[vtsnowedin]

The world turns slowly in California. Instead of debating keeping one old plant open they should be planing six to eight new ones that would serve as the CO2 free base of their electric grid for the next fifty years.
" None are so blind as those that refuse to see."

[Tanada]

Now for something I personally got a pleasant surprise about. The Federal USA Government has updated their Nuclear Energy page for what seems like the first time in a long time and the new lay out is actually very pro-nuclear energy. For most of the time the page has existed the feel of the layout and descriptions was very blase' about the uses and advantages of fission over fossil fuels. The new page feels like something I could have written myself and has a lay out that is very professionally presented, far better than the old layout. Please check it out for yourselves!
Office of Nuclear Energy

[Tanada]

Should NC's clean energy future include more nuclear power? Duke Energy thinks so

When Duke Energy filed its carbon plan with the N.C. Utilities Commission in May, there was the usual focus on retiring dirty coal-fired power plants and embracing more renewable energy sources.

The company's proposal was in response to legislation hashed out by Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper, the GOP-controlled General Assembly, and Duke Energy that committed the Tar Heel State to reduce carbon emissions by 70% from 2005 levels by 2030 and to reach carbon neutrality by 2050. Duke, as the state's largest utility, has submitted several "pathways" to meet the requirement.

But raising some eyebrows was the utility giant's plan to incorporate 570 megawatts of new nuclear power into its future portfolio. These new reactors, however, wouldn't be like the giant plants the company already operates north of Southport on the N.C. coast or in southwestern Wake County.

Growth:With offshore wind projects set to increase, is NC ready to capitalize on the opportunity?

How to keep the lights on in the future:Duke, environmentalists jostle over future grid

They would be much smaller and simpler reactors.
Duke Energy is interested in adding more nuclear power to its North Carolina grid in the coming decades. But any new reactors would be much smaller and simpler than today's nuclear plants, like the Brunswick Nuclear Plant north of Southport.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), small modular reactors (SMRs) are advanced nuclear reactors that have a power capacity of up to 300 megawatts per unit, which is about one-third of the generating capacity of traditional nuclear power reactors.

"Small nuclear reactors are essential for Duke Energy’s transition to a cleaner energy future," company spokesperson Jennifer Sharpe said via email. "The low-carbon, dispatchable energy of SMRs allows us to ensure reliable service for customers as we add more renewables to our system."

Duke is the largest regulated nuclear plant operator in the country and plans to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.

But the idea of adding additional nuclear power to North Carolina's grid isn't sitting well with everyone.

"The biggest thing is we just don't need them," said Jim Warren, executive director of NC WARN, a Durham-based nonprofit that promotes a swift move to clean energy options. "They are way too risky in a number of ways and just too expensive for the company and rate-paying customers to get them built."
Reliable and scalable

Depending on who you talk to, the rush by countries to shift away from fossil fuel power plants either represents the last gasp for nuclear power, which remains expensive to develop, or the renaissance of an often misunderstood industry through the development of safer, smaller less complex reactors.

Backers of nuclear power note that it is a source of emissions-free reliable power, and they believe their case has been strengthened due to the threat of climate change and the need to stabilize unreliable electrical grids.

Recent world events, notably the invasion of Ukraine by Russia and the subsequent upheaval in energy markets, has even convinced "green" governments like Germany, Japan and California to take another look at retaining or even expanding their nuclear power portfolios.

According to the IAEA, nuclear power provides about 10% of the world’s electricity, with thirty countries currently operating nuclear power plants and more than two dozen others looking at the power source as a way to meet their energy needs as they transition away from traditional fossil fuel power sources.

The Brunswick Nuclear Plant, located north of Southport, is expected to remain operational for decades to come.

Unlike wind and solar, nuclear power plants can also adjust output to meet demand throughout the day, allowing them to be paired with renewables to create a hybrid power generation system.

"Renewable energy sources, such as solar and wind, are intermittent, and while batteries can support them for a few hours, modeling clearly demonstrates the need for generation that can overcome extended weather conditions," Duke's Sharpe said. "SMRs are readily available and can be turned on anytime we need them."

Since they are small, SMRs also are viewed as easier to deploy than traditional reactors, which are often built to be site-specific, driving up their design time and costs. And because they are modular, a plant can also be scaled up by adding additional reactors to meet growing demand.

'Just not economical'

Three Mile Island. Chernobyl. Fukushima.

Accidents at those nuclear plants, in the United States, Ukraine and Japan, respectively, are seared into many people's memories.

Along with fears of potential radiation leaks, worries about what to do about nuclear waste produced by the plants and the energy source's association with nuclear weapons also makes many nervous.

But Warren said there's a more basic reason why North Carolina needs to move beyond nuclear energy.

"It's just not economical," he said.

Warren said nuclear plants have proven over and over again to be fiscal black holes, running into unforeseen development and construction problems that leaves utilities throwing more bad money after bad money as the cost and time lines for the projects balloon. While several new plants have been proposed in the past two decades only one is currently under construction, by Southern Company in Georgia.

