Tag Archives: Dominion Power

Dominion buying up solar projects

A Virginia electric utility bought a solar project near Georgia Power’s nuclear plant Vogtle, and has been busily buying up four more, in Indiana and Connecticut. The Georgia electric customer is recent coal-to-solar convert Cobb EMC, not Georgia Power. This is the same Dominion Power that got Virginia to legalize its “standby charge” of a monthly fee for individuals to connect solar to its grid. Is Dominion trying to beat Edison Electric’s warning of the disruptive challenge of rooftop solar by building large solar plants? If so, it’s a start, with quite a few construction jobs. And all of this new solar power is expected to be online this year, a lot faster than nuclear….

Dominion says of its Azalea Solar Power Facility:

Location of Azalea Solar Power Facility Dominion announced on March 1, 2013, that it has acquired a solar energy development project in Georgia from Smart Energy Capital and Jacoby Development. The expected start of commercial operations is Dec. 1, 2013. (> View our news release for complete details.)

Dominion’s Azalea Solar Power Facility is planned to produce approximately 7.7 megawatts (AC) using photovoltaic technology. Dominion will select a contractor and oversee the construction of the project. The 40-acre project is located on Continue reading →

Georgia Power wants to charge you for your solar power

Georgia Sierra Club’s Seth Gunning batted away Georgia Power’s proposed solar tax, which would charge about $22 a month for many new home solar installations. GA PSC needs to call Georgia Power’s proposal out, because it was a bad idea when Dominion Power did it in Virginia, and it would be a worse idea here in sunny Georgia. Besides, Austin Energy already established that the purported basis for such a solar tax is nonsense: actually, utilities should be paying more for home solar power because of the benefits they receive.

Jonathan Shapiro wrote for WABE yesterday, Georgia Power’s Proposed Solar Tariff Scrutinized,

The company is proposing an average tariff of about $22 per month for new home solar systems that aren’t a part of Georgia Power-sponsored solar initiatives.

Company officials argue the tariff is necessary because most solar users still require the power grid as a back-up when the sun isn’t shining. As solar use spreads, the company stands to collect less revenue from those customers. What doesn’t change is the cost to maintain the grid. Georgia Power says non-solar customers shouldn’t have to bear all the costs.

“We don’t want to contribute to the problem of shifting costs so before we do that we very much prefer to get these tariffs right so all customers benefit,” said Roberts.

PSC Chairman Chuck Eaton wondered if the tariff is about making up for lost revenue, why not consider new fees for any number of energy efficiency measures.

“What makes solar unique?” asked Eaton. Continue reading →

Millstone 3 nuke down since Friday, NRC tells us Monday

Friday a reactor tripped off, and NRC got around to telling us about it today: Millstone 3, 3.2 miles WSW of New London, Connecticut, about half way between Boston and New York. I hear a few people live around there. That’s its second downtime in six months. Why is nuclear considered reliable baseload? Distributed solar power wouldn’t all be down at once, and wouldn’t risk irradiating millions of people.

Here’s Event Number 49260: Continue reading →

Duke Energy is closing Crystal River nuclear reactor

Finally! The reactor only 160 miles from here that nobody wanted to pay to fix is closing for good: Duke is closing Crystal River. After Kewaunee and Crystal River closing, which one is next? San Onofre? The never-opened Vogtle 3 and 4?

Ivan Penn wrote for Tampa Bay Times today, Duke Energy announces closing of Crystal River nuclear power plant,

Duke Energy announced early Tuesday it will permanently close the Crystal River nuclear plant that has been shut down since late 2009.

The company said it is reviewing alternatives, including building a new natural gas plant, to replace the power produced by the nuclear facility.

Duke's four coal-fired plants will remain in service at the same Citrus County complex where the nuclear plant, known as CR3, is located.

How about they build offshore wind farms and solar farms instead, like TEPCO is doing near Fukushima? Those can be built on time and on budget, use no fuel, and cause no pollution. And how about rooftop solar for jobs and energy independence?

There's more in the article, including this:

Continue reading →

Failed concrete: the bane of nuclear reactors

Let’s not forget the failed concrete on which Plant Vogtle’s unprotected stranded reactor vessel is supposed to sit.

A week before the reactor vessel train wreck, news stories said concrete pouring was delayed due to “noncompliant rebar”. Thomas Clements elaborated for the Aiken Leader 14 January 2013, Vogtle AP1000 Nuclear Reactor Vessel Discovered Unprotected, Stranded in Savannah Port since December 15 Shipment Failure,

Due to chronic delays in the pouring of “nuclear concrete” for the basemat of the AP1000 units at Vogtle and VC Summer, it remains unknown when or if any reactor vessels can actually be placed into the excavated holes at the sites. A January 10 meeting of the NRC confirmed that another basemat-related “license amendment request” (LAR) was soon to be filed by SCE&G for its AP1000 project and that the target date for granting of the LAR was March 18. It appears that the Vogtle project has fallen behind the V.C. Summer project and no strategy for the filing of a similar and necessary LAR by Southern Company is known.

Concrete, the long-time bane of Seabrook Station and also what’s keeping Crystal River shut down because nobody wants to pay the billions of dollars it would take to fix it.

 

What say we call the whole thing off, like Dominion Power did with its existing Kewaunee nuke, and TEPCO and NRG did with their plans for new South Texas nukes.

 

Maybe it’s a sign that meanwhile Google has invested a billion dollars in wind and solar and gotten 2 gigawatts of power, almost as much as the 2.2 GW the two new Vogtle nukes were supposed to produce, except Google’s solar and wind projects are online on time, and for less than just the cost overruns at Vogtle.

The Georgia legislature is in session. You can contact your legislator or the PSC today about toppling Southern Company’s three-legged nuclear regulatory-capture stool and fixing that 1973 Territoriality Law so we can get on with solar and wind in Georgia, for jobs and energy independence, and oh by the way clean air and plenty of clean water.

-jsq

Substandard fire protection at nuclear Plant Hatch?

Does Hatch nuclear Unit 1 have substandard fire protection, like many reactors built before 1975? Protection against fires that the NRC says cause about half the core damage risk, such as at Fukushima, which is the same design as Hatch?

According to Simplyfy.org 2 Jan 2012, Fire Risk At Older Japan Reactors Shows Potential Worldwide Problem,

The [Japanese Nuclear Regulatory Authority] NRA announced recently that reactors built before 1975 likely have sub standard fire protection designs. This includes having important cables coated in fire resistant insulation, isolating and protecting cables and creating barriers to prevent fires from spreading to other areas of critical equipment.

Source: The Mainichi, 1 Jan 2013, Over 10 nuclear plants in Japan have flawed fire-prevention equipment: sources.

What else was built before 1975? Plant Hatch Unit 1 “Operating License: Issued – 10/13/1974”, according to the U.S. NRC. 100 miles from here, and the same design as Fukushima.

DOE also instituted upgrades and changes to their reactor facilities which included facility modifications as a result of Browns Ferry fire. Private sector nuclear power reactors in the US are not all fully up to the newer rules. The NRC has issued a number of exemptions that watchdog groups have criticized as being unsafe. Browns Ferry still does not meet the NRC fire rules for cables. 47 of 52 reactors in the US still do not comply with the 1980 fire regulations.

Plant Hatch is privately owned and operated. Has it been upgraded? Continue reading →