NEI Nuclear Notes

Here in a Washington that's preoccupied with political spectacle, it can be easy to miss important details about the business of government that really matter. One of those is coming up next week when the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) holds a two-day technical conference about electricity markets in the Northeastern U.S.  Since policymakers in Washington have not been able to find consensus on a comprehensive energy policy for the country, states have shown leadership in trying to ensure that the electricity system of the future will meet their needs. For some time, state governments have adopted renewable portfolio standards (RPS) to spur the growth of wind and solar to meet environmental policy goals. More recently, states like Illinois and New York have enacted similar programs to preserve nuclear power plants , in order to support nuclear energy's unique package of grid stability, zero emissions and fuel supply diversity. How these state policies are...

Matt Wald The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior director of policy analysis and strategic planning at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald . We’ve said it often: nuclear power is a foundation of a reliable power grid, holds down carbon emissions and is a staple of local economies. But it’s nice to hear it from others as well, and earlier this month, all those points were made by the  Washington State Democratic Central Committee . The committee passed a resolution calling for continued operation of the Columbia Generating Station , a publicly-owned reactor that since 1984 has been churning out 1,190 megawatts of power, enough to meet the needs of about a million households, and about 8.2 percent of the electricity generated in the state in 2014. The reactor’s output is “continuously available regardless of weather conditions,” the resolution pointed out, and can help back up the rising levels of intermittent solar and wind power. Shutting it would mea...

The United Nations Climate Summit September 24 has an interesting format. It brings together 120 heads of state (or their representatives)to “announce bold actions that they will be taking in their countries.” These, I assume, could be anything on-topic, so there may be some nuclear energy-related announcements. Everything could be kind of vague and feel-good – gestures toward energy efficiency, for example – or countries get very ambitious with their announcements. This is a U.N. effort, but should not be confused  with the Framework Convention on Climate Change. I suppose it’s okay to call the summit a bit more casual – or at least as casual as such a high-level meeting could be. Write Jerry Kremer over at the Huffington Post connects the summit with its location, focusing on New York state’s own emissions profile. While New Yorkers produce 8 metric tons of carbon dioxide per capita annually, the national average is more than 150 percent higher -- and in some states 300...

We've been on the hunt for editorials both negative and positive about nuclear energy to see if there are themes that can be identified. Many resolve that nuclear energy is the surest way to help the country reach emissions goals and see the event in Japan as a call to strengthen safety rules - both in this country and worldwide. But there are other approaches, too. --- This op-ed  from The New Straits Times (in Malaysia) is negative and very much wants Malaysia to go to solar energy. The problem is, nuclear energy is less expensive. Ah, but that won't always be the case - maybe - down the road a piece: Hence, the pertinent question in this energy debate is: How would the projected costs of solar power and nuclear power compare in the near future, say, in 10 years time? (2021 is the proposed date for Malaysia's first nuclear power plant). If indeed the cost of electricity generated by the new nuclear power plants is rising, the cost of solar-generated electricity is li...

The Syracuse (N.Y.) Post-Standard introduces us to the NRC inspectors who oversee the two plants in that part of the world – Nine Mile and James A. FitzPatrick: “Every day, we do a control room walk-down,” [Inspector Edward] Knutson said. “We look at what’s going on, we indicate what we expect them (operators) to do.” “We talk to the control-room supervisor and get from them what has occurred in the previous shift,” [Inspector Scott] Rutenkroger said. “We see what’s in service and what’s out of service. We find out what they see as the condition of the plant.” And they keep their eyes perpetually open: Rutenkroger once noticed that the door between an emergency diesel-generator room and turbine building had a support missing. It could have hampered proper operation of the door and that could have led to trouble: Steam lines are located on the other side of the door. If the door hadn’t shut properly and one or more of the steam lines ruptured, steam could have seeped ...

A couple of weeks ago, we ran a story about the efforts of a small town to bring a nuclear plant to its area back in the seventies. It didn’t happen back then, for various reasons, and Easton, N.Y. remains now as it was then, a small farming town. So imagine my surprise : About 50 people, including a member of [Rep. Chris Gibson's (D-N.Y.)] staff, attended last week's [town] board meeting at which the board voted to create the [nuclear] study committee. Gibson, the freshman Republican congressman from the 20th District, has made constructing a nuclear power plant in the district one of his priorities. That district, of course, includes Easton. Most of the story is bare speculation, but I found it interesting that the echo of the past has made an impact on the present: [Farmer George] Allen was a high school senior when the [original nuclear] plant was proposed, and remembers seeing a model of the facility at his school. Years later, after he had bought the utility...

Here’s an interesting story about a nuclear plant that didn’t get built in Easton NY in the late sixties (as the name implies, Easton is in far east New York state near the Vermont border): Town Supervisor John Rymph was [in Easton in 1967, when the plant was announced], and said that he remembered being excited and looking forward to, as many residents did, the plant and the changes it would bring. A comprehensive plan and the town's planning board both sprouted in the aftermath of news of the nuclear facility planned for Grandma Moses' birthplace. The local paper was excited, too: An editorial in the now defunct Cambridge-based Washington County Post proclaimed in March that "the atomic age had arrived on the local scene," but continued on to say that the "communities to be affected are far from being ready to meet the challenge." From this distance, we can’t really know what the Post saw as its community not being ready, as it certainly ...

Up in New York state, one of the three candidates for the 23rd district really likes nuclear energy: "Chief among the alternatives is nuclear," Mr. Doheny said. "It's safe, it's reliable." That’s Matthew Doheny, the Republican. Here’s what he says on his campaign site: In the U.S. today, 104 reactors generate approximately 20% of our nation’s electricity. By comparison France (hardly a beacon of free-market thinking) has almost 80% of its electricity generated by nuclear power. Nuclear is renewable, safe and one of the cheapest sources of power available. The 23rd district is home to three reactors, at Oswego. Well, what about the Conservative, Douglas Hoffman? Oswego … could probably accommodate one or two additional ones [reactors], he said. "Nuclear puts people to work immediately," he said. Shall we try for a clean sweep with Rep. William Owens (D-NY)? Mr. Owens said he is "clearly very supportive" of n...

John Wheeler at This Week in Nuclear keeps hitting hard against New York State’s Department of Environmental Conservation: In my further research on this topic I discovered a damming piece of evidence that proves NY State is giving preferential treatment to fossil fuels while at the same time imposing unfair regulations on neighboring nuclear energy facilities, the largest competitors to fossil fuels. Stop by for the whole story .

This Week In Nuclear’ s John Wheeler has an excellent description of the water permit issue going on between the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the Indian Point nuclear plant: The NY position on Indian Point is not about protecting the environment; it is about imposing onerous financial burden on the plant to make it less competitive with the end goal of shutting the plant down for good. Don’t worry, he has facts to back up his statement. For instance: It is illogical for NY State to object to the use of wedge wire screens [to reduce the plant’s impact on fish] on the basis that the technology is experimental and unproven. According to the US Environmental Protection Agency wedge wire screens have been successfully tested in a variety of settings in New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Florida, and Kansas, and on bodies of water including the St John River and the Delaware River in conditions very similar to the Hudson River. In these examples wed...

From Entergy's press release : The Independent Safety Evaluation (ISE) panel's report, while identifying areas for improvement that need to be addressed, confirms that Indian Point Energy Center is a safe and secure plant, Entergy officials said Thursday. What does Entergy need to work on ? ... the Panel found that IPEC’s relationship with the public and stakeholders, particularly on matters of emergency preparedness, is not healthy. Additionally, the Panel concluded that IPEC’s emergency response facilities and equipment do not meet high industry standards, and should be upgraded. Overall, the Panel found that security at the plant is strong but problems with staffing shortages in some security functions and certain aging security systems and equipment should be addressed on a priority basis. Check out the report (pdf) and let us know your thoughts. Was the panel worth it? Do you think they were objective? Will their assessment have any weight with the public? Will anyone act...

Well, what's new? I didn't catch this until yesterday, but shortly after Entergy announced an independent safety evaluation will be done for Indian Point, Riverkeeper was quick to dismiss the study . Here's Riverkeeper: An independent safety assessment is not an assessment contracted and paid for by the company needing an assessment. If the Nuclear Regulatory Commission conducts the safety assessment, Entergy would still have to pay for it. Anytime a plant is under increased scrutiny by the NRC, the plant is billed for those extra hours. Riverkeeper: There are times when the federal government needs to step in and put taxpayers’ dollars to work for the sake of public health and safety. It is not taxpayers' dollars at work here. As said above, Entergy would still end up paying for the study. Riverkeeper: A true Independent Safety Assessment should be overseen by federal and state regulators and include a citizen advisory panel. There are ten experts on Entergy's ISE...

