Skip to main content

The Summer Breeze: V.C. Summer 2 and 3 Approved

VC_SummerSouth Carolina Gas and Electric received its combined construction and operating license (COL) from the NRC for two new reactors at its V.C. Summer facility. Let’s let them tell you about it:

South Carolina Electric & Gas Company, principal subsidiary of SCANA Corporation , and Santee Cooper, South Carolina’s state-owned electric and water utility, have received approval for combined construction and operating licenses (COLs) from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for two new nuclear units at V. C. Summer Station in Jenkinsville, S.C.

“Receiving approval of our licenses to construct and operate units 2 and 3 at V.C. Summer is a significant event for our company and marks the culmination of an intense review by the NRC,” said Kevin Marsh, chairman and CEO of SCANA. “We look forward to building these two new nuclear units to enhance our ability to meet the energy needs of our customers.”

Lonnie Carter, president and CEO of Santee Cooper, said, “These new nuclear units are a critical component of Santee Cooper’s long-term plan to diversify our generation mix. Access to reliable and low-cost electricity will be key to job creation and economic development opportunities as we continue rebuilding our state’s economy and position South Carolina for the future.”

About 1,000 workers are currently engaged in early-site preparation work at the V.C. Summer construction site. The project will peak at about 3,000 construction craft workers over the course of three to four years. The two units, each with a capacity of 1,117 megawatts, will then add 600 to 800 permanent jobs when they start generating electricity.

Full steam ahead! We’ll look at some of the news and editorial comment about this next week.

---

Gov. Jerry Brown of California may or may not be able to navigate the unusual world of his state’s politics – we certainly hope he can – but in his first term (1975-1983) or his second one (beginning last year), he has always been reliably straightforward in describing his thinking, yet he always sounds fantastically mellow for a chief executive. Let’s count it as a virtue, whether one agrees with his policies or not.

So were we were quite interested to see what he had to say about  energy. He didn’t disappoint.

Every Governor usually inherits a mess,” said Brown.  “I’m open, I’m curious, I like to try new things. So if we didn’t try something before [in terms of renewable energy], maybe we can try it now. And stuff we haven’t done, that’s what we gotta do.”

Well, that’s renewables. Fine.

“Just looking at stuff, sh*t happens,” said Brown. “Nuclear’s got issues, but it’s good for greenhouse gases, it’s pretty reliable. Our plant at Diablo Canyon is going at 98 percent reliability, which is a lot higher than it was 30 years ago.”

I’m not sure I’d put exactly like that, but true enough. Diablo Canyon is one of California’s two operating nuclear facilities. San Onofre is the other.

We poked around to see if Brown said more about nuclear – he’s been at the Wall Street Journal’s ECO:nomics conference this week - but really just snips and bits. Here’s one:

MR. THOMSON: How have your views on nuclear changed? Would you describe yourself as pronuclear now?

GOV. BROWN: Certainly I'm more skeptical of everything, even of my own ideas.

Nuclear's got issues, but it's good for greenhouse gases. It's pretty reliable. So, I'm open to it. I want to make stuff work. I want to deal with stuff. And you've got to try many paths, because a lot of them don't work.

I'd definitely say nuclear is a serious technology that serious people have to think about, and I certainly would include myself in that group.

This is a striking change. Brown ran in 1979 on an explicitly anti-nuclear platform (it was soon after the accident at Three Mile Island).

---

I found this comment about fracking to be non-responsive, but pure Brown:

I called up one of our leading oil companies and said, "What's the story on fracking?" This was a week ago. He said, "Well, it's not as bad as the environmentalists say and it's not as safe as the oil companies say." I said, "Well, could I get a briefing on it?" He said, "Yeah." So sometime in the next two or three weeks I'm going to be able to answer your question better.

So, let’s see what he thinks in three weeks.

The view at Summer. This is actually from about a year ago. It’s probably not quite so pit-like now.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Brown is very liberal, but has a pragmatic side. Sounds like he's leaning to the latter in terms of nuclear and the GHG issues. That is for the better.
Brian Mays said…
Who knows? Maybe Governor Brown has been hanging out with Stewart Brand. After all, Brand served as Gov. Brown's "special advisor" back in the late seventies.

Let's hope that Brown is keeping that kind of company these days.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why Nuclear Plant Closures Are a Crisis for Small Town USA

Nuclear plants occupy an unusual spot in the towns where they operate: integral but so much in the background that they may seem almost invisible. But when they close, it can be like the earth shifting underfoot.

Lohud.com, the Gannett newspaper that covers the Lower Hudson Valley in New York, took a look around at the experience of towns where reactors have closed, because the Indian Point reactors in Buchanan are scheduled to be shut down under an agreement with Gov. Mario Cuomo.


From sea to shining sea, it was dismal. It wasn’t just the plant employees who were hurt. The losses of hundreds of jobs, tens of millions of dollars in payrolls and millions in property taxes depressed whole towns and surrounding areas. For example:

Vernon, Vermont, home to Vermont Yankee for more than 40 years, had to cut its municipal budget in half. The town closed its police department and let the county take over; the youth sports teams lost their volunteer coaches, and Vernon Elementary School lost th…