Skip to main content

NRG Files License Applications with NRC for New Reactors at the South Texas Project

By Eric McErlain
My apologies for the lack of posts today, as I was down on Capitol Hill this morning for the press event announcing NRG's license application with NRC to build an additional two reactors at the site of the South Texas Project. For more details directly from NRG, click here.

I was at the event with my video camera, so I should have some footage to share later this afternoon. Congratulations to everyone at NRG and STP on taking an important first step -- one that hasn't been taken in the U.S. since 1978 -- on the road to building America's next new nuclear reactor.

UPDATE: Here's NRG Energy's President and CEO, David Crane, at the press conference:



UPDATE: And here's a clip of a statement from Senator Pete Domenici:

Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
Dominci is Republican. Were there any Democrat politicians at the NRG announcement? What about Jeff Bingham who's the majority leader of the same Senate Energy Committee that Pete Dominici is on? Were any Democrat Committee members there? Were any of their Presidential candidates there (e.g., Hillary, Obama, etc.)? Was Gore there? Unless I am mistaken (and I truly wish I were, for that would bode well for nuclear power regardless of who wins in the 2008 Presidential election), I think we know the answer to those questions.
September 26, 2007 at 12:11 PM
Joffan said…
in answer to anonymous:
from Environment News Service covering the announcement:

"Nuclear power is an essential component of any comprehensive national energy plan," said United States Senator Mary Landrieu, a Louisiana Democrat. "According to the Nuclear Energy Institute, 35 new nuclear power plants are needed in the next 40 years to keep pace with our escalating energy demand. A new power plant in Texas will prove to help combat the impact of global climate change and allow America to continue on a path toward energy independence."

Mary Landrieu is on the Energy and Natural Resources committee.
September 26, 2007 at 6:40 PM
Anonymous said…
There are more to come later this year.

I am just waiting to see how Toshiba goes about building the GE FDA version of the US ABWR.

Toshiba either needs GE-Hitachi to revise the design certification to include the features of the Toshiba version of the plant in Japan, or Toshiba needs to build the US version of the plant.

Either way, I am not sure how Toshiba can get around sending lots of money to GE-Hitachi.

If NRG plans to modify the design to match the Japan design, then that will delay construction waiting for new design approvals.

NRG would have been better off selecting Hitachi as the lead rather than Toshiba. They are trying to save a little here and there, but it will cost them in the end.
September 27, 2007 at 11:09 AM
Anonymous said…
Thanks, Joffan. Sadly, Mary Landrieu's lone voice is drowned out by Ed Markey, Dennis Kucinich, and many of the rest. Elliot Spitzer, NY's new Democrat governor, has publicly stated that NYS has no tolerance for new nukes and his AG, Andy Cuomo, son of Mario "I shut Shoreham down", are going after Indian Point tooth and nail to shut it down. That's why I made my comment. Only Democrats do that. Though Republicans have other, different faults, they aren't anti-nuclear like that. And Hillary, Democratic contender for the presidency, has gone out of her way to make things as hard for Indian Point as she possibly can (e.g., E-Plan sirens). And Obama, another Democratic contender, has advocated the shutdown of Davis Besse (riding the wave of that RPV head fiasco). And John Edwards has openly opposed nuke power.
September 27, 2007 at 2:14 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

By
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...
23 comments
Read more

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

By
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...
7 comments
Read more

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

By
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...
6 comments
Read more