Skip to main content

SCE&G, CEZ, Ice, The Sun

 Unrattled:
South Carolina Electric and Gas Co. said it expects to have a federal license by January to operate two new nuclear reactors it wants to build in Fairfield County.
The State newspaper reported SCE&G received a letter Wednesday from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission saying the utility's application is complete and a final safety report should be ready in September.
The NRC then would have four months to hold a public hearing and issue the licenses for the nearly $10 billion project.
SCE&G provides a little more detail about the two reactors planned at V.C. Summer:
In the letter, the NRC staff concluded that SCE&G’s application for a combined operating license is complete. The revised schedule supports the issuance of the Final Safety Evaluation Report (FSER) in September 2011. As the NRC letter stated “The objective for completion of the mandatory hearing, including issuance of a final Commission decision, should be no later than four months from the issuance of the later of the FSER or Final Environmental Impact Statement for the COL.”
And makes it clear that this fits the schedule originally set for the project. The first new unit should be begin operation in 2016 and the second in 2019.
SCE&G also provides a pdf of the NRC letter outlining its schedule if you want to dig deeper into the details.
---
Rattled:
Panicky investors, worried about euro-zone debt, global economic gloominess and plunging stock markets, may have let recent antinuclear sentiment and the hunt for havens get the best of them.
Wouldn’t be the first time, would it?
Analysts say shares in Czech-based power company CEZ AS, central Europe's biggest producer of nuclear power, have fallen too much amid the recent German-led backlash against atomic energy. They predict the stock price will recover later this year as the furor over nuclear energy dies down and the Europe Union discusses exemptions to regulations covering carbon-dioxide emissions.
Die down or no, CEZ, of which the Czech government is a majority owner, never changed course:
"Some international investors may not pay attention to [the] Czechs still supporting nuclear power. These investors might think Germans are against nuclear, so Europe will be against it, too," said Teresa Schinwald, an analyst at Raiffeisen in Vienna who has a "buy" recommendation and target price of 1,050 Czech Koruna ($60.93) on CEZ. "It seems like a perception problem rather than a practical one."
If I were an expert on the stock market, well, I’d probably be panicking. But not about CEZ.
---
We know that the earthquake and tsunami that struck Japan in March were powerful – leaving Fukushima Daiichi aside for a moment, they caused a loss of life and property that was so large it was difficult to grasp. On this side of the Pacific, some marinas were rocked by the tsunami, but no serious damage occurred.
Looking east made sense at the time, but others were looking south:
To sum up the dynamics of the event: An earthquake off the coast of Japan caused massive waves to explode out from its epicenter. Swells of water swarmed toward an ice shelf in Antarctica, 8,000 miles (13,600 kilometers) away, and about 18 hours after the earthquake occurred, those waves broke off several chunks of ice that together equaled about two times the surface area of Manhattan. According to historical records, this particular piece of ice hadn't budged in at least 46 years before the tsunami came along.
This is significant because scientists had no evidence that a tsunami could do this – snap off pieces of the ice shelf – and this instance has been extensively documented (the site has a video of the icebergs being formed, for starters). This can lead to new intelligence about ice shelf stability.
I’m not sure that this episode causes problems itself – the article doesn’t say so – but I’d guess ships in the southern hemisphere will need to know the location of a Manhattan-sized block of ice – assuming it can be carried by waves – so they can avoid it.
---
Here comes the sun:
Storms are brewing about 93 million miles (150 million kilometers) away, and if one of them reaches Earth, it could knock out communications, scramble GPS, and leave thousands without power for weeks to months.
But go about your business in an orderly way.
This is what is happening:
The tempest is what's known as a solar storm, a flurry of charged particles that erupts from the sun. Under the right conditions, solar storms can create extra electrical currents in Earth's magnetosphere—the region around the planet controlled by our magnetic field.
The electrical power grid is particularly vulnerable to these extra currents, which can infiltrate high-voltage transmission lines, causing transformers to overheat and possibly burn out.
Now, before we prepare for months in the dark:
"Geomagnetic storms are low-probability, high-impact events," Lordan said. "When assessing the risk to the grid, one has to ask, What's the level of storm intensity that the grid system should be prepared for?
"Based on the data and the scenarios we can reasonably expect, I believe the power-delivery system can operate through a solar storm."
Well, that’s not nearly as exciting as wandering across a wasteland looking for a stray can of beans, but ledes promising a future in dystopic science fiction scenarios should always be taken with a grain of salt. It certainly doesn’t hurt to know about these kinds of events – I remember solar storms creating havoc on my short wave radio – though tamping down the dire predictions would do a world of good.
From NASA: The sun-orbiting SOHO spacecraft has imaged many erupting filaments lifting off the active solar surface and blasting enormous bubbles of magnetic plasma into space. This image shows the sun in ultraviolet light, while the field of view extends over 2 million kilometers, or 1.243 million miles, from the solar surface.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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...