Dan Yurman shares some thoughts on New York's Indian Point nuclear plant. Be sure to visit : New York is the first state to formally oppose relicensing of a nuclear power plant At a time when the rest of the world is experiencing what is called a " nuclear renaissance ," the situation in the Empire State appears to be retrograding into a dark age where all things nuclear are considered a threat, and often on an emotional rather than rational basis. ...

Here are some of the details : In an effort to provide public assurances about the operation and protection of New York's largest nuclear power facility, Entergy Nuclear today announced the start of a fully independent examination of safety, security and emergency preparedness at its Indian Point Energy Center (IPEC) in Buchanan. The Independent Safety Evaluation (ISE) will be conducted by a distinguished independent panel of experts selected for their unique qualifications and independence of relationships with Entergy which would compromise their judgment. The ISE would supplement extensive evaluations already regularly conducted by the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission through its reactor oversight process. "Although repeated and continuous NRC assessments have concluded Indian Point is safe, we hope this independent evaluation will be another step in building public confidence in Indian Point's safety and security, and serving as a vital role in New York's ener...

From Constellation : UniStar Nuclear Energy (UNE), a strategic joint venture between Constellation Energy (NYSE: CEG) and the EDF Group, today announced it has notified the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) of its plans to submit a Combined License (COL) application in late 2008 for a potential advanced design nuclear reactor at Constellation Energy's Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station in upstate New York. For the list of planned new nuclear units in the US, click here .

Herbert J.C. Kouts, an important figure in the early years of the development of the American nuclear energy industry, has died at the age of 88 at his home on Long Island . In an obituary in today's edition of the New York Times , Matthew Wald quotes a passage from Kouts that was included in an appendix to a New York State-sponsored report issued in 1983 about the Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant on Long Island. As many of you might recall, the plant was shut down by local opposition even as it was just about to being commercial operation: In an appendix to the commission’s report, Dr. Kouts said: “All careful analysis confirms that the risk of nuclear power is small. The chance of a large accident is very low, and consequences of such an accident would be substantially less than most people think.” “In the United States, the near-term risk of doing without nuclear power is the risk attached to using oil or coal instead,” he wrote. “The problems that these cause include acid rain; e...

As we're all aware, a bevy of local and state politicians in New York have jumped on the anti-Indian Point bandwagon . But for Westchester County resident Peter Applebome, the answers to questions about energy and the environment aren't so obvious : [C]losing Indian Point raises its share of vexing questions. For starters: Is New York prepared to increase carbon emissions and perhaps flunk its goals under the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative to close Indian Point? In whose neighborhoods in Westchester or Rockland Counties is it prepared to build the power plants that would replace it? Is the possibility of more expensive and less reliable electricity an acceptable trade-off for not having to worry about Indian Point? If Indian Point poses an unacceptable risk, shouldn’t the dozens of nuclear plants in metropolitan areas around the country and the world close as well? And we’re comfortable with those carbon trade-offs too? In the end, they come down to this: Do the forever-gr...

... From our friends at NAM Blog .

From the New York Sun : To the alarm of business and energy groups, the Spitzer administration is cranking up its effort to shut down the Indian Point nuclear reactors by demanding that the federal government reject the plant's license renewal application because of safety reasons. Governor Spitzer, along with Attorney General Cuomo, yesterday submitted a petition to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission claiming that the Hudson River plant is too old and susceptible to terrorist attacks and natural disasters to be granted a 20-year extension of its license. "The presence of the Indian Point nuclear power plant in our midst is untenable," the petition states. The legal filing is the governor's most significant action against the plant since taking office, and the latest sign of a political shift among local government officials toward shutting it down. Here's the official NEI response from CNO Marv Fertel: “The position taken today by the governor and the attorney ge...

One of my colleagues at NEI just handed me the following statement from actor Paul Newman . Newman toured Entergy's Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant earlier this week, and after the completion of the tour, he issued the following statement which has also been distributed by Entergy and NEI: Statement of Paul Newman Indian Point tour of May 21, 2007 I recently toured the Indian Point nuclear plant and I expected to be shown safety and security at the plant. But what I saw exceeded my expectations. No Army or Navy base I’ve ever visited has been more armored and I couldn’t walk 30 feet inside the plant without swiping my key card to go through another security check point. There was security at every turn, and the commitment to safety is clear. One worker told me his family lives very close to the plant, downwind even, and he is very comfortable because of the plant's commitment to safety. During my tour of the plant, I was amazed that a generator that is the size of two or thr...