Nuclear power: Wave of the past or future?

VentureBeat ^ | October 15, 2009 | Tom Slater

[Willie Green]

The U.S. may soon get its first nuclear reactor in more than 30 years. UniStar Nuclear Energy — a joint venture between Baltimore-based Constellation Energy and the EDF Group — has proposed a new reactor for southern Maryland capable of generating 1,600 megawatts and powering 1.3 million homes twenty-four hours a day.

To put this in context, the largest wind power installation in the world, the Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center in Texas, generates 735 megawatts — but only when it’s windy. Nuclear, by comparison, is massive.

Having cleared the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the New York Public Service Commission, the project is in the final phase of due diligence for a cut of the $18.5 billion in federal dollars earmarked for advanced nuclear development. There seems to be only one remaining roadblock: the Maryland Public Service Commission.

Even though the MPSC approved the reactor itself in late June after an 18-month study, there has been a great deal of protest around the hearings for the deal between Constellation Energy and the EDF Group. With a price tag of $7 billion, the reactor will require not only federal loan guarantees, but also substantial investment from EDF, requiring them to purchase a 50 percent stake in Constellation.

This seems straightforward enough. But the snag — apparently large enough to re-open MPSC hearings several times — lies in whether the investment would give French EDF too much influence over an American power company, Constellation’s subsidiary Baltimore Power & Light.

Those opposing the reactor and the deal between EDF and Constellation have called attention to potential energy rate hikes that could be levied to offset the cost of the plant’s construction. Despite what EDF calls “overwhelming public support” for the reactor voiced during the hearings, it seems there is a small but significant group opposed to it on financial terms. This group has issued construction estimates of up to $15 billion.

To counter these arguments, Constellation says the deal’s approval would create 4,000 construction jobs as well as 400 permanent positions at the reactor, while ultimately benefiting the area with cheaper electricity as well.

A hot topic of debate in the region, the reactor is emblematic of the U.S. nuclear industry as a whole. If one of the first realistic proposals in 30 years is stopped, how much hope will there be for the next?

[Jeff Chandler]

capable of generating 1,600 megawatts and powering 1.3 million homes twenty-four hours a day

Try doing that with alternative energy!

[Reagan Man]

>>>>>The U.S. may soon get its first nuclear reactor in more than 30 years.

Great news! Hopefully, the first in a new trend.

[veracious]

A big part of the near term (future). Do it!

[Dr. Thorne]

Check this out: http://www.hyperionpowergeneration.com

From their website: "Hyperion Power Generation is commercializing the world’s first transportable nuclear power module in the quest for clean, non-polluting fail-safe, affordable and accessible power."

It's a single 6 feet tall mini-nuclear generator that is buried underground and can potentially provide electricity for 20,000 homes. Pretty cool.

[HangThemHigh]

If the US wants a future, we had better develop a workable energy policy. Nuclear is about the only alternative to living in the dark & shivering, especially if the Dims can push cap & tax through.

[rahbert]

put one in the yard, sell power to all your neighbors!

great retirement buisness idea!

[Willie Green]

It's a single 6 feet tall mini-nuclear generator that is buried underground and can potentially provide electricity for 20,000 homes. Pretty cool.

I like the mini-nukes and think they should have a niche sometime in the distant future.
But priorities dictate focusing on getting the big plants going again. They've been dormant way too long, and the mini-nukes are a controversial distraction.

[WellyP]

The French, yes, the French get 95% of their power from nukes. What is wrong with the LIBTARDS? Don’t they understand that if the French can do this safely, the U.S. of A. can do it “in spades”!

[Buckeye McFrog]

why do I get the feeling that The China Syndrome is suddenly going to hit hot rotation on AMC?

[Myrddin]

Taking their figure of $25 to $30 million for the module, 20,000 average homes and a 5 year life before refueling, the cost works out to around $250 per house per year. Not too bad.

