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

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap...

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...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog