Why U.S. Needs Nuclear As Part of "All of the Above" Energy Strategy

Glenn McCullough, Jr.

The following is a guest post by Glenn McCullough, Jr. He served as Mayor of Tupelo, Mississippi and was Chairman of TVA from 2001 - 2005. Currently he is Chairman of the board for NuVision Engineering in Pittsburgh. Follow him on Twitter, @GlennMcCJr.

On January 10, the Weather Channel broadcast an extraordinarily rare headline: “Coldest Temperatures of the Century for Some.” It was referring to the "Polar Vortex," that swept into states as far south as Alabama, Tennessee, and Georgia in the early days of the new year.

On the flip side, scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration pegged 2012 as the warmest year on record for the contiguous United States. That summer, 99 million Americans experienced at least 10 days of temperatures above 100 degrees.

Here’s the point: extreme weather happens. Whether it’s a deep cold or a stifling heat, Americans deal with varying temperature changes throughout the year. It would be nice if the only thing those shifts affected was our decision to wear a sweater or a t-shirt. Unfortunately, weather variables have enormous impacts on our country’s electric power supply, stability and cost.

When I was appointed to the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) board of directors in 1999, I was struck by TVA’s deep and unrelenting commitment toward safe, reliable, and affordable nuclear energy. As a result, the TVA and local power companies are able to keep the lights on year after year for 9 million people throughout the Tennessee Valley.

During my tenure at TVA, we embarked on a strenuous evaluation of every baseload electric generation option, including natural gas and coal, with controls to reduce harmful emissions. In 2002, the board made the decision to restart a reactor that had been offline since 1985. When evaluated for environmental impacts, financial and operational soundness and long-term reliability, restarting the Brown’s Ferry 1 reactor was the best option for future power generation.

The restart was meticulously planned with a $1.8 billion budget and a five-year timeframe. In 2007, Brown’s Ferry 1 was brought back online - both on schedule and on budget. President Bush personally traveled to the facility to commemorate the successful restart.

Today, Brown’s Ferry is reliably generating safe, clean, affordable nuclear energy. That reactor, along with other nuclear energy facility in 31 states, proves that nuclear energy plays a vital role in providing cleaner, reliable, and less expensive electricity for Americans.

Without nuclear energy, in fact, there’s no doubt consumers would have faced widespread electricity shortages during that summer of 2012 and this winter. And with the way our nation’s coal plants are shutting down due to EPA regulation, nuclear energy should play a more significant role in the years ahead.

No matter what the weather brings, Americans need reliable energy, especially in the face of record temperatures. When supply shortages are met with the high demand of summer and winter months, it always leads to higher prices for consumers. In the worst cases, it leads to blackouts. Those are the times we need reliable energy the most.

Currently, 100 reactors produce almost 20 percent of America’s total electricity. Nuclear plants operate safely and are online an industry-leading 91 percent of the time, generating clean, affordable electricity around the clock. That’s more reliable than other any other source of electricity, including natural gas and coal. They also produce nearly two-thirds of all carbon-free electricity nationwide.

It’s time to take a closer look at nuclear energy. It's clear that nuclear energy plays a key role in a balanced electricity production portfolio to power our economic growth and today’s digital lifestyle.

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