[Reagan Man]

Agreed! This all goes back to the leftist hysteria of Three Mile Island and the China Syndrome movie of the late 1970`s. Part of the envirowacko extremist movement and eventual WashDC lobby that killed the nuclear reactor business.

[Willie Green]

why do I get the feeling that The China Syndrome is suddenly going to hit hot rotation on AMC?

And the Hildebeast will want publik skool kids to take potassium iodide along with their Ritalin.

[sitetest]

I get my power from BGE (Baltimore Gas and Electric, not “Baltimore Power and Light” - geesh, doesn't anyone even try to do journalism anymore??). I view this very, very positively. This plant will generate nearly as much power as the two plants already on-site at Calvert Cliffs, and it will have one-fifth the physical footprint and will impact the surrounding land, water and natural resources much less than even the current plants. There is enough land at Calvert Cliffs to build several more of these.

[Willie Green]

Cool! Thanks for the on-the-frontlines support!!!

[nuke rocketeer]

The South Texas Project will beat Unistar, They have already started ground preparation for two ABWR’s right nest to the 2 4-loop PWR’s they already operate.

Our parent company Toshiba has sold them and STP has already had the first of the COL (Construction-Operating Liscense) hearings.

[TBP]

Nuclear power is a vital part of our energy independence.

[Dr. Thorne]

They say it only needs service every 7 - 10 years (replacing the fuel) and is constantly monitored remotely. If this works, it would be a great investment opportunity. However, they get their funding from a private capital firm. The fund where their investors put their money is closed. Darn.

[nuke rocketeer]

we have almost double the nuke plants than the French do - 102 vs 59.

[nuke rocketeer]

Calvert Cliffs is probably the prettiest nuke site in the world, equaled only by the Angra site in Brazil. I’ve worked at both along with about 20 other nukes in the US.

[sitetest]

Dear nuke rocketeer,

Regrettably, they don't permit the public at large to enter the grounds anymore.

It's a large site, over 2700 acres, if I recall correctly. They could shove half a dozen of these new plants on the grounds, and they'd still all be lost in the woods.

sitetest

[wolf78]

Try doing that with alternative energy!

You can do that and it has already been done (albeit on a somewhat smaller scale: wind / hydrogen hybrid power station in Prenzlau, Germany), so the question is not if, but always how much dinero?

[Willie Green]

The South Texas Project will beat Unistar, They have already started ground preparation for two ABWR’s right nest to the 2 4-loop PWR’s they already operate.

Westinghouse is my nostalgic favorite, so I hope it pans out as you predict.
I find it embarrassing to lose out to the Frenchies.
OTOH, Toshiba was dealt a setback yesterday, so I don't know how that might affect the race.

U.S. Rejects Nuclear Plant Over Design of Key Piece

(I admit, I haven't followed this issue as close as I should have for a couple years, and it's going to take a little bit to get back up to speed.)

[nuke rocketeer]

It will cost much more than the equivalent number of nuke plants. The dirtiest little secret on wind power that is not widely published is that it’s capacity factor is about 30% at best, vs. 95% to 98% for nuclear and coal. That means to replace one 1000 MW coal plant, you have to build roughly 1500 2 MW wind generators. The total materials and fossil fuel consumption to build this number of wind generators exceeds that for a nuke plant.

[ASOC]

France is a great counrty. About the size of Montana and a population of 81.5 million.

France derives over 75% of its electricity from nuclear energy. This is due to a long-standing policy based on energy security. They make the electricity with 59 reactors.
France is the world’s largest net exporter of electricity due to its very low cost of generation, and gains over EUR 3 billion per year from this.
France has been very active in developing nuclear technology. Reactors and fuel products and services are a major export.
France uses ‘standard’ reactors, easing training and reducing maintenance costs.

[Kevmo]

The future of nuclear is cold fusion.

