Study: 272 GWe in New Capacity Being Evaluated

Power plant developers are evaluating more than 272,000 megawatts (MW) of new power generation unit additions in the U.S. This set of more than 1,700 units takes into consideration only active, precommissioned units as identified by Industrial Info’s Power Tracker. The majority of these projects, about 87%, are scheduled to begin construction by 2012.

Coal-fired units lead all fuel types for future generation unit development with more than 71,000 MW planned. When an additional 117 IGCC units are accounted for the total output for planned coal derived power units in the U.S. jumps up to over 90,000 MW.

Development of coal (71,000 MW), nuclear (46,000 MW), and wind (47,000 MW) projects, each have outpaced natural gas fired unit development, which stands at about 45,000 MW from 426 units.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Electricity, Nuclear Power, Wind Power, Coal, Natural Gas

Comments

Anonymous said…

47 GW of wind? Somehow I don't think that will be a reality.

It will be interesting to see if the 90 GW of coal becomes a reality. If any of the proposed CO2 limits come into play, it won't.

I'm becoming much more convinced that the nuclear will be the only one to hit the forcast numbers.

November 29, 2006 at 7:49 PM

Anonymous said…

Based on current experience with wind capacity factors, 47 GW of wind capacity will equal the gross output of about 12 GW of nuclear. Just to keep things in perspective.
:-)

November 30, 2006 at 11:13 AM

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...

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...

How Much Land Does Nuclear, Wind and Solar Really Need?

Not too long ago, we reviewed a report that looked at nuclear energy (and other energy sources) as biodiversity agents. This had to do, in part, with the amount of land a facility needs to function. Nuclear energy and fossil fuel plants use relatively little, wind farms and solar arrays quite a lot of land . Based on an objective and transparent analysis of our sustainable energy choices, we have come to the evidence-based conclusion that nuclear energy is a good option for biodiversity conservation (and society in general) and that other alternatives to fossil fuels should be subjected to the same cost–benefit analyses (in terms of biodiversity and climate outcomes, as well as sociopolitical imperatives) before accepting or dismissing them. Writer Barry Brook, who collected 75 scientists to endorse his paper, is interested in land use as it impacts flora and fauna. Biodiversity concerns do not get as much play as they might – and, when they do, it annoys many when land is withdraw...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog