The Facts on Oyster Creek and New Jersey Electricity

The Asbury Park Press is calling on New Jersey Governor John Corzine to publicly declare his position on relicensing the Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant. What really seems to be getting the paper's goat these days is that the Governor is actually taking his time to learn all he can about the facts involved:

Five months ago, Gov. Corzine told the Press editorial board that the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant in Lacey should not be relicensed for 20 years under any circumstances because of safety concerns. Last month, he and four other top state officials toured the plant. A Corzine spokesman said the governor was impressed by its security and personnel.

Asked by a Press reporter whether Corzine's visit changed his opinion on license renewal, the spokesman responded: "Right now he is conferring with his Cabinet team to keep apprised of Oyster Creek's renewal status at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and state action within that framework." Huh? Is that a yes or a no? The public deserves a direct answer.

We hope the governor isn't waffling on his opposition to keeping the plant open. We hope he is merely gathering more information for a court fight if and when the NRC approves relicensing — something that could happen by May if Oyster Creek passes the agency's environmental and safety reviews.

Over at We Support Lee, Ruth Sponsler has been crunching the numbers, and has come up with some figures that the folks at the Asbury Park Press neglected to include in their editorial:

Let's look at Oyster Creek by itself, compared with renewable sources. Could renewables replace Oyster Creek if Oyster Creek weren't relicensed?

To get Oyster Creek's 2002 generation figure, I went to a spreadsheet linked here. That 2002 figure is 5,031,271 megawatt-hours. I divided that by New Jersey's 1,330,000 renewable megawatt-hours for 2002 and got 3.78. Thus, during 2002, in New Jersey, Oyster Creek, alone, generated 3.78 times the amount of electricity that all renewable sources in New Jersey generated during that same year. If Oyster Creek were to be shut down, the renewable generating capacity to replace it is just not there. Oyster Creek's capacity would need to be replaced by fossil fuels - likely coal or natural gas.

[...]

The anti-nuclear special interest groups usually say that they're against fossil fuels, but the arithmetic of energy and their actions against nuclear energy speak louder than their words.

Indeed.

Technorati tags: Nuclear Energy, Environment, Energy, Politics, Technology, Economics, Alec Baldwin, New Jersey, Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant

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