Skip to main content

Nuclear by Northwest

energy_northwestAfter our visit to the northwest a couple of days ago (or posts below) why not stay in the rainy kingdom for awhile? It’s kind of interesting up there these days.
Washington State is in a good position because nearly all of our electricity generation is clean. Most comes from hydropower or the Columbia Generating Station, our nuclear plant, or wind. There is already a plan to phase out coal generation in the state. That alone should enable Washington to achieve our target.
This is Energy Northwest CEO Mark Reddemann speaking to Bloomberg News. He is saying something that has been missing of coverage of the Clean Power Plan. It’s this: hydro and wind are very important to reduce CO2 emissions. And so, insists Reddemann, is nuclear energy.
Nuclear energy is not a martyr or a victim nor does it require special pleading. The point is that nuclear energy answers in a big way to the goals of the Clean Power Plan, a point that has often been ignored in the press.
Reddemann redresses the balance:
The Clean Power Plan does have the potential to be effective in reducing carbon emissions from U.S. electricity generating resources, mostly by moving utilities away from coal generation to natural gas, nuclear and renewables. But we need to be seriously thinking about the alternatives for utilities that rely heavily on coal generation, which is a base load resource. Wind and solar are not viable replacements for that capacity. Natural gas is the current go-to replacement, but it emits carbon as well.
Nuclear, both the large plants that are being built in the southeast, and in 10 years, small modular reactors, can provide the capacity electricity grids need, and the carbon-free generation to meet Clean Power Plan goals. We need to do more to help make that happen.
With NuScale over the border in Oregon, it does seem that the northwest is becoming a regular modular alley for small reactors. It’ll be interesting to see what Energy Northwest does in this regard.
Of course, Reddemann heads a company that operates a nuclear facility. The importance of his point lies in the statistics: 68. 8 percent of Washington’s electricity is generated by hydro power, 7.8 percent renewable and 7.5 percent nuclear. Nuclear energy is not the solution to CO2 emission reduction, it is a solution.
That’s important in keeping options open in what promises to be a large transition in the energy profile of the United States. It’s good Bloomberg caught this aspect of the Reddemann interview and gave it some breathing space.
Unfortunately, Hamlet’s quote that provides the title doesn’t quite hit the right tone: “I am but mad north-northwest. When the wind is southerly, I know a hawk from a handsaw.”  Maybe we should do something with the hawk-handsaw thing.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …