Skip to main content

Remembering the First Nuclear Electricity

The first electricity generated by nuclear power was produced December 20, 1951, soon to be 55 years ago, at the Experimental Breeder Reactor #1 (EBR-1) in Idaho.

For a comparison of past vs. present practices, that pioneer nuclear power plant was announced March, 1949. The first, albeit token, juice was produced 33 months later.

Yesterday, I participated in a scheduling meeting for the next new nuke. It will take us 14 months to mobilize then prepare and submit the application - and that's for a proven, certified design. First safety-related concrete pour takes another 24+ months following combined construction and operating license (COL) approval.

The take-home point is that the very first nuclear power plant was designed, built, tested, and on-line in the time it takes for a contemporary project to complete its paperwork.

Now, granted, there is a huge difference between EBR-1's 500 watts and tomorrow's 1400 megawatts, but those pioneers built their new, experimental reactor to be cooled with molten sodium metal while our plants are the result of 50 years of painstaking development and refinement of the light water reactor.

Perhaps the NRC's rules on "Limited Work Authorizations" (LWAs) could use some tweaking?

Technorati tags: , , , , ,

Comments

Anonymous said…
I'm not sure I'd be so quick to hold up EBR-1's rapid design and construction as a model to be emulated by today's industry. The reactor experienced a meltdown six years later in 1955.

http://www.nucleartourist.com/events/part-melt.htm

Maybe there are good reasons why more time is taken now for design and safety reviews.
Alex Brown said…
What really amazes me is not just the fact that it takes many years to get the paperwork done, it also costs tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars just to get everything in order before you can even start building the plant. And that money is invested with no assurance that a plant will ever even be built.
Joseph Somsel said…
The up-front cash invested in a merchant plant's mobilization, application, and early site preparations could be considered proprietary information these days.

They'd kill me if I divulged that - I'm probably already in trouble for the schedule info.

As to EBR-1, it was a test reactor built to "go where no man has gone before," built in a cold, rocky desert where no man would want to live.

It does raise the issue of "paralysis by analysis." A favorite political tactic is to call for more analysis and review of any opposed project.

Popular posts from this blog

Making Clouds for a Living

Donell Banks works at Southern Nuclear’s Plant Vogtle units 3 and 4 as a shift supervisor in Operations, but is in the process of transitioning to his newly appointed role as the daily work controls manager. He has been in the nuclear energy industry for about 11 years.

I love what I do because I have the unique opportunity to help shape the direction and influence the culture for the future of nuclear power in the United States. Every single day presents a new challenge, but I wouldn't have it any other way. As a shift supervisor, I was primarily responsible for managing the development of procedures and programs to support operation of the first new nuclear units in the United States in more than 30 years. As the daily work controls manager, I will be responsible for oversight of the execution and scheduling of daily work to ensure organizational readiness to operate the new units.

I envision a nuclear energy industry that leverages the technology of today to improve efficiency…

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear: Energy for All Political Seasons

The electoral college will soon confirm a surprise election result, Donald Trump. However, in the electricity world, there are fewer surprises – physics and economics will continue to apply, and Republicans and Democrats are going to find a lot to like about nuclear energy over the next four years.

In a Trump administration, the carbon conversation is going to be less prominent. But the nuclear value proposition is still there. We bring steady jobs to rural areas, including in the Rust Belt, which put Donald Trump in office. Nuclear plants keep the surrounding communities vibrant.

We hold down electricity costs for the whole economy. We provide energy diversity, reducing the risk of disruption. We are a critical part of America’s industrial infrastructure, and the importance of infrastructure is something that President-Elect Trump has stressed.

One of our infrastructure challenges is natural gas pipelines, which have gotten more congested as extremely low gas prices have pulled m…