St. Petersburg Times: "Nuclear may prove to be the best way to go."

Here's the St. Petersburg Times on Progress Energy's plans to build a new reactor in Levy County, Florida:

The company put great care into picking the Levy County site: 3,000 undeveloped acres in a rural area, with the plant footprint taking up only 300 of those acres. The reactors would sit on higher ground and be further from the coast and tidal surge than the one at Crystal River, but they would be close enough that the two facilities could share some resources. The underlying limestone is particularly stable by state standards and the site is near the Cross Florida Barge Canal, a reliable source of water needed to cool the reactors.

Most importantly, Floridians will have many opportunities to learn more and to speak up. Permitting processes at both the state and national level should allow for plenty of public input and refinement of the plan.

So far, Progress Energy has been forthcoming with information. There is no doubt the company must act soon to prepare for the predictable growth in demand for electricity in this part of the state. Nuclear may prove to be the best way to go.

For similar thoughts from Mike Thomas of the Orlando Sentinel, click here.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Nuclear Power, Environment, Energy, Technology, Economics, New Plants, Progress Energy, Florida

Comments

Anonymous said…

I am really concerned about any effects of the residents living in the towns of Inglis, Yankeetown, and Red Level. These communities are between the CR-3 plant and the newly proposed one in Levy Co. There are hazards, and they should be addressed.

June 16, 2007 at 12:31 PM

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