Alabama aims to fuel nuclear revival
After Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and the industry's failure to deliver on promises of providing energy "too cheap to meter" (even with over $115 billion in federal subsidies since 1947), the future of nuclear energy had looked grim. A new reactor hasn't come on line in over 10 years.
But Alabama and the Tennessee Valley Authority are about to change all that, as The Birmingham News reports:
But Alabama and the Tennessee Valley Authority are about to change all that, as The Birmingham News reports:
One day next month, workers at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant near Athens will start a chain reaction in the Unit 1 reactor and begin making enough electricity to power 650,000 homes.The Browns Ferris plant puts Alabama and the South at the forefront of a hoped-for national nuclear revival, the News notes:
It will be the first reactor to come online in America in more than a decade.
The Tennessee Valley Authority's decision to restart the reactor it shut down 22 years ago puts Alabama at the forefront of a nuclear-power resurgence in the United States.
"I'll regard this as another milestone in a journey of nuclear power toward securing its place as an energy source for the future of America," Dale E. Klein, chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said.
Utilities have announced plans to seek federal licenses in the next two years to build up to 30 reactors. They are lining up to take advantage of federal incentives for the first few projects completed.One interesting point: Alabama doesn't need the extra power. The new facility is for export of energy to rapidly-growing nearby Southern states like Georgia -- a demand that critics believe could be headed off by greater efforts at conservation:
Alabama already produces more electricity than it uses, with the excess going to power other areas in the fast-growing South.
Net electricity generation in Alabama in 2005 was 137.9 million megawatts, according to a report released in March by the federal Energy Information Administration. The same year, 89.2 million megawatts were sold in the state, meaning state power companies produced 55 percent more electricity than their customers needed.Sara Barczak, safe energy director for the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, said Alabama and the rest of the Southeast could delay the need for new power plants for years by conserving power.
"If you're in a different state that's in a major supply crunch, that's one thing," she said. "But I don't see that Alabama is there and, secondly, they've got a long way to go in terms of energy efficiency."
Labels: Alabama, nuclear power
12 Comments:
You can also delay the need for new power by crippling economic growth and having rolling brownouts, or we can build big coal power plants and flood the air with mercury and arsenic...
Opening more nukes isn't a bad deal.
If I lived in Alabama, I would be celebrating the fact that my home state was producing more of one of the most sought after products in the world - emission free electricity.
Like any other manufactured product, electricity is a source of revenue and jobs. It is not something that requires each state to achieve self-sufficiency. If one state produces a product better than others - say oranges in my Florida home, or peaches in Georgia, or corn in Iowa, then one of the things that makes our country great is that we can all buy that product without tariffs or restriction.
In the case of nuclear produced energy, it looks like Alabama has a competitive advantage that should be nurtured, not discouraged.
I live in Alabama, 20 miles downwind from Browns Ferry, and I can tell you I am very grateful for that plant and the clean air we enjoy.
"One interesting point: Alabama doesn't need the extra power."
Um, sir, when was the last time you visited Huntsville? This area is experiencing explosive growth, much of it coming from transplants from other areas of the country. The recent BRAC decision is bringing in tens of thousands of people from Northern Virginia.
Manufacturing is growing here too, mostly out in Decatur and near the airport. Much of that growth has to do with abundant and affordable energy. Energy that is coming from clean nuclear and not filthy coal.
If Alabama can continue to attract people and industry from places that currently rely on filthy coal, then we continue to do more and more for keeping greenhouse gases out of the air.
"The new facility is for export of energy to rapidly-growing nearby Southern states like Georgia -- a demand that critics believe could be headed off by greater efforts at conservation."
I don't know who these "critics" are or what they think they know, but the growth is right here in Madison County. Georgia has two of the filthiest coal plants in the country -- Scherer and Bowen. I had the unfortunate experience of driving through the "plume" of the Bowen plant on a recent trip to Atlanta as I passed through Rome, Georgia.
I was driving down the road and in just a moment, I could smell the stench of the plant as suddenly as if a light had been turned on. I drove for another 30 miles before the stench finally attenuated to what I would consider an acceptable level. I turned to my wife and said "can you imagine living in this filth every day?"
She said "I sure am grateful for the nuclear plant."
Conservation is great--I'm all for it. I go to Lowe's and buy 24 packs of compact fluorescents. But we need clean power--there's no replacement for it. And I'm very glad Browns Ferry 1 is coming back on line. We'll need more as we continue to receive people and businesses from other areas in the country that don't have such a progessive approach to electrical energy.
Speaking as a worker who worked for the TVA for 13 years, "I wouldn't trust them in an outhouse with a muzzle on." These people living around Brown's Ferry, and supporting nuclear energy have no idea at the lack of oversight the Federal Government (NRC) has taken with the nuclear industry. In no other country in the world would an industry such as this be allowed to operate the way they do. In 1997 Greenpeace uncovered that the NRC had made a secret deal with the TVA OIG to provide the names of nuclear whistle-blowers. Greenpeace has possession of these documents that were signed by both agencies, and this was a direct violation of the law. At the same time, it is suspected that the TVA is illegally burning nuclear waste from their Sequoyah Nuclear Plant near Chattanooga, and transporting it to the Widows Creek Fossil Plant in Stevenson, Alabama where it is insinerated.
For those of you who do not remember, Brown's Ferry Unit 1 was de-commissioned in 1985 during a refueling outage when an incipient crack was found in the reactor vessel. These cracks cannot be repaired, and this is the same reactor vessel that is on the unit now. I know operators who worked at the Brown's Ferry site, and they claim this is a major safety issue. If this crack opens slightly the radiation could be contained locally, but if it is a catastrophic rupture this will be another China Syndrome much like the Russian reactor at Chernobyl.
The TVA and the NRC waited until this was outside of the public consciousness, and are not flirting with disaster. I am amazed at the sheeple will sell the souls of their children for a few shillings.
I would not trust the TVA in an outhouse with a muzzle on. Greenpeace uncovered in 1997 that the NRC was providing nuclear whistle-blowers names to the TVA OIG in violation of federal law. This information was used to harass and intimidate workers at TVA. It is now suspected that TVA has been incinerating nuclear waste from the Sequoyah Plant near Chattanooga, Tennessee and burning it in the boilers at the Widows Creek Fossil Plant at Stevenson, Alabama.
For those of you who do not remember, Brown's Ferry Unit 1 was shut down in 1985 for an incipient crack in the reactor vessel. This crack cannot be repaired, and according to operation sources within TVA, it is a major safety issue. If this crack was to open slightly the radiation could be contained locally, but if this crack is catastrophic it would be a China Syndrome much like the Russian reactor at Chernobyl. The TVA and NRC waited until the public had forgot about this issue, and are now taking a major risk at restarting this unit.
From the comments posted on this page I am not only amazed at the ignorance of people concerning issues that affect their daily lives, but at the sheeple who will sell the souls of their children for a few shillings.
At the same time, it is suspected that the TVA is illegally burning nuclear waste from their Sequoyah Nuclear Plant near Chattanooga, and transporting it to the Widows Creek Fossil Plant in Stevenson, Alabama where it is insinerated.
What kinds of nuclear waste? High level nuclear waste or gloves and shoe covers?
Coal burning already releases so much more radiation to the environment than a nuclear plant that it would be difficult to detect gloves and shoe covers. If Greenpeace had two brain cells they would be fighting coal instead of nuclear. But Greenpeace is two brain cells short of two brain cells.
If this crack was to open slightly the radiation could be contained locally, but if this crack is catastrophic it would be a China Syndrome much like the Russian reactor at Chernobyl.
Nice scare tactic, but inaccurate. Chernobyl had no containment building, Browns Ferry 1 does. Chernobyl had graphite moderation and water cooling. That meant that after the water boiled away the reactor could keep making heat from fission. Browns Ferry uses water for cooling and moderation. If the water goes away, fission shuts off, faster than you can imagine. There's still decay heat to remove, but that's why you have core cooling systems. It is physically impossible for the Chernobyl accident to happen at Browns Ferry.
If anyone's neck is on the line, it's mine. My kids and I live straight down wind of Browns Ferry. But I'm a nuclear engineer and I know how these machines work, and I'm not concerned. I'm actually very glad we have Browns Ferry providing our electricity instead of some filthy coal plant filling my kids' lungs with sulfur dioxide, mercury, and other heavy metals.
(no I do not work at Browns Ferry or TVA or have any financial interest in them)
The comments concerning Greenpeace are only "red herrings" and "straw men", but coming from engineers that is understandable. These are the same smeer tactics used by the evangelical movement; smear someone without really addressing the issues they are raising. While it is true that burning coal to make electricity is a very unhealthy process it is equally true that allowing nuclear energy to operate without proper oversight is unhealthy. I'm assuming these supporters of nuclear energy are giving us the choice between dirty coal plants and unregulated nuclear plants. Some choice! These comments don't surprise me though...engineers have yet to create anything that doesn't fail.
In response to this:
I'm assuming these supporters of nuclear energy are giving us the choice between dirty coal plants and unregulated nuclear plants.
I can't imagine how you consider nuclear power unregulated. No industry could possibly be more incredibly regulated and more scrutinized by those who fear or hate it.
I have heard many people lament that the choice between coal and nuclear power is horrible, or even a false choice. It is the actual choice we face so long as we consume both coal and nuclear power.
In Wisconsin, new nuclear construction is virtually banned, and we are about to start building a new coal plant in LaCrosse. That's one choice, the choice that puts be downwind from burning toxins. I just tried burning a little coal in my grill to see what it's like, and it was noxious to say the least.
On the other hand, renewable power could become so successful, and conservation so embraced, that we can start to close down power plants. Once again, we will face a choice between coal and nuclear power. Which shall we shut down first? As a person who breathes air, I vote to get rid of the coal.
Karl Davis,
Madison WI
Any time an agency, company, or person can release hazardous or radioactive waste into the environment and get away with it by claiming it is a national security interest to keep it secret and out of public scrutiny there is NO oversight.
I do not care what anyone says, nuclear power is not safe. Look at three mile island. If that hydrogen bubble would have caused an explosion the situation would have been terrible. Also, look at the dangers of storing the nuclear waste. It is not safe to put anywhere!! What about solar power????
Ehm, anonymous, have you thought about delivering electricity at night? Most people like to do something after the sun has disappeared. And about waste, think about all stuff that will have to be disposed of when that solar power has to be decommissioned.
Post a Comment
Return to Facing South's main page