"Duke Energy has already dragged us through this horror movie, and we can’t let them do it again," Warren said, referring to the utility's own efforts to build additional big nuclear plants earlier this century.

And as utilities across the world embrace renewable energy sources like offshore wind and solar, the price of those is dropping quickly.

In 2021, Wall Street financial consulting firm Lazard estimated that the cost of electricity from new nuclear plants would be between $131 and $204 per megawatt hour. That compares to between $26 and $50 per megawatt hour for utility-scale solar and wind plants.

Aside from public perceptions, the economics of developing and constructing new reactors also remain question marks.

"Significant technology development and licensing risks remain in bringing advanced SMR designs to market and government support is required to achieve domestic deployment of SMRs by the late 2020s or early 2030s," states the U.S. Department of Energy.

Unfair heat:Why Wilmington's neighborhoods aren't created equally when it comes to handling the heat

Tidal woes:'Undergoing a transformation': How increased high tide flooding could reshape the NC coast
Homegrown nuclear reactors?

As utilities, environmentalists and regulators debate the merits of adding new nuclear power to power grids, the impact for Wilmington residents could be more than just how the electricity to keep their lights on is produced.

GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy, based in Castle Hayne, is one of the leading companies working on a new SMR reactor.
GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy is headquartered in Castle Hayne, north of Wilmington. It is one of several companies developing new small modular nuclear reactors.

The company, which employs more than 2,000, has announced several agreements with utilities to explore the potential deployment of its new BWRX-300 small modular reactor. That list includes the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and utilities in Poland, Sweden and Canada. Company spokesman Jonathan Allen said a reactor in Ontario could be completed as early as 2028.

So is Duke Energy interested in GEH's new reactor?

Allen said he couldn't discuss talks GEH might have had with customers that haven't been formally announced. Duke also declined to say if GEH would be the company's favored partner if more nuclear is in the utility's future — something that will be decided by the N.C. Utilities Commission.

"As outlined in Duke Energy’s carbon plan, we are evaluating all available SMR designs and will choose the option most complementary to our system and our goal to reach net zero," Sharpe said.

The utilities commission is expected to rule on Duke's proposed carbon plan by the end of the year. A coalition of clean energy and environmental groups have also submitted an alternative carbon-reduction plan that includes more renewable power and no additional nuclear reactors.

LINK

[Tanada]

Coal plant sites could host 265 GW of advanced nuclear, costing 35% less than greenfield projects: DOE

Dive Insight:

The report comes as states and the federal government are looking for ways to take advantage of transmission lines and other equipment that was built to serve coal-fired power plants, in part to support the communities around the retired or soon-to-be shuttered generating facilities.

Illinois, for example, intends to install a mix of solar and battery storage at 11 retired coal-fired power plant sites while TerraPower is planning an advanced nuclear reactor demonstration project near the coal-fired Naughton plant in Wyoming.

DOE researchers from the Argonne, Idaho and Oak Ridge national laboratories found 190 operating coal plant sites that could host nearly 200 GW of nuclear capacity and 125 recently retired plant sites that could handle about 65 GW of nuclear capacity. There are about 100 GW of existing nuclear capacity in the United States, which account for 8.2% of all U.S. generating capacity, according to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Coal-to-nuclear, or C2N, projects appear to perform better economically than stand-alone, greenfield nuclear projects, the researchers said.

Also, building nuclear plants at retired coal plant generating stations may provide an economic boost to disadvantaged communities, according to the report.

“The study results suggest economic potential for communities and firms that pursue C2N transitions,” the DOE researchers said. “An implication of this is that there is a potential advantage for interested coal communities to be first movers in what could be a series of many C2N transitions across the United States.”

The researchers’ economic and environmental impact analysis was based on a hypothetical 1,200-MW coal-fired power plant in the Midwest that is replaced with a 924-MW nuclear plant.

That analysis suggests jobs in the region could increase by more than 650 permanent jobs, up from an estimated 150 jobs connected to the coal-fired power plant, the researchers said.

“Swapping out retiring coal-fired power plants with advanced nuclear reactors reduces carbon emissions, improves air quality, and provides economic benefits to communities,” Greenwald said. “It also minimizes siting challenges, reduces or eliminates community and economic impacts due to asset retirement while producing clean and reliable energy.”

LINK 1

Why Nuclear Energy Is Now Part of The Road to Renewables

What do Microsoft founder Bill Gates, climate scientist James Hansen, legendary venture capitalist Fred Wilson and the governments of Germany and Japan have in common? They are all exploring how nuclear power can be a part of the transition to a net zero world.

What a difference a decade makes. After the 2011 Fukushima crisis, nuclear power seemed to be facing possible extinction after Japan and Germany pledged to phase out nuclear energy. Now, everything is changing for three main reasons; a global energy crisis caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, an evolving understanding of the role nuclear power can play in helping battle climate change, and advances in technology enabling smaller nuclear plants.

In late August, Japan said it will restart idled nuclear plants and may develop next-generation reactors, something unimaginable after a tsunami caused a nuclear meltdown at Fukushima. Japan’s short-term motive is ending its reliance on Russian oil. Long-term, it’s a step toward a fossil fuel-free world. And, in a policy reversal, Germany is expected to prolong the use of three nuclear power plants because bans on Russian oil and natural gas have made it possible that millions of Europeans may be unable to afford to heat their homes this winter.

Many in Generation X and Baby Boomers — the generations of my parents and most of their peers — understandably think of nuclear energy with dread. They grew up in a Cold War society fearing nuclear annihilation, and have vivid memories of nuclear accidents near home at Three-Mile Island, and in far away places like Chernobyl.
Putting Past in Perspective

But for many of my generation, the kids of Gen X, harnessing nuclear energy is an idea worth consideration. We can put those earlier nuclear disasters in perspective, mindful that the larger, looming catastrophe we face is climate change. Long after the Baby Boom generation has passed on, our generation and our children will inhabit a still-heating planet where we still pump carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels into the atmosphere.

To be sure, nuclear energy needs to be tightly managed. Corruption and ignorance played a part in past disasters and Russia’s bombardment of a nuclear plant in Ukraine highlights ongoing security concerns. But technology has advanced, and our outlook must evolve, too.

This shift in attitudes has boosted nuclear stocks. Significant investment is making nuclear facilities more agile, faster to build and bring online and, ultimately, safer. Regulations are also helping. Stocks of nuclear power providers have outperformed the broader stock market lately. Outperformers include Constellation Energy (Constellation Energy Corporation - $87.75 1.61 (0.01802%) ), NRG Energy (NRG Energy Inc. - $42.80 1.22 (0.02771%) ), Xcel Energy (Xcel Energy, Inc. - $73.48 1.05 (0.01409%) ) and Entergy Corp. (Entergy Corp. - $114.30 1.58 (0.01363%) ), which all outpaced the broad S&P 500 Index over the summer. Helping their advance has been the Inflation Reduction Act, which includes a subsidy for nuclear plants, including "production tax credits" to existing plants.

Why is Washington supporting nuclear energy in a law aimed at tackling climate change? Because the sun doesn’t shine at night and wind turbines only operate efficiently within a narrow range of wind speeds. That means we need something paired with renewables for reliability. One option is natural gas-fired peaker plants that burn fossil fuels. Or we could develop better batteries to efficiently store solar and wind power for when it is needed, or employ another form of clean energy, such as nuclear power. As policymakers consider these choices, nuclear is overcoming some of its long-standing constraints through innovation.
For Nuclear, Smaller is Better

Smaller nukes can now be built within existing electrical facilities to replace coal-burning plants. These space-efficient plants require less time for regulatory approval and are safer, requiring less oversight. The “tiny nuclear” movement (which shares its ethos with the distributed solar movement) has attracted investment from private firms testing new designs.

And two of the world’s smartest guys (a Boomer and a member of the Greatest Generation) are also betting on tiny nukes. Bill Gates’ Terrapower and Warren Buffett’s PaciCorp are partnering to build a facility on the site of a Wyoming coal-fired power plant. The 345-megawatt reactor would be the smallest commercial U.S. nuclear plant and could power 400,000 homes. Terrapower believes its design can enable faster licensing and construction, and position it to go live on the power grid in 2028. Through U.S. Department of Energy grants and other incentives, Washington has committed $1.9 billion to the project.

Public pressure triggered by Three-Mile Island in 1979, amplified by Chernobyl in 1986 and hammered home by Fukushima in 2011 caused the nuclear industry to retrench. But these disasters were unique and had limited consequences. Since Three Mile Island, there have been few notable U.S. nuclear incidents even as nuclear provides some 20% of our electricity. Chernobyl was caused by negligence while Fukushima was located near an undersea fault line. A common element of all three is how few humans were sickened or died.

The long-term safety record of nuclear energy was among the reasons why in 2020 the Democratic party changed its position regarding nuclear energy to favor “all zero-carbon technologies, including hydroelectric power, geothermal, existing and advanced nuclear, and carbon capture and storage.” This was the first time Democrats have backed nuclear since 1972 and today both parties are backing nuclear.

Even climate scientist James Hansen has called nuclear power one of the best means for rapidly reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Meanwhile, nuclear energy costs pennies on the dollar compared to fossil fuels. And while the sun gives away its energy for free, we’ve yet to figure out an efficient way to harvest, store and transport electricity from it at scale.

Technology could yet push nuclear energy to new advances. Legendary venture capitalist Fred Wilson has put out a call for novel ideas to advance nuclear energy. “I've been looking into nuclear reactors and batteries with the lens of how small is possible,” the famed investor wrote on his blog. “Could we make a nuclear reactor or battery that fits in our home? Could we make a nuclear reactor or battery that we carry with us like a phone? I know these ideas seem preposterous but … often we bump into something else along the way that is even more interesting.”

With enthusiasm like this from Wall Street, climate scientists and leading governments from Washington to Tokyo, it seems like nuclear power is getting a new lease on life.

LINK2

[AdamB]

I only bash banana benders who buy expensive motorcycles while lacking either the roads to use them on or the talent, and then brag about that here.

It's the first time I come across anyone suggesting that Australia doesn't have plenty of roads.

Australia has plenty of roads. I'm not talking about cager roads. I'm talking about real roads where you apply horsepower, two wheels, and speed, and they become magic.

[Tanada]

Several embedded links in article at link below quote to support statements in report.

Canada / Ontario Backs Plans To Operate Four Pickering Units For Additional Year :: NucNet | The Independent Nuclear News Agency

The Ontario government has announced its support for Ontario Power Generation’s (OPG) continued operation of the Pickering nuclear power station for an additional year to 2026 – with the possibility of additional extensions of 30 years.

The province’s energy ministry said the plan to operate for a further year would cut carbon emissions by 2.1 megatonnes, or roughly 20% of the electricity sector's projected emissions. It would increase North America's supply of Cobalt-60, which Pickering has been supplying since 1971 and which has medical uses such as in cancer treatments, by 10%-20%.

At the Ontario government’s request, OPG reviewed its operational plans and concluded that the facility could continue to safely generate electricity, a statement said.

Under OPG’s new plan, electricity generation at Pickering would end in 2026 instead of 2025. Units 1 and 4 would operate as originally planned until 2024 and Units 5 to 8 would operate until September 2026 as major refurbishment of nuclear units at OPG’s Bruce and Darlington nuclear stations progresses. Units 2 and 3 are already shut down.

All units at both Darlington and Bruce – a total of 12 – are either scheduled for or have completed refurbishment.

The Pickering station, which produces enough electricity to power a city of 1.5 million people, would need to be completely refurbished to stay in operation beyond September 2026, the ministry said, adding that refurbishment could extend that by 30 years.

Ken Hartwick, OPG president and chief executive officer, said OPG plans to complete an assessment requested by the province and submit a final recommendation on refurbishment by the end of 2023.

The revised schedule is subject to approval from the regulator, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission.
Canada’s Ambitious Nuclear Plans

Units 1 to 4 at Pickering – known as Pickering A – were the first commercial Candu reactors in the world to begin operation, from 1971 to 1973, although a large prototype operated commercially at Douglas Point from 1968 to 1984.

Pickering 1-4 were laid up in 1997. Units 1 and 4 were refurbished and restarted in 2005 and 2003 respectively, but Units 2 and 3 remained shut down.

According to International Atomic Energy Agency data, Canada’s fleet of 19 commercial power reactors provides about 14% of the country’s electricity production.

Canada has ambitious plans for next-generation nuclear plants.

In July, OPG and US-based X-energy signed an agreement to look for opportunities to deploy the Xe-100 high-temperature, gas-cooled reactor at industrial sites in Ontario and identify further potential end users and sites throughout Canada.

In March, Four provincial governments – Saskatchewan, Ontario, New Brunswick and Alberta – said they would push ahead with a plan to develop nuclear power in Canada with calls for the federal government to back ambitious proposals for SMRs and a new class of Generation IV micro-SMR for remote communities and mines.

Electric utility SaskPower said recently it had chosen two sites in Saskatchewan for the potential construction of a small, modular nuclear reactor.

LINK

[Tanada]

Vistra Moves to Extend Operation of 2,400-Megawatt Comanche Peak Nuclear Plant

License renewal would ensure continued reliable, baseload generation from Vistra's largest source of zero-carbon electricity

, /PRNewswire/ -- Vistra (NYSE: VST) today announced that it is seeking to extend the operation of Luminant's Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant through 2053, an additional 20 years beyond its original licenses. The company has officially submitted its application for license renewal with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Glen Rose, TX

"Comanche Peak is one of the lowest-cost and highest-performing nuclear power plants in the country and is a large, dispatchable source of carbon-free electricity," said Jim Burke, president and CEO of Vistra. "Renewing the licenses of this plant is critical for grid reliability and our environment and is a benefit to the economy, the local community, and our company."

The two-unit nuclear plant has a capacity of 2,400 MW – enough to power about 1.2 million Texas homes in normal conditions and 480,000 homes in periods of peak demand. Since it began operating in 1990, Comanche Peak has generated more than 582 million megawatt-hours of reliable, emission-free electricity.

Burke continued, "Our country is navigating a massive transition to cleaner sources of electricity, and at the same time, we cannot lose sight of reliability. Nuclear energy is uniquely positioned to provide that balance of emission-free power and always-on baseload capabilities. Our team stands ready to continue a proud tradition of safety, dependability, and operational excellence at Comanche Peak, and we are excited to be filing this application for extension."

Reliable, Clean, Emission-Free Electricity

Vistra has established a leading role in the energy transition with Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant at the center of Vistra Zero, its zero-carbon generation portfolio. With a robust pipeline of development projects, Vistra expects to have at least 7,300 MW of zero-carbon generation online by 2026 across Texas, California, and Illinois. The company is committed to a 60% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, compared to a 2010 baseline, and we've already achieved more than 72% of that target.

Economic Engine for Local Economy

Comanche Peak is operated by more than 600 employees and more than 200 permanent contractors. Refueling outages for the two reactors, which routinely occur four times over a three-year period, require supplemental workers and bring in anywhere from 800-1,200 skilled technicians from across the country. These contractors are a source of substantial additional economic activity for hotels, restaurants, and related businesses in the area.

As the largest taxpayer in Somervell County, Texas, the plant pays more than $30 million a year in state and local taxes. Additionally, Comanche Peak donates thousands of dollars to community organizations, funds environmental protection programs, and takes part in civic engagement activities in both Somervell and Hood counties.

The current licenses for units 1 and 2 extend through 2030 and 2033, respectively. The company is applying to renew the licenses through 2050 and 2053, respectively.

About Vistra
Vistra (NYSE: VST) is a leading Fortune 500 integrated retail electricity and power generation company based in Irving, Texas, providing essential resources for customers, commerce, and communities. Vistra combines an innovative, customer-centric approach to retail with safe, reliable, diverse, and efficient power generation. The company brings its products and services to market in 20 states and the District of Columbia, including six of the seven competitive wholesale markets in the U.S. Serving approximately 4 million residential, commercial, and industrial retail customers with electricity and natural gas, Vistra is one of the largest competitive electricity providers in the country and offers over 50 renewable energy plans. The company is also the largest competitive power generator in the U.S. with a capacity of approximately 39,000 megawatts powered by a diverse portfolio, including natural gas, nuclear, solar, and battery energy storage facilities. In addition, Vistra is a large purchaser of wind power. The company owns and operates the 400-MW/1,600-MWh battery energy storage system in Moss Landing, California, the largest of its kind in the world. Vistra is guided by four core principles: we do business the right way, we work as a team, we compete to win, and we care about our stakeholders, including our customers, our communities where we work and live, our employees, and our investors. Learn more about our environmental, social, and governance efforts and read the company's sustainability report at https://www.vistracorp.com/sustainability/.

SOURCE Vistra Corp.

LINK

[jato0072]

Youtube - How to Fail an Energy Transition w/ Noah Rettberg

I thought this talk was excellent (nuclear power related). I came away feeling really bad for German citizens. We live in interesting times.

[Tanada]

UN IAEA has released a new report on the necessity of nuclear baseload to make renewable energy a true carbon neutral pathways by eliminating all fossil fuel systems from the grid. Currently the main method of leveling intermittent sources is to closely couple them with natural gas. The report is a 115 page pdf file at this IAEA CCNP Report Link.

[Tanada]

China Will Add Two More AP1000 Nuclear Reactors

China’s State Council has approved two AP1000 nuclear reactor units for State Power Investment Corp.’s (SPIC’s) Lianjiang Nuclear Power Plant in Zhanjiang, Guangdong province, reactor technology supplier Westinghouse said on Oct. 12.

If built, the units will become ninth and tenth reactors based on Westinghouse’s Generation III+ advanced reactor technology in China. Four AP1000 units are already currently operating in China: Sanmen 1 and 2 in Zhejiang province and Haiyang 1 and 2 in Shandong province. The four reactors were commissioned in 2018.

The Lianjiang Nuclear Power Project is located in Tianluoling, Cheban Town, Lianjiang City, Zhanjiang City, Guangdong province, 48 kilometers away from Lianjiang City and 65 kilometers away from Zhanjiang City.


Another four CAP1000 reactors—China’s licensed adaptation of the AP1000—are under construction at the Sanmen and Haiyang plants. Sanmen 3 and 4. China National Nuclear Corp. (CNNC) kicked off construction of the second phase at Sanmen in June 2022, while Shanghai Nuclear Engineering Research and Design Institute (SNERDI), a SPIC affiliate, poured first concrete for Haiyang’s second phase in July 2022. The State Council approved the two projects in April. By Sept. 25, SNERDI, a general contractor for both projects, reported it had separately hoisted in place containment vessels at Haiyang 3 and Sanmen 3.

SNERDI is also building CAP1000s at Lianjiang 1 and 2. The company on Sept. 28 announced it began excavation for the Lianjiang plant’s first phase. The site is designed to host a total of six 1.2-GW reactors, said SNERDI.
Speeding Toward ‘Nth-of-a-Kind’

Westinghouse in a statement congratulated SPIC on adding the AP1000-derived plants to its growing fleet. It said the AP1000 plant “is the only operating Generation III+ advanced reactor with fully passive safety systems, modular design, and has the smallest footprint per MWe on the market.” The reactors at Sanmen and Haiyang “utilize the most advanced, proven technology and have set industry records with their outstanding startup, availability, and operational performance. One unit at the Haiyang site is generating both electricity and steam for district heating,” it noted.

China’s AP1000 derivatives stem from technology transfer agreements between China’s State Nuclear Power Technology Corp. (SNPTC) and Westinghouse to standardize the reactor technology and enable domestic production of components. In April, as the State Council approved the second phases at Sanmen and Haiyang, Westinghouse said its partnership with SPIC—which was created through the 2015 merger of China Power Investment Corporation and SNTPC—takes “full advantage of the AP1000’s plant’s outstanding performance in the four existing operating units.”

A key benefit has been to accelerate serial building of the technology, Westinghouse noted. “[T]hrough our successful partnership with [SPIC] in China, we expect to achieve an AP1000 plant ‘nth-of-a-kind’ project with the construction cost and schedule of these next four units validating the recent Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) report conclusions regarding the attractive cost and schedule for future AP1000 units.”

On Wednesday, Westinghouse President and CEO Patrick Fragman said the company is “proud to be a part of this 15-year nuclear energy cooperation program and delivering on our commitment to enable a fleet of AP1000 units to power a carbon-zero future for China.”
Future Prospects in China, Europe, and Maybe Even the U.S.

Along with China’s AP1000 builds, two AP1000 units are currently being completed at the Vogtle site in the U.S. in n Waynesboro, Georgia. Southern Co., which owns 45.7% of that project through its subsidiary Georgia Power, says significant progress continues to be made at the Vogtle 3 & 4 nuclear expansion site. Direct construction at Unit 3 is approximately 99% complete, and the total project is approximately 96% complete. Georgia Power currently projects a Unit 3 in-service date in either the fourth quarter of 2022 or first quarter 2023. Unit 4 is projected to be complete in either the third or fourth quarter of 2023. Vogtle 3, in August, notably, received the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s green light to load fuel and begin the operation of the unit. Vogtle 3 is the first reactor in the nation to reach the milestone as part of the regulator’s Part 52 combined license process.

Westinghouse AP1000 technology also has been selected for nine units in Ukraine and is under consideration at multiple sites in other countries in Central and Eastern Europe and the United Kingdom. Westinghouse on Wednesday also said the reactor technology is under consideration in the U.S.

Westinghouse’s AP1000 developments are being closely watched, given that the technology is currently the legendary American company’s flagship large-scale nuclear offering. While delays and setbacks at the company’s U.S. AP1000 projects crippled the reactor vendor, and even sent it into bankruptcy in 2017, the company appears to have reemerged as a solid contender in the burgeoning market for nuclear power, which is increasingly being seen as integral for decarbonization.

Earlier this week, a consortium comprised of Brookfield Renewable Partners, together with its institutional partners, and Cameco Corp. agreed to acquire Westinghouse from Brookfield Business Partners (BBU). The $8 billion deal is expected to be finalized in the second half of 2023, subject to customary closing conditions and approvals.

LINK

[Tanada]

Vogtle Unit 3 starts nuclear fuel load



Georgia Power announced tonight that fuel load into the Vogtle Unit 3 reactor core has begun at Plant Vogtle near Waynesboro, Ga. The fuel load process marks a historic and pivotal milestone toward startup and commercial operation of the first new nuclear units to be built in the U.S. in more than three decades.

"The Vogtle 3 & 4 nuclear units represent a critical, long-term investment in our state's energy future, and the milestone of loading fuel for Unit 3 demonstrates the steady and evident progress at the nuclear expansion site," said Chris Womack, chairman, president and CEO of Georgia Power. "We're making history here in Georgia and the U.S. as we approach bringing online the first new nuclear unit to be built in the country in over 30 years. These units are important to building the future of energy and will serve as clean, emission-free sources of energy for Georgians for the next 60 to 80 years."

The start of Unit 3 fuel load comes after Southern Nuclear received a historic 103(g) finding from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in August which signified that the new unit has been constructed and will be operated in conformance with the Combined License and NRC regulations.

During fuel load, nuclear technicians and operators from Westinghouse and Southern Nuclear are scheduled to safely transfer 157 fuel assemblies one-by-one from the Unit 3 spent fuel pool to the Unit 3 reactor core in the coming days.

Startup testing will begin next and is designed to demonstrate the integrated operation of the primary coolant system and steam supply system at design temperature and pressure with fuel inside the reactor. Operators will also bring the plant from cold shutdown to initial criticality, synchronize the unit to the electric grid and systematically raise power to 100%. Vogtle Unit 3 is projected to enter service in the first quarter of 2023.

Southern Nuclear will operate the new unit on behalf of the co-owners: Georgia Power, Oglethorpe Power, MEAG Power and Dalton Utilities.

The new Vogtle units are an essential part of Georgia Power's commitment to delivering clean, safe, reliable and affordable energy to its 2.7 million customers. Once operating, the two new units, which will be clean energy sources that produce zero air pollution, are expected to power more than 500,000 homes and businesses.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

Certain information contained in this release is forward-looking information based on current expectations and plans that involve risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking information includes, among other things, statements concerning the projected in-service date for Plant Vogtle Unit 3 and 4. Georgia Power cautions that there are certain factors that can cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking information that has been provided. The reader is cautioned not to put undue reliance on this forward-looking information, which is not a guarantee of future performance and is subject to a number of uncertainties and other factors, many of which are outside the control of Georgia Power; accordingly, there can be no assurance that such suggested results will be realized. The following factors, in addition to those discussed in Georgia Power's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2021, and subsequent securities filings, could cause actual results to differ materially from management expectations as suggested by such forward-looking information: the potential effects of the continued COVID-19 pandemic; the ability to control costs and avoid cost and schedule overruns during the development, construction, and operation of facilities or other projects, including Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, which includes components based on new technology that only within the last few years began initial operation in the global nuclear industry at this scale, due to current and/or future challenges which include, but are not limited to, changes in labor costs, availability and productivity, challenges with management of contractors or vendors, subcontractor performance, adverse weather conditions, shortages, delays, increased costs, or inconsistent quality of equipment, materials, and labor, contractor or supplier delay, delays due to judicial or regulatory action, nonperformance under construction, operating, or other agreements, operational readiness, including specialized operator training and required site safety programs, engineering or design problems or any remediation related thereto, design and other licensing-based compliance matters, including inspections and the timely submittal by Southern Nuclear of the Inspections, Tests, Analyses, and Acceptance Criteria documentation for Plant Vogtle Unit 4 and the related investigations, reviews and approvals by the NRC necessary to support NRC authorization to load fuel for Plant Vogtle Unit 4, challenges with start-up activities, including major equipment failure, or system integration, and/or operational performance, and challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic; the ability to overcome or mitigate the current challenges at Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 that could further impact the cost and schedule for the project; legal proceedings and regulatory approvals and actions related to construction projects, such as Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4, including Public Service Commission approvals and NRC actions; under certain specified circumstances, a decision by holders of more than 10% of the ownership interests of Plant Vogtle Units 3 and 4 not to proceed with construction and the ability of certain other Vogtle owners to tender a portion of their ownership interests to Georgia Power following certain construction cost increases, including the purported exercise by Oglethorpe Power Corporation and the City of Dalton of their tender options and related litigation; the ability to construct facilities in accordance with the requirements of permits and licenses (including satisfaction of NRC requirements), to satisfy any environmental performance standards and the requirements of tax credits and other incentives, and to integrate facilities into the Southern Company system upon completion of construction; the inherent risks involved in operating and constructing nuclear generating facilities; the ability of counterparties of Georgia Power to make payments as and when due and to perform as required; the direct or indirect effect on Georgia Power's business resulting from cyber intrusion or physical attack and the threat of physical attacks; catastrophic events such as fires, earthquakes, explosions, floods, tornadoes, hurricanes and other storms, droughts, pandemic health events, political unrest, wars or other similar occurrences; and the direct or indirect effects on Georgia Power's business resulting from incidents affecting the U.S. electric grid or operation of generating or storage resources. Georgia Power expressly disclaims any obligation to update any forward–looking information.

LINK

[Tanada]

A billion reasons why nuclear plant negotiations turned out well for ComEd customers - Chicago Sun-Times

The nuclear Braidwood Generating Station, about 60 miles southwest of Chicago in Will County, is one of three nuclear plants Exelon said it would close if it didn’t reach a deal with the Legislature last year.

Rich Hein/Sun-Times

Sometimes a shock from electricity can be a good thing.

ComEd customers are going to get an unexpected payout of $1 billion, yes billion, from the state’s nuclear plants. We’d like to see more of the kind of foresighted negotiation by government and advocates that brought this about.

Last year, Chicago-based Exelon said it would close the Byron, Dresden and Braidwood nuclear plants unless it got financial help from the state. In February, Exelon spun off its power generation subsidiary into a stand-alone company named Constellation.

The threat to close the plants came amid an effort to pass legislation to require the use of more renewable energy in Illinois.

During the negotiations, supporters of the Climate and Equitable Jobs Act, which Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed in September, agreed to help keep the nuclear plants open because they are needed to provide zero carbon energy until the state can ramp up production of renewable energy, such as solar and wind. CEJA requires Illinois utilities to get 40% of their power from renewable sources such as solar and wind by 2030.

At the time, negotiators expected — based on existing prices — that customers would pay some $700 million to keep the nuclear plants going. That would have been a lot of money to fork over, but it was necessary to get a deal on moving the state away from fossil fuels.

Instead, ratepayers will get a return of $1 billion.

Illinois had renewable energy legislation and a nuclear bailout before in 2016’s Future Energy Jobs Act. Here’s what was different this time. Generally unnoticed by the public, environmental and consumer advocates and Pritzker’s team included a guardrail that said if electricity prices shot up to a certain level — putting more money in the pockets of nuclear plant operators — consumers would get money back.

And customers will get money back, in a big way.

According to the Illinois Commerce Commission, the credit will lower ComEd consumers’ bills by about $19.71 a month, saving the average family $237 per year. The savings will be higher in the summer, lower in the winter. ComEd only distributes the electricity, but it passes on the cost of generation in its bills to ratepayers.

The total savings will come to about $1 billion. When is the last time consumers got a billion dollars from anyone?

Here’s why the timing is so significant.

Starting earlier this year, already-high electricity prices began climbing due to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. In response to the invasion, Europe is trying to wean itself off Russian natural gas, and the United States is shipping more liquefied gas to Europe in tanker ships.

The strain on supply is driving up natural gas prices, which, like electricity, were already high. Higher natural gas prices affect electricity bills because most of the nation’s electricity is generated by burning natural gas. As natural gas prices go up, so does the cost of electricity.

All this is happening while people already are hurting from higher prices at the gasoline pump, inflation and other wallops to the wallet.

According to the Energy Department, electricity prices in Illinois are up about 15%. Across the country, electricity is expected to cost 50% to 80% more this summer.

Prices might keep rising for years because some of the costs of hardening power grids against weather extremes will show up on bills. Moreover, as the climate gets hotter, people will use more electricity in the summer to cool their homes. The costs of wind and solar installations had been steadily declining, but have recently increased because of supply chain snags.

But while ratepayers in other areas are seeing nothing but higher prices, Chicago area residents are fortunate to get $1 billion back.

LINK

[Plantagenet]

Greta Thunberg just came out in favor of nuclear power.

The Germans have been shutting their nuclear plants and now they have to switch to coal-fired power plants because Russia has cut off their NG supplies.

Greta just said the Germans were dopes for shutting their zero-emissions Nuclear plants and shifting to coal-fired power plants.

That Greta.......once again she is standing up and telling truth to Power.


Greta Thunberg is asking the Germans "how DARE you shut down nuclear power plants and then switch to coal-fired power plants....."

Cheers!

[Newfie]

Somewhere today I read that Germany decided to retain the 3 operating plants, for a while at least.

[vtsnowedin]

Yes all of the EU has got a really big reality check on the energy supply issues including carbon emissions. I expect a lot more sensible and practical policies and construction plans to come into place in the next few months.

[Tanada]

NuScale Joins the Race for a Next-Gen Floating Nuclear Power Plant

A U.S. West Coast-based nuclear power startup has released a new design for a barge-mounted power station, which would use a next-generation small modular reactor (SMR) to provide utility-scale electrical power.

The floating nuclear power station is a concept dating back to the construction of the Sturgis, a converted Liberty Ship with a nuclear reactor which operated in the Panama Canal Zone in the 1970s. Today the concept is in use by Russia's Rosatom, which has deployed a barge-mounted nuclear power plant at the remote Arctic port of Pevek.

Portland-based NuScale Power, a designer of next-generation small modular reactors (SMRs), is working with Canadian mobile-reactor company Prodigy Clean Energy on the design of a new "marine power station." The concept is scalable up to about 900 megawatts. The floating station would be transported to a harbor for permanent mooring and connected to shoreside utility grid. Only after arrival and commissioning would its nuclear fuel be installed. At end-of-life, it could be floated off for decommissioning.

The commercial advantages of floating nuclear may be attractive. The structure can be built off-site at a shipyard, where the infrastructure and workforce for efficient construction already exist. Serial construction methods are possible, unlocking economies of scale. Site permitting and preparation are reduced as well, since construction occurs elsewhere and the reactor does not occupy land.

"By packaging the [NuScale Power Module] into Prodigy’s marine facility, we will offer countries a near-term solution to address energy security and to decarbonize their economies, including replacing coal-fired plants – many of which are located at the coast,” said Mathias Trojer, Prodigy Clean Energy President and Chief Executive Officer.

Floating nuclear power is attracting more R&D attention as the push for decarbonization accelerates. Palo Alto-based Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) has released a novel proposal to manufacture green fuels using electricity from a floating nuclear power plant anchored at sea, much like an FPSO. Core Power, a company headquartered in the UK, believes that it would be practical to produce one million tonnes of "green" ammonia per year using 1.2 GW of modular nuclear reactor power on a floating platform. And in South Korea, Samsung Heavy Industries has formed a partnership with Danish nuclear-reactor startup Seaborg to develop floating nuclear power plant barges using compact molten salt reactor technology.

Link

[vtsnowedin]

Can we assume that a floating SMR uses the water it is floating on as coolant? So you would have a warm spot in the harbor water that would be lovely for the sea ducks but drive the environmental nerds nuts.

[Newfie]

I honestly think they are a great idea. However they are exposed to attack from a hostile force. Think about what is going on with the Ukraine nukes and gas line. Clearly there are some unstable world actors who need to he accounted for.

There is always some AH who pees in the pool.

[C8]

I honestly think they are a great idea. However they are exposed to attack from a hostile force. Think about what is going on with the Ukraine nukes and gas line. Clearly there are some unstable world actors who need to he accounted for.

There is always some AH who pees in the pool.

That's why we should be moving to nuclear and renewable energy more and save fossil fuels for the future. FF are naturally "bunkered" from attack, assuming both sides knock each other's nuclear and renewable energy out, the nation with the most FF's recovers the fastest.

[vtsnowedin]

I honestly think they are a great idea. However they are exposed to attack from a hostile force. Think about what is going on with the Ukraine nukes and gas line. Clearly there are some unstable world actors who need to he accounted for.

There is always some AH who pees in the pool.

That's why we should be moving to nuclear and renewable energy more and save fossil fuels for the future. FF are naturally "bunkered" from attack, assuming both sides knock each other's nuclear and renewable energy out, the nation with the most FF's recovers the fastest.

That is an odd way to look at it but it has some merit.