Tag Archives: Nuclear

Pilgrim nuke shut down in winter storm again this weekend

Entergy, the company that blacked out the Super Bowl, now has taken down Massachusetts’ Pilgrim nuclear reactor in a winter storm. And that’s not the first time this year. Plus, what will happen with sea level rise to that nuke on the coast?

Beth Daley wrote for Boston.com this morning, Pilgrim nuclear plant shuts down in storm, Pilgrim Station nuclear plant automatically shut down in the thick of the storm Friday night after losing power, according to a statement by Entergy, the plant’s owner.

Authorities said there is no danger and backup diesel generators are powering safety systems.

“The plant is in a safe, secure condition and will remain on backup power supply until off-site power is restored,” the statement said.

But that’s hardly the whole story. Pilgrim Station has been down about a week lately, and at 80% still other days, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC):

Continue reading →

HB 267 Financing costs; construction of nuclear generating plant

As promised, a bipartisan bill was filed Thursday to stop Georgia Power from charging for nuclear cost overruns on Plant Vogtle; this could free up some financing for Georgia to move ahead on solar and wind power.

2013-2014 Regular Session – HB 267 Financing costs; construction of nuclear generating plant; change calculation that utility can recover from customers,

A BILL to be entitled an Act to amend Code Section 46-2-25 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to the procedure for changing any rate, charge, classification, or service and the recovery of financing costs, so as to change the calculation used under certain circumstances to determine the costs of financing associated with the construction of a nuclear generating plant that a utility may recover from its customers; to provide for related matters; to provide an effective date; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.

The bill would add this text to Georgia Code:

…provided, however, that in the event the amounts recorded in the utility’s construction work in progress accounts plus the amount of all financing costs accrued on any construction work in progress accounts exceeds the costs approved by the commission in the original certificate of the nuclear generating plant granted under Code Section 46-3A-5, the cost of equity portion of the financing costs shall be calculated using a rate no higher than the utility’s actual cost of debt.

Let’s see what Georgia Power does to fight this one. So far, it’s Continue reading →

Nuclear Power Is Not the Answer —Sierra Club

Sierra Club, one of the oldest, largest, and most influential grassroots environmental activist groups in the U.S., has been tentatively anti-nuke since 1974, observing now that none of its conditions of energy conservation, reactor safety, nuclear fuel disposal, weapons proliferation, or adequate regulation have ever been met, has come out unequivocably against nuclear power.

Nuclear Power Is Not the Answer

The Sierra Club remains unequivocally opposed to nuclear energy. Although nuclear plants have been in operation for less than 60 years, we now have seen three serious disasters.

Tragically, it took a horrific disaster in Japan to remind the world that none of the fundamental problems with nuclear power have ever been addressed.

Besides reactor safety, both nuclear proliferation and the required long-term storage of nuclear waste (which remains lethal for more than 100,000 years) make nuclear power a uniquely dangerous energy technology for humanity.

Plenty of links in that Sierra Club page.

Sierra Club is one of the first two of the 99 sponsors of the Forward on Climate rally, high noon Sunday 17 February 2013 on the National Mall in Washington D.C. I’ll be there. How about you?

-jsq

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 →

Denmark beats Georgia Power’s 20 year plan

As anticipated, Georgia Power released that 20-year energy plan Thursday, because they have file one every three years with the PSC. It includes far less solar power than tiny little far-north-of-here Denmark is busily deploying.

The good news: Georgia Power is closing a bunch of coal plants. And this plan makes a nod towards "demand response programs, energy efficiency programs, pricing tariffs and other activities".

The bad news: they're replacing those coal plants with natural gas, and of course "two new state-of-the-art nuclear facilities at Plant Vogtle"; you know, the two Georgia Power has been charging customers for since 2009 while they deliver no electricity. Georgia Power can't even seem to deliver the reactor containment vessels.

But what about renewable energy? Continue reading →

San Onofre and Diablo Canyon status graphs (NRC data)

Graphs for San Onofre and Diablo Canyon from NRC daily reactor status reports, per request.

Pride of Southern California Edison Co., San Onofre 2 in San Clemente, California, has been down for more than a year now, since 10 January 2010. Interesting the way it ramps down down from 100% to below 80% over a week, almost as if they were trying to cool it off. Will it stay down permanently?

San Onofre 2

San Onofre 3 has been down almost a year, since 1 February 2012. Cost of outage for both reactors so far: $317 million as of November.

