Skip to main content

Sen. Graham Goes to Oconee

By

nuclear_td110.embedded.prod_affiliate.74 The Anderson (S.C.)Independent Mail has the news:

U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham [R-S.C.] stood in the welcome center of Duke Energy’s Oconee Nuclear Station and said he had learned something new about his hometown nuclear plant.

“I didn’t know how easy it is to shut down,” Graham said. “There’s one button they can press and it drops the fuel rods. With one button, they can shut down the reactor within a second.”

There’s the clean energy angle:

At stake, Graham said, is a clean energy source for future generations of Americans. Wind and solar power, he said, can’t replace the coal-fired plants that dominate the energy production landscape today, but nuclear can.

And the economic angle:

Graham also underlined the station’s role in the local economy, as it has a $90 million payroll and has paid $27 million in property taxes to Oconee County. About 1,500 people work regularly at the plant, said Richard Freudenberger, the plant’s regulatory support manager. Another 2,000 or so are on site now working with Duke on upgrades and refueling the station’s first unit.

The State covers the visit, too, and adds what we might call the Japan angle:

Nestled in the mountains five hours from the ocean, the Duke power plant couldn’t be affected by a tsunami, he noted. The reactors also are of a different design that ensures they could continue to operate safely in the event of a disaster, he said. He conceded that a broken dam at Lake Jocassee could affect the plant, but said Duke Energy is working on a plan to address such a disaster.

And of course the personal angle:

“This nuclear plant, I live five miles away’’ from, said Graham, R-S.C. “I’ve lived in this area all of my life. A lot of the people I have grown up with and went to high school with work here. I have faith in the American nuclear power industry.’’

Sen. Graham is really going out of his way to make the case for nuclear energy. Polls show that support for nuclear energy has lessened though not considerably, but Sen. Graham is still going at least an inch or two out on a limb.

Good for him. He’s a consequential figure and his support is appreciated.

Sen. Graham at Oconee. I believe he is second from left, but don’t quote me.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
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...
23 comments
Read more

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

By
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...
7 comments
Read more

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

By
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...
6 comments
Read more