In today's edition of the New York Times, a story by Matt Wald compares and contrasts the strategies of two different nuclear power plant owner/operators (Constellation Energy and PPL Corp.), and how they believe nuclear fits into their future generation mix. Here are some excerpts concerning Constellation, the more bullish of the two companies:
UPDATE: More thoughts from The Oil Drum: New York City.
Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics, Constellation Energy, PPL Corp.
Nobody in the United States has started building a nuclear power plant in more than three decades. Mayo Shattuck could be the first.Here at NEI Nuclear Notes, we've been following Constellation's progress very closely. For more, click here. And for a look at the power supply situation in the Baltimore-Washington area that depends on the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, click here.
As the chief executive of Constellation Energy, a utility holding company in Baltimore that already operates five nuclear reactors, Shattuck is convinced that nuclear power is on the verge of a renaissance, ready to provide reliable electricity at a competitive price. He has already taken the first steps toward that goal, moving this month to order critical parts for a new reactor.
[...]
Constellation Energy, the Baltimore company, not only wants to build reactors for itself, it has also formed a partnership with a reactor manufacturer to build and operate them for other utilities.
"This organization has a history of feeling that they have done well in nuclear," Shattuck, its chief executive, said.
Constellation says it will apply for a reactor operating license by the end of next year, probably at either Calvert Cliffs, Maryland, where it runs two nuclear reactors that it built in the 1960s and '70s, or at Nine Mile Point, in Scriba, New York, on Lake Ontario, where it operates two reactors it bought in 2001 from Niagara Mohawk Power and other utilities.
[...]
Constellation, which doubled its nuclear bet in the 1990s by buying more reactors as the utility industry restructured, believes it has demonstrated one marketable skill - running reactors profitably - and that it could quickly follow a new plant with a copycat, building both on time and on budget.
Constellation proposes a fleet of plants, identical down to the "carpeting and wallpaper," Shattuck said, reducing the design costs on subsequent reactors to near zero.
Operating processes would be identical, and operators could be shuffled among the plants, something that is often impossible today even with adjacent reactors. The company wants partners who would offer either equity or operating skills.
UPDATE: More thoughts from The Oil Drum: New York City.
Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics, Constellation Energy, PPL Corp.
Comments
Does anyone have any information about how many of the current 104 licensed reactors in the US were built on time, on budget? We hear a lot about time delays and budget overruns, but I suspect that there were quite a few projects that more than met expectations.
Mr. McErlain himself had earlier criticized Gore because he had “dismissed nuclear energy out of hand”, when what Gore had actually said was: “I doubt nuclear power will play a much larger role than it does now…” and “… if they can design a new generation [of reactors] that's manifestly safer, more flexible, etc., it may play some role, but I don't think it will play a big role.”
But in today’s New York Times, in the very article cited by Mr. McErlain, I read the following:
“But even if a few plants are built, industry insiders do not expect nuclear power to assume a significantly greater role. Roger W. Gale, an electricity expert and former Energy Department official, asks several hundred utility executives each year what they foresee in their industry.
“While they are convinced that a new plant will be ordered soon, the more than 100 senior utility executives who responded also said they do not expect “a future where nuclear generation represents a larger share of generation” than today.”
In other words, on the subject of the future of nuclear power, the views of Al Gore and the views of senior utility executives are pretty much the same.
Uh-oh—I am sure it won’t be long before I see NEI links mocking those senior utility executives.
We're not at the point for major deployment of new nukes. But maybe in 10-15 years we could be. We'll have to ask the execs the same question in another decade.
The utilities that own and successfully operate a sizable nuclear fleet are more favorable to an expanded role of nuclear than both Gore and the average utility executive. As has already been pointed out here, where this ultimately goes depends on how smoothly the the new COL and construction process works.