TWiN 49 - NRG Energy Files 1st New Nuclear Constuction License Application in USA

Listen to the Podcast Here

In this Episode I discuss:

1. Insights into the NRG Application to Build & Operate Two New Nuclear plants.
2. Rep. Ed Markey's (D-MA) On-Going War on Nuclear Energy
3. CNN's Anti-Nuclear Bias
4. Nuclear Plants Perform "Better than expected" in Major Earthquake
5. Letters from Listeners

The nuclear renaissance in the United States reached another important milestone this week! Those of you in the business have probably heard the big news: On Monday September 24 the first combined construction and operating license for a new nuclear plant in the USA was filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by NRG Energy and South Texas Nuclear Operating Company. The companies plan to build two Toshiba Advanced Boiling Water Reactors (ABWRs) at their South Texas Project site where they already operate two Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactors.

• New Units will add 2 x 1350 MWe (2700 MWe) to the already 2,500 MWe from the PWRs.

• New site will surpass the Palo Verde Nuclear Power Station as the largest nuclear electricity generating station in the United States.

• Based on the information at Power Plants Around the World, the STP site will become the 18^th largest electric station in the world

About the ABWR Design

• It's already one of the NRC's "certified designs." The other pre-certified reactor type under active consideration in the US is the Westinghouse AP-1000. The Areva/Unistar EPR and the General Electric ESBWR designs are not yet certified. This could give an advantage to the STP project when it comes to timeliness of obtaining approval for their COL.

• There are already four ABWRs in operation in Japan, and two more are under construction in Taiwan. The experience of having built, started up, and operated the units will give the NRG project a huge advantage compared to first-of-a-kind projects. For example, Kashiwazaki-Kariwa Unit No.6 was built in 51 months from ground breaking to commercial operation (and only 39 months from the first concrete pour to the first time they connected to the electrical grid).

• The Toshiba ABWR is a variation on the General Electric ABWR. It is not really an "evolutionary" design as are the ESBWR and AP-1000. It is more of the next step in a progression of BWR where each generation has benefited from the experiences gained building and operating the ones that came before it. Each generation of BWRs has been an improvement on the last in terms of design, construction, margins of safety, ability to maintain, and reliable operation.

• So from a perspective of minimizing risk in the licensing process, construction time line, and reliable operations it is a logical choice.

Some design specifications worth mentioning:

• The volume of the ABWR building is about one third smaller than those of present BWR buildings, resulting in less construction time and expenses.

• Toshiba states improvement in design yield safety margins that are about one hundred times greater than the current plants in the United States.

• The design includes ten internal reactor pumps that replace the external recirculation pumps in earlier BWR designs. This eliminates piping and connections to increase safety and decreased costs.

• The reactor safety systems are automated and Toshiba claims no operator action is required for the first 72 hours in the event of a coolant loss. Being a former operator, I'm a bit skeptical on that point. But…. the plants I operated were designed in the '50's and '60's and built in the '60's and 70's - so I have to be careful. Also, my background is in military and commercial PWRs - so my personal experience may not be relevant. If any of you out there have recent BWR operating experience I'm interested in hearing from you about your post-accident operating guidelines and training.

The Companies Involved

There is an intricate web of legal entities and companies that could be involved in the STP units 3 and 4 project.

• According to Wikipedia, South Texas Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC) is owned by three entities:
• NRG Energy 44%
• City of San Antonio 40%
• City of Austin 16%
• Toshiba, of course, will be the lead for reactor design and procurement.
• GE, Hitachi and Bechtel were involved in drafting the COL, and NRG is in talks with them to reach agreement on their role in the construction phase of the project.
• Toshiba has hired Fluor's Power Group to provide engineering, procurement, and construction services.
• And with Toshiba being the majority owner of Westinghouse, I've got to wonder what Westinghouse's role will be in the project.

If you build them will they come?

• The company stated they plan to have the two units on line in 2014 and 2015. If you back up the timeline from those dates you'll find there are some long lead time things that need to happen. In addition to the physical plant components, there's a lot of early work needed in developing the workforce for the new units. Initial fuel load happens about one year before commercial operations, and when you load fuel you have to have just about everything in place for an operating plant; licensed operators, a fire brigade, maintenance crews, security, a training staff, a simulator.

• Here's a thought: STP runs two PRWs - they don't have BWR operating experience. So where do you think they'll get experienced operators for the new units? True, some will come from their existing units and will re-train on the BWR technology, but my guess it they'll be recruiting experienced BWR operators away from other companies. South Texas did this once before - back in the late '80's and early 90's I was working as a Senior Reactor Operator at Turkey Point Nuclear plant in Florida. About that time STP was building up their operating staff for the new PWRs - units 1 and 2 that had just come on line. I recall hearing of telephone calls into the Turkey Point control room from STP employees who were recruiting operators. In act, several experienced operators left Turkey Point around that time and went to work at South Texas.

• I know personally that the folks at South Texas are doing a lot in their local community to strengthen the technical education infrastructure so they can recruit local talent for the plants. I take my hat off to them! That is definitely the right thing to do! I doubt it will be enough, though. They'll have to recruit some experienced people from the outside

I've mentioned before on the show that the time is ripe for people who want to get into this business. All you have to do is go to the web sites of various nuclear utilities and take a look at the job postings. I'll put some links in the show notes. Hey - if you get a job in the nuclear industry after hearing one of my shows then shoot me an email ad let me know!

Anti-Nuclear Politician Ed Markey Tries to Throw Cold Water on the Optimism

If you've listened to my shows long enough, you've undoubtedly heard about Representative Edward Markey (D-MA). He is without question one of the most rabidly anti-nuclear elected officials in the US government. The day after the NRG Energy COL application, Markey sent a letter to the NRC commissioner questioning the legality of the NRC's practice of using independent consultants to review parts of nuclear plant construction applications.

Markey's quote: "Assuring the safety of nuclear power plants falls well within the definition of an 'inherently governmental' function," Markey wrote. "I am therefore alarmed that this contract may violate the law and ... result in a danger to public health and safety."

Man, he's a pro! He knows all the key words and tricky phrases to get the media all spun up, doesn't he?

Markey's claim is that by outsourcing design reviews, the NRC is deferring its responsibility to external consultants. Again, it's easy to see the fallacy in Markey's argument; every branch of government uses external talent and resources when they don't have the permanent staff to meet the demands. FEMA, the DOD, the Dept of Labor, and the FDA - they all use external consultants and experts when needed (people like college professors, government retirees, and engineering consultants are commonly used by federal government agency). The NRC Office of New Reactors started with about 85 people late last year and is expected to grow to 430 by the end of 2007 to deal with an anticipated onslaught of nuclear reactor applications. And while about 100 government employees will work on each application, they still don't have all the talent needed. I need to mention here that the US taxpayers do not pay one cent to support the effort. The NRC is funded entirely though user fees levied on the beneficiaries of the work - in this case the reactor vendors and utilities. This is simply one more way Ed Markey is trying to slow the process down - on one hand he works as a congressman to prevent the NRC from getting approval to hire the people they need to do the license reviews, then he complains when they outsource work they can't do on their own.

Typical! It sounds like something right out of the play book from the anti-nuclear group the Nuclear Policy Research Institute! If you think that's far fetched just do what I did; Google the terms "Markey NPRI" and see what you find. Interestingly, many of the references have been removed from the host websites, but thanks to Google, you can view the old pages by clicking on the "cached" files.

In response to Markey's letter an NRC spokesman stated: "The NRC has not, and will not, delegate any decision-making authority in the licensing of potential new U.S. nuclear reactors,"

I'm sure we haven't heard the last of this!

CNN's Negative Nuclear Campaign

I spend a lot of time in airports, and I've often wondered why all the televisions in all the airports in the United States are constantly tuned to CNN. It's pretty irritating for a guy like me because CNN has a knack for sensationalizing any story related to nuclear energy, and they rarely present the positive sides of the stories.

Over the last few months I've come to expect weekly negative coverage about the earthquake that struck Japan in July. The epicenter was near the Kashiwazaki Kariwa nuclear station, and the non-nuclear parts of the plant suffered some minor damage. If you didn't know anything other than what CNN told you about the event you would believe the reactors were gravely damaged, leaked dangerous radioactivity into the sea, had caught on fire, and will probably never operate again. All this is false, but that's what they've been reporting. The facts are the reactors automatically shut down when the earthquake occurred (as they are supposed to), and while the non-nuclear parts of the plant had some damage, the reactors and safety systems were virtually unscathed. In fact, an independent team of nuclear safety experts from the IAEA inspected the reactors and concluded that plant safety features performed admirably during the earthquake. They also confirmed that the very small amount of radioactivity that sloshed out of the fuel storage pools well below the authorized limits for public health and environmental safety. Damage from the earthquake is limited to those sections of the plant that would not affect the reactor or systems related to reactor safety.

It's worth noting that the earthquake, a major one at 6.8 on the Richter scale, exceeded the level of seismic activity for which the plant was designed. Other building and industrial facilities built to normal commercial standards were completely destroyed. According to one report I read, the nuclear plant was just about the only thing left standing and, as I said, it was almost unaffected. The IAEA team concluded that the safety margins used in building the plant and conservative seismic design measures added robustness to the structures, systems and components that helped them weather the earthquake better than expected.

So in a REAL WORLD major earthquake the Kashiwazaki Kariwa reactors demonstrated the success of a conservative nuclear design philosophy that protected the public, even when the event was worse than the designers envisioned. That sounds like a huge success story to me!

The plant, by the way, is the world's largest nuclear power generating complex with seven reactors and 8.2 GW of electrical output, including the two ABWRs I mentioned earlier in the show.

I want to mention the classical music on this episode is at the request of Marje Hecht who posted some very interesting comments about the last episode on the podcast web page, and she provided a link to an article by Marsha Freeman on the political and economic factors that contributed to the downturn of the nuclear industry in the United States in the 1970's and 1980's. Thank you, Marje. Marje, by the way, is the Managing Editor of 21st Century Science & Technology. Check out their web site.

By the way I get all the music for my podcasts at the Podsafe Music Network. This particular track is called Paul in Love, by Paul, a group of musicians in Austria. Check out the PodSafe Music Network! It's an amazing source for royalty free music by artists who are trying promote their work.

I also received an email from Giorgis from Sydney who feels I am overstating the threat posed by Iran's eventual acquisition of nuclear weapons. I'm trying to keep an open mind about it, but international diplomacy has not yielded any results for several years.

And Orlando Stevenson wrote I to say "thanks" for bringing to light the career opportunities in the nuclear industry. He's passed some information from the show to a family member who may be interested in a career change. Excellent Orlando, thank you!

On the topic of ways to get a positive outcome from the Iran nuclear crises, Stuart Peterson asked "Why not give Iran some demand for Natanz's enrichment services (i.e., sell Iran a few LWRs)? That way, they'll be forced to produce LEU." Great idea, Stuart! Cash speaks louder than swords, and from what I've heard Iran could use all the hard currency they can get! Come to think of it, that's what Russia has been trying to do with the Bushehr nuclear plant, the project has been stalled for months because Iran has not been paying its bills.

I also got a note from my good friend and fellow podcaster Rod Adams of the Atomic Show. While I've been busy with other endeavors Rod has kept nuclear podcasting alive with some absolutely great shows. If you don't listen to the Atomic Show, you should!

Thanks everyone for the emails and comments! Keep them coming! And I'd like to say "Welcome" to new listeners in Slovakia, Serbia, Egypt, and Hawaii. As a reminder, the show web site is at thisweekinnuclear.com where you can read show transcripts, post comments, send me email, and much, much more.

Have a great week!

John Wheeler

Episode 48

LISTEN TO THE PODCAST HERE!

1. What’s John Been Up To?
2. The Jane Fonda Effect
3. Iran's Atoms for Peace Program
4. Vermont Supreme Court Throws Out Anti-nuclear Argument
5. New College Courses Focus on Nuclear Careers

Welcome to episode 48 of “This Week in Nuclear.”

Thanks for returning to the show after my summer break. The last several months have been incredibly busy, but things are starting to clam down a bit and I’m going to do my best to get back to producing regular podcasts. I really appreciate all the notes of support and encouragement from many of you out there.

The Fonda Syndrome

Have you ever heard of “The Jane Fonda Effect?” I hadn’t until this week. It’s a phrase coined by Steven Levitt, one of the authors of the best selling book “Freakonomics” in a Sept 16th editorial in the NY Times. In this essay, he ponders whether or not Jane Fonda is partially to blame for global warming. Here’s the line of thought that makes him contemplate the hypothesis:

Jane Fonda is vocally anti-nuclear, and she starred in the film “The China Syndrome”, a story about a fabricated near disaster at a California nuclear plant.
The movie premiered 12 days before the accident at Three Mile Island, and helped to create public misperception and fear of nuclear plants.
In the movie, the loss of coolant accident that was nearly avoided would have (according to the script) destroyed an area of land the size of Pennsylvania – something that is utterly preposterous. But the public at the time didn’t know any better.
The accident at TMI had no environmental consequences, and no one was killed or even slightly injured as a result of the core melt down. The safety systems behaved as designed and contained the hazardous materials.

In the years after the accident, many plants that were under construction were abandoned, and those in the planning stages were cancelled.
Because the USA turned away from new nuclear plants in favor of gas, oil, and coal, causing a huge increase in the amount of greenhouse gasses released, especially when compared to how it would have been had those cancelled nuclear plants been built.

Well, Levitt is right on one account – the USA would be producing far less CO2 today if there were more nuclear plants. But as much as I’d enjoy blaming global warming on Jane Fonda, and as much as she’d like to take credit for shutting down nuclear plants, the facts don’t support those positions.

It’s a widely held myth that the accident at Three Mile Island causes such a huge public outrage that utilities cancelled new nuclear plant orders and abandoned half-built nuclear plants.

While I find “The Jane Fonda Effect” thought provoking, it’s interesting to find that a renown economist missed a fundamental fact about the decline in nuclear plant construction in the 1980’s and 1990’s: the primary cause was the economics of electricity supply and demand, NOT the success of the anti-nukes. Economic recession and a corresponding drop in electricity demand growth left utilities holding the bag on billions of dollars of base load power plant projects that they did not need. They did what any good business would do – they cancelled their orders.

During the same time period MORE new coal plants were cancelled than nuclear plants. If the success of the anti-nuclear movement had truly been the cause of nuclear plant cancellations, then there would have been a corresponding increase in new coal plant construction, and there was not.

For the same reason nuclear plants are coming back in favor – they make sense economically; low emissions, low cost energy, and long term electricity price stability are attracting investment around the world. The “anti’s” can’t change the fundamental economics of nuclear energy, and that’s why they are losing their ill-advised struggle.

The Times article is thought-provoking, though, and it’s worth a read.

Iranian Atoms for Peace

Let’s see…where we are in the saga of Iran’s “Atom’s for Peace” program. In our last episode we left the kindly President Ahmadinejad was embattled, one against the many; the free world was condemning his uranium enrichment program for violating international law, for refusing to submit to United Nations resolutions, and for failing to provide full transparency required by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

And today, three months later we find they are let’s see…..violating international law, refusing to submit to United Nations resolutions, and failing to provide full transparency required by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Well I guess that sums it up, doesn’t it? The Iranian President is going a fantastic job; he’s continuing to stall the UN and international negotiations while his engineers add more and more enrichment capacity. At last could they had 3,000 centrifuges running making the material they need for nuclear weapons.

There has been some progress though; this week the French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy stated publicly that Iran's nuclear activity is a cover for a clandestine weapons program. And the Russians have refused to deliver nuclear fuel to the Bushehr nuclear plant. Even Iran’s strongest supporters are getting irritated at the facade. It’s about time…it was on September 25, 2003 that IAEA inspectors first reported finding highly enriched bomb-grade uranium in Iran’s centrifuges. That’s more than three years, and during that time the Iranian government has made a mockery of the international community while continuing to threaten their neighbors with animation.

I’m somewhat of a pessimist when it comes to Iran’s nuclear program, and the world’s response to it. If anyone out there has any good ideas, or if you know of a possible chain of events that would bring this to a happy ending, please post a comment on the blog. There’s lot to be optimistic about when it comes the peaceful expansion of atomic power to provide the world with abundant, reasonably priced, emissions free electricity, but this not one of those happy stories.

Vermont Supreme Court Throws Out Anti-Nuclear Appeal

On a brighter note….In May of 2006, the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant was granted a 20% power up-rate after a long legal process with both the state of Vermont and the federal government. The New England Coalition, an anti-nuclear group, appealed the 20 percent power increase, arguing that the Vermont Public Service Board did not hold public evidentiary hearings on the proposed power increase.
This week the Vermont Supreme Court dismissed the appeal saying the issue was indeed raised when the proposal was being reviewed by state officials three years ago. Associate Justice John Dooley III wrote in the ruling "The entire thrust of NEC's appeal -- that various statutes required the Board to conduct an evidentiary hearing before entering its March 3, 2006 order -- was simply not made to the Board,"

Vermont Yankee is in the process of seeking a 20 year life extension, and you can be assured that the New England Coalition is fighting it every way they can.

