Skip to main content

Visiting Davis-Besse

By Eric McErlain
Last Friday, Gary Petersen and a group of parents and students involved in home schooling in the Toledo area visited the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Plant. Congrats to Chip Palazzo and everyone at First Energy for continuing to reach out to the community and tell our industry's story.
Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
Nothing against the fine folks at Besse, but why can't they climb back into their football sized hole and let someone with higher credibilty promote the virtues of nuclear power? Mr. Ahmadinejad is in the U.S. and his experience with peaceful uses of nuclear fission might provide a more believable perspective.

Seriously, I cannot think of a worse face for this industry than FENOC. They 've done more than anyone to damage our reputation and should shut-up.
September 24, 2007 at 12:31 PM
Gary Petersen said…
Thanks for noting my article. The visit was a lot of fun and very informative. I would never have thought that the cooling tower discharged 10,000 gallons of water vapor every hour and that the fuel used for power generation was just 3% or so uranium content.

Chip was great, both in the tour and in catching the article I wrote on my weblog and commenting on it.
September 24, 2007 at 12:39 PM
Anonymous said…
Gary, thanks for your kind words.

I've been in the business of communications for more than 20 years and I can tell you - in all my years in various leadership capacities - I've never been as proud as I am now to represent FENOC and the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station to the communities we serve... and that includes sharing information with enthusiastic students interested in how we generate clean electric power.

The caliber of leadership in place at Davis-Besse and the 800+ who come through these gates every day is second to none. Their commitment to the safe, reliable efficient operation of this plant is evident 24/7/365.

It's a privilege to represent a team whose passion and commitment to doing the right thing IS the priority - as it is across the entire FENOC Fleet.
October 16, 2007 at 11:56 AM
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