Re-Analysis of the Marinov Light-Speed Anisotropy Experiment
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2270920/posts
Friday, June 12, 2009 11:25:41 PM · by Kevmo · 27 replies · 1,027+ views
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/physics/pdf/0612/0612201v2.pdf ^ | Reginald T. Cahill

The Suppression of Inconvenient Facts in Physics
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2266921/posts
Sunday, June 07, 2009 7:50:26 PM · by Kevmo · 78 replies · 1,626+ views
Suppressed Science.Net ^ | 12/06/08 | http://www.suppressedscience.net/

The End of Snide Remarks Against Cold Fusion
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2265914/posts
Friday, June 05, 2009 5:56:08 PM · by Kevmo · 95 replies · 1,770+ views
Free Republic, Gravitronics.net and Intrade ^ | 6/5/09 | kevmo, et al

‘Cold Fusion’ Rebirth? New Evidence For Existence Of Controversial Energy Source
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2212864/posts
Monday, March 23, 2009 12:42:14 PM · by FlameThrower · 35 replies · 1,586+ views
Science Daily ^ | Mar. 23, 2009 | American Chemical Society

[wolf78]

It will cost much more than the equivalent number of nuke plants. The dirtiest little secret on wind power that is not widely published is that it’s capacity factor is about 30% at best, vs. 95% to 98% for nuclear and coal. That means to replace one 1000 MW coal plant, you have to build roughly 1500 2 MW wind generators. The total materials and fossil fuel consumption to build this number of wind generators exceeds that for a nuke plant.

The thing is: I'm neither anti-nuke nor anti-wind. I like all energy options, whenever they make economical sense. And that's actually what I said: The problem with alternative energy is not IF you can do it, because you can, it's bringing costs in line. So if someone says "try doing that", the logical answer is "sure, now give me the money". But it's the wrong question in the first place.

You can actually power a country, a state or whatever with alternative energy. I think it was Siemens (they also build coal and nuke power plant equipment) who did a study, that by combining wind and solar (plenty of desert in Arizona) they complement each other pretty well, so you'd need 5-8% long-term (i.e. weeks or months) energy storage (compressed air, hydrogen etc.), which also drives up prices. So the answer is: Yes, you can power a country with alternative energy, but it isn't cheap.

I actually like nuclear a lot, but we also need to realize its weak points (i.e. factors that drive up cost). E.g. using SFPs for storage like it's done in the US is a cheap option, but not really sustainable, nukes currently under construction have cost overruns and future breeders will be expensive, too. Then there is the price for decomissioning and dismantling old nukes (you can pretty much just throw away an old wind turbine or sell it to the third world).

I like nuclear, but it's not a cheap panacea, like some cheerleaders make it sound. So all energy options should be discussed honestly, i.e. in terms of dollars..., ah well, the dollar is tanking, so let's say euros.

P.S.: If cost weren't an issue, I'd like fusion reactors now, please ;)

[listenhillary]

It would be much cheaper if we put the lawyers and environmentalist gadflies in the fill for the cooling towers. Then decide on the most efficient, safest design and stick with it nationwide.

Then instead of pissing away 787 billion for stimulus, use it instead as a long term financing for the construction 80 or more electrical generation nuclear plants. Those on the coasts could also desalinate sea water.

[nuke rocketeer]

When you look at all long term costs, nuclear is virtually tied with coal for best cost. it’s biggest problem is that most of that cost is up-front in construction price. Breeders just do not work out yet. Every one that has been built has been shut down due to problems with sodium leakage. We can go to the plutonium and thorium cycles and have plenty of fuel for hundreds of years.

I do not mind the alternative sources, but in order to have a stable grid, they will never be much more than 15% to 20% of the total supply. The so-called smart grid will help on this, but to avoid a tremendously expensive crash program, the total cost to replace the US grid is estimated to be 1 trillion dollars and is likely to be higher.

BTW, fusion power is just around the corner, like it has been for the past 30 years.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Yeah, we can’t have the freakin’ French influencing our power companies! Why, they’re worse than China! /s

MPSC should just go ahead and approve.

Maryland “Freak State” PING!