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...

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