Skip to main content

South Texas Project Nuclear Plant Sets Record on Continuous Operations

From STP:
The South Texas Project established a U.S. nuclear power industry record Sunday, completing four consecutive breaker-to-breaker production runs by repeatedly operating both its units continuously between refuelings. The plant shut down its Unit 2 reactor Sunday for routine refueling and maintenance.

No other nuclear power plant has accomplished this in the five decades since the first commercial reactor in the U.S. began operations in 1958.

...

During the past four years, STP’s two units have produced more energy than any other two-unit nuclear power plant in the country. Both units have led the nation in production, and Unit 1 led all 439 reactors worldwide in electric generation last year.

...

In its record-setting production runs, STP generated 65 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity. That equates to approximately 7.5 percent of all electricity used in Texas during that time.

Unit 1 operated continuously from April 2005 to October 2006, when it was shut down for refueling, and from November 2006 to March 2008, when it was refueled again. Unit 2 was continually online from October 2005 to March 2007, and again from April 2007 until yesterday. The units generated 32.7 billion kWh and 32.3 billion kWh, respectively, during those production runs.
I'd say congratulations are in order!

Picture of STP.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Staying online recently during Gustav seemed very non-safe to me. It sounded great from a capacity factor standpoint, but it was certainly not conservative decision making. I would have shut the plant down during that storm. The risk versus reward was not there. There could have easily been a spin-off tornado, or the eye could have shifted direction South. Had something bad actually happened, the whole industry would have felt the pain just in the hope of South Texas saving a few dollars and preserving their precious breaker-to-breaker runs. Safety has got to come before production.
David Bradish said…
anon, I can understand your concern. Hopefully the information from STP's press releases may help. Here's what the first one said:

STP's operating procedures require it to take both its reactors offline, before the storm's landfall, if hurricane-force winds are predicted to affect the plant site.

And the second press release said this:

Based on current projections for Hurricane Ike, both units at the South Texas Project (STP) Nuclear Operating Company remain online, and power is not expected to be reduced as long as the transmission grid can support full operation.

As of Friday morning, Hurricane Ike is projected to make landfall in the vicinity of Galveston Bay, potentially as a Category 3 storm. Current forecasts indicate sustained wind speeds can get as high as 55 miles per hour at the STP site at the peak of the storm. The projected wind speed is substantially less than hurricane force. The units can safely operate under these projected conditions.

The buildings that house STP’s reactors, vital equipment and spent fuel have steel-reinforced concrete walls, four to seven feet thick, that are built to withstand major hurricanes and the tornadoes they can spawn. The plant site is 10 miles inland and at an elevation of 29 feet, well beyond the reach of even a Category 5 storm surge.
Anonymous said…
STP was fully prepared to downpower if needed and did staff the hurricane team onsite just in case the storm shifted. I applaud their risk-informed decision making strategies. I have no doubt they did the right thing for both the public and the company. Remember, the people who run the plant also live around it and any decision they make affects not just "other people", but their own families as well. This goes for any plant in the country.

Congrats to STP and some really remarkable plant operation.
Anonymous said…
David's comment reveals the key to rebutting the first anonymous comment. Operators shut down in response to hurricanes because there is no place to send the power, not because the hurricane presents a hazard that the plant can't handle. There was never any question about safety in this instance.

And yes, the breaker-to-breaker runs are "precious" precisely because that's what nukes were meant to do.
rickrocket said…
I am an operator at STP and was on-site for Ike. We have very definite plans in place for inclement weather with very particular weather condition limits for keeping the plant online. The NRC and plant management as well as the shift supervisor on crew were vigilant in keeping withing our procedures. If we would have met those requirements, we would have shut both units down immediately. Safety was never compromised, and we had double the normal operations and maintenance manpower on-site during the storm to take care of any issues that may have arisen.
Jason said…
People are generally only anonymous when they want to troll or say something that is wrong, might come back to bite them, or is hurtful to others. Anonymous are not interested in accountability for their actions, inactions, or comments.

I work for a company that is involved with safety-related functions, design, maintenance and review of many nuclear power plants around the country and there are far less safe places with much more volatile materials, equipment housed by less safe buildings than being inside a nuclear power plant during a tornado or a hurricane.

Popular posts from this blog

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

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

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