Skip to main content

New Plant Update

Thanks to my colleague David Bradish for his latest update on the status of new plant projects around the U.S. To date, 12 companies or consortia are preparing at least 19 applications for as many as 30 new reactors. The latest announcements added to the list are Texas Utilities (TXU) and Amarillo Power.

Technorati tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments

Anonymous said…
In the NEI table, it shows Progress Florida technology type as "Not Yet Determined (2)." To me that implies either two AP1000 or two ABWRs and not one ESBWR or one EPR. It would be more correct to list technology type as simply "Not Yet Determined," unless you know something more than I do. Previously, NEI proclaimed that Progress was buying two AP1000's for Florida, which is not consistent with the public information available. Now, NEI is proclaiming that Progress is buying two reactors for Florda, which is still not consistent with the public information. Please try to get your facts straight and give credit only where credit is due. We are talking about a couple billion dollars here or there. It is a big deal to the parties involved. Until they announce the technology and the number of reactors, it is inappropriate to list a number here.
David Bradish said…
We'll double check with our new plant director, Adrian Heymer, and let you know.
Anonymous said…
Just found it (ML061990482 on ADAMS, dated 7/12/06). You can change that to "AP1000 (2)" for Progress in Florida. They have made the technology selection for Florida without a site selection and without a news release. That brings the Westinghouse commitment up to 13.4 GW planned. I have GE at 9.8 GW and Areva at 8.0 GW. However, the Areva status looks wishy-washy with one site selected (Calvert Cliffs), one site as a maybe (Nine Mile), and three others TBD. I think that they are just trying to get the NRC to take them seriously in review space by trumping up their COL estimates. I would be shocked if any new plants get built North of the Mason-Dixon line or West of the Mississippi for that matter.
Anonymous said…
Oh yeah, Texas is the other area where construction is sure to actually happen.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why Nuclear Plant Closures Are a Crisis for Small Town USA

Nuclear plants occupy an unusual spot in the towns where they operate: integral but so much in the background that they may seem almost invisible. But when they close, it can be like the earth shifting underfoot.

Lohud.com, the Gannett newspaper that covers the Lower Hudson Valley in New York, took a look around at the experience of towns where reactors have closed, because the Indian Point reactors in Buchanan are scheduled to be shut down under an agreement with Gov. Mario Cuomo.


From sea to shining sea, it was dismal. It wasn’t just the plant employees who were hurt. The losses of hundreds of jobs, tens of millions of dollars in payrolls and millions in property taxes depressed whole towns and surrounding areas. For example:

Vernon, Vermont, home to Vermont Yankee for more than 40 years, had to cut its municipal budget in half. The town closed its police department and let the county take over; the youth sports teams lost their volunteer coaches, and Vernon Elementary School lost th…