Continue reading →

NRC Power Reactor Status Reports Graphed

Do you know how many outages nuclear reactors near here have had? Probably not, because that’s usually not in the news, and you have to dig into day by day NRC reactor status reports to find out. It turns out nuclear power is 0/7 instead of 24/7 on many a day.

Looking at all nine nuclear reactors within 200 miles of here, the graph drips downtime like tears.

Reactors within 200 miles

The available data on NRC’s website and graphed here goes back to 31 March 2006, through 29 January 2013. Let’s look at each of our closest reactors one by one. Hatch 1 on the Altamaha River, in addition to its recent 40% power on 21 January and 87% on 5 January, has had quite a few outages:

Continue reading →

Power source growth rates like compound interest

What if instead of projecting percentages, we project gigawatts from FERC’s December 2012 Installed Operating Generating Capacity table? Solar and wind still win in less than a decade.

FERC 2012 power source gigawatts and growth rates projected 20 years

Ignore the fastest-growing curve for a moment; I added that. All the other curves start with the December 2012 gigawatts for each power source in the FERC table, and an annual compound growth rate computed by comparing that installed operating capacity to the capacity added in 2012 for that power source. That compound annual growth rate for solar is 60.9% and for wind is 22.8%. Nothing else comes close.

Solar passes coal in about 8 years, wind in about 9, and natural gas in about Continue reading →

Georgia Power to announce 20-year plan Thursday

What will Georgia Power announce for a 20 year energy plan Thursday? Will they (1) just double down on their rate-hike boondoggles for nuclear and gas, or (2) they could flip like Austin Energy in 2003 and Cobb EMC in 2012 and suddenly go solar? The wording here looks like it’s going to be the former. That they even feel compelled to announce some sort of formal plan instead of just shovelling disinformation out another 50 years indicates they’re feeling the pressure to change direction to real sustainable energy: wind and solar power.

Matt Shedd wrote for WUGATV today, Georgia Power To Release Energy Plan,

Georgia Power is set to release a 20-year energy plan on Thursday which will outline a way for the company and the state to be less reliant on coal power. The AJC reports that just 5 years ago, the company’s reliance on coal was at 70 percent.

That number has now dropped to 47 percent. These changes are coming in the wake of Georgia Power’s parent, the Southern Co., being pushed by environmental rules to rely less on coal. Georgia Power won approval to buy electricity produced by natural gas from its sister company Southern Power, which may be part of the company’s future plans.

Thomas A. Fanning, CEO of Georgia Power’s parent The Southern Company (SO), has been touting 70% to 35% reduction in coal since at least May 2012 at the SO shareholder meeting. Fanning continues to emphasize nuclear, gas, and “clean coal” instead of real sustainable energy, namely wind and solar power. He also continues to assert electricity demand will increase, while ignoring conservation and efficiency, which for Georgia could remove all need for new energy, enabling solar and wind to shut down more coal and gas plants, as well as nukes.

So, get out the popcorn and take your bets. Will it be (1) or will it be (2)? I’m betting this time it will be (1), but sooner or later it will be (2), and even Georgia Power, and yes, even Southern Company, will stop digging in their heels and get on the solar train to profits, jobs, energy independence, and oh, by the way, clean air and plenty of clean water.

-jsq

GA SB 51, The Georgia Cogeneration and Distributed Generation Act

Georgia Senator Buddy Carter has introduced a Senate bill for the current session of the legislature, SB 51, “The Georgia Cogeneration and Distributed Generation Act of 2001”. It attempts to fix Georgia’s special solar financing problem, the antique 1973 Territorial Electric Service Act.

Why 2001? Apparently Buddy Carter has been introducing it every year since then. Last year Georgia Power’s disinformation campaign nuked it when it was SB 401. Has the legislature gotten tired of Georgia Power and its parent the Southern Company being way late and overbudget on those new nukes? Does the legislature want Georgia citizens to get the savings and job benefits of the fastest growing energy source in the country? Will GaSU help with SB 51, or only with GaSU’s attempt to become a solar monopoly utility? You can contact your legislators and tell them what you think. Every one of them who voted for Georgia Power’s stealth-tax rate hike for that nuke boondoggle should vote for SB 51 to start getting Georgia on a clean path to jobs and energy independence.

This bill is not perfect: it counts “generator fueled by biomass” as Continue reading →