Why Everyone Needs to #ActForNuclear

Fertel lays down the law at the DOE summit.

If Washington policy makers hadn't heard the news before, they should have it figured out now after yesterday's DOE summit (archive of live stream) -- a critical part of America's infrastructure, it's nuclear power plants, are under imminent threat of premature closure and the costs to the nation and the world could be enormous.

If you haven't already watched the summit video, do so right now, as DOE has helpfully archived all of the proceedings online. And when you have a chance, be sure to check out the #ActForNuclear hashtag on Twitter. As of yesterday afternoon, it was trending on Twitter in Washington, making it all but certain that staffers and their bosses all around the town were getting the message about what's at stake.

There were so many highlights, there isn't time to detail them all. But before you dive into the live stream, it would be a good idea to read NEI CEO Marv Fertel's speech that came in the first hour, right after introductions from DOE's John Kotek and opening remarks from Energy Secretary Ernie Moniz.

We thought the first plant shutdowns at Kewaunee and Vermont Yankee would galvanize action to prevent additional shutdowns.

We were obviously mistaken.

Please understand, however, that these early shutdowns are not just isolated events.

They are evidence of a larger systemic problem.

So this summit is part of a wake-up call—a wake-up call to drive action by the states … by the federal government … by the policy community and our political institutions … by anyone concerned about economic growth, environmental protection, jobs and reliability of electricity supply.

So, why should America #ActForNuclear? Again, here's Fertel:

Over the last several years, companies have shut down—or announced plans to shut down—eight nuclear reactors … about 6,300 megawatts of capacity … 6,000 direct jobs and at least that many indirect jobs … almost 10 percent of the Clean Power Plan’s 2030 carbon reduction goal.

We can see another 15 to 20 plants at risk of premature shutdown over the next 5 to 10 years.

If we were to lose all those plants, assuming they’re replaced with high-efficiency combined-cycle gas-fired plants, it would wipe out approximately one-quarter of the gains achieved by the Clean Power Plan … which represents about 45 percent of the U.S. commitment in Paris at COP21.

When Vermont Yankee closed, nuclear generation in ISO New England declined by 5.3 million MWh in 2015 compared to 2014 when Vermont Yankee was operating. This was offset by gas-fired generation increasing by 5.7 million MWh. Carbon emissions increased 5 percent in New England in 2015.

You’ve all heard that Exelon announced on its last earnings call that it cannot continue to sustain losses at its Quad Cities and Clinton nuclear plants in Illinois.

The company has lost $800 million over the last three years at those plants.

Illinois must reduce carbon emissions by about 30 million tons by 2030 under the Clean Power Plan … losing Quad Cities and Clinton would increase that compliance obligation by an additional 20 million tons.

Quad Cities—in fact, any large two-unit nuclear station—produces about as much electricity in a single year as all the utility-scale solar in America last year.

There's more, believe me, so much more to talk about. And we'll be putting together a Storify later today to knit it all together. But for now, I'll leave you with one Easter Egg. Go to the live stream and skip to the 52:30 mark to see one of the breakout stars of the summit, Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ). Don't worry, we'll wait.

Passionate discussion from Senator @CoryBooker around the need for #nuclear. #ActForNuclear #ActOnClimate pic.twitter.com/xn1beJfcKP
— GAINnuclear (@GAINnuclear) May 19, 2016

Thanks for stopping by. We'll have more later.

UPDATE: NEI's Tara Young has put together a narrative from Thursday's meeting using Storify. Please check it out.

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