The U.S. Nuclear Renaissance: Forging Ahead

UniStar Nuclear made a weighty announcement today:

AREVA NP Inc. and BWX Technologies, Inc. ... have signed an agreement that will re-establish commercial nuclear power plant component manufacturing in the United States and will support the UniStar business model and future fleet of nuclear power plants in North America. The agreement between the two nuclear technology development and manufacturing leaders is a major link in the UniStar supply chain. It will result in the ability to manufacture components for UniStar's fleet of U.S. Evolutionary Power Reactor (U.S. EPR) advanced nuclear power plants, as well as commercial nuclear plant replacement components for operating North American plants.

The BWXT plant is in Mount Vernon, in the extreme southwest corner of Indiana. It has access to the Ohio River, so it is convenient for barge shipment of heavy components to much of the central U.S.

With all the excitement about early site permits and design certifications, it is easy to forget that construction of a nuclear power plant requires "big iron" (actually steel), huge forgings and weldments that are made to exacting specifications. The press release notes that "global supply of forgings and major components for new plants may well become an issue." What an understatement! I understand that the lead time for a set of steam generators is currently six to seven years. Fortunately, the press release also says that the plant "could begin manufacturing commercial nuclear components as early as 2006." That's none too soon! It looks as if the Mount Vernon plant will be a busy place.

POSTSCRIPT: Back in April, we mentioned that BWXT had been awarded the "N" stamp to produce commercial nuclear grade components. In June, we pointed to a story in the Indiana press that speculated on the future of the company, and what it might mean for its hometown's future.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Energy, Technology, Electricity, Environment, BWX Technologies, AREVA, UniStar Nuclear

Comments

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog