America Technology Gets Ready to Go Big Again with New Nuclear Projects

I hear it all the time lately.

“What’s happening to American technology? Are we losing our edge?”

No more space shuttle. Steve Jobs logging off for good. The next generation space telescope on the chopping block.

So, it was with no small satisfaction last week that I listened into an NRC hearing on combined construction and operating license for new reactors at the V.C. Summer site in South Carolina. Perhaps the best bit was Stephen Byrne, executive vice president of South Carolina Electricity and Gas, explaining why a utility executive would opt to build a new nuclear power plant.

“We choose nuclear over other energy alternatives for four main reasons. First, the need for baseload power. The new units will help meet state regulatory reserve margin requirements. Second, cost. Nuclear is competitive with other baseload options when evaluated over its 40-year design life. Third is fuel diversity, adding units 2 and 3 [at V.C. Summer] will increase the share of nuclear in our fuel portfolio from approximately 11 percent to approximately 30 percent…Fourth is its low greenhouse gas emissions.”

But more than that, it was nice knowing that, after a 30-year break, America is (pending final NRC approval) going to be building a nuclear power plant again.

Think about it. Upwards of 1,000 megawatts of generating capacity all produced with a small amount of uranium. In a facility with a relatively small physical footprint, especially compared to the equivalent space renewables would use. (One of the things that struck me about my first visit to a plant was how small it was.) And it all happens without combustion, so no greenhouse gases are produced.

The AP1000 reactor design for the facilities comes from Westinghouse. Westinghouse, based in Pennsylvania, was acquired by Toshiba Corporation and other partners in 2006. But at the end of the day, a U.S. company will play a major role in building a reactor on American soil creating American jobs.

There has also been a lot of talk lately on what counts as a shovel-ready project. Both the V.C. Summer project in South Carolina and the Vogtle project in Georgia [another subject of a recent NRC mandatory hearing on its combined operating license] fit the bill. In fact, the shovels have already started digging in early work at the sites. Southern Company—which is heading up the Vogtle project—can’t wait to get started.

“We will be in a position to implement the rule-making as soon as it is affirmed,” Joseph “Buzz” Miller, executive vice president for nuclear development of Southern Nuclear Operating Co., said...

The NRC is expected to approve the Vogtle COLs sometime “very early next year.” The Summer COLs, presumably, would not be far behind.

When the COLs get issued, I will be heading over to Southern’s website on the progress at Vogtle to keep track of what’s going on. And right after that, I’ll be checking in with NASA on its next missions.

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