College Programs Springing Up to Support the Nuclear Renaissance

Demand for college courses that prepare young people for careers in the nuclear industry are on the rise. Word is getting out that jobs are plentiful, the work is exciting, and the pay is very good. One interesting development – industry is getting involved in a big way in partnering with colleges and government to create programs designed to precisely fill the demand. That means graduates will have exactly the knowledge and skills they need to go right into these high paying fields.

A few innovative examples include:

A Nuclear Technology associates degree program that has been developed through a partnership between University of Missouri, Linn State Technical College, and the Calloway Nuclear Plant.

An Energy System Technology Education Center at Idaho State University that is a collaboration between the university, Entergy Corporation, Idaho National Laboratory, and others.

A Nuclear Support Technology associates program at Central Virginia Community College that trains students to become nuclear quality control inspectors, a field that is in high demand.

Each of these programs offers hands-on engineering technology knowledge and skill that enable students to fast-track into a nuclear career. All the credits earned in the two-year degrees matriculate into a four year bachelors degree program when the graduate decides to further their education later. I’ve described a few, but there are many more.

You can find out more information through the Center for Energy Workforce Development, or from the Nuclear Energy Institute web site.


Well, that’s it for this show. It’s great to be back! Don’t forget you can get a full transcript of the show from my blog, and you can find prior episodes in the archive. You can also listen to the podcast on the telephone at (510) 248-0360, so if you’re away from your computer you can dial in to hear the latest episode.

You can help support the show by visiting the goggle advertisement links on the web site, by shopping at my Amazon store, or by making a donation by Paypal. And for those of you who have already donated to the show - you have my most heart-felt thanks! Your donations have helped reduce the financial costs of producing and hosting the show. Each show takes between 6 and 10 hours to prepare, record, and post, so with that kind of time commitment it’s nice to have some of the recurring costs taken care of through donations.

Peace!

JW

Episode 47

Listen to the Podcast

1. Browns Ferry Unit 1 is Online!
2. Brazil to Resume Angra-3 Project
3. UK Energy White Paper Calls for Nuclear Build
4. Anti-Nuclear Groups Continue Vermont Yankee Tax Battle
5. Tornado Warnings Cause Electricity Price Spike
6. USA Today Story Generates Buzz
7. More Coal Miners Die, but who’s paying attention?

Utility Worker Shortages


Browns Ferry Unit 1 Startup

There’s cause for celebration in Alabama! The Browns Ferry Unit 1 just returned to service after 22 years shutdown. Three Browns Ferry units were taken out of service by the TVA, or Tennessee Valley Authority n 1985. Units 2 and 3 were retuned to service in 1991 and 1995 respectively, but Unit 1 remained mothballed. As demand for electricity grew, the TVA board considered their options in meeting the demand in a way that would cost effective and add value for their 8.7 million customers. In 2002 they concluded that restarting Browns Ferry Unit 1 was the best decision for the company and for the ratepayers because it would offer a lot of energy at low cost, and the promise of stable energy prices.

Preparing for the startup was a major project that included installing digital instrumentation, modern power supplies, and replacing many plant components like 200 miles of cable and eight miles of pipe.

Each Browns Ferry unit is rated at 1155 MWe, so with three units in operation it will be one of the largest power stations of any kind in the United States. Over the next several days the unit will be undergoing a series of at-power tests and power will be slowly raised to full load.

I have some friends at Browns Ferry and in other TVA locations, so I just want to say “Congratulations” on achieving this milestone!

Congressmen Need Computer Networking Lesson

There are a couple of US Congressmen who apparently have a serious misperception of how computer networks function. As a result, the NRC is being put in a position to educate them. Bennie Thompson of Missippi and James Langevin of R.I. wrote a letter to the NRC about an event last year at Browns Ferry Unit 3. In that event, a malfunction in a digital control system caused main feedwater pump flow to drop. Feedwater control systems in this type of nuclear plant are not safety-related. This means the plant does not rely on feedwater control systems to keep the reactor safe, and the malfunction of these systems can not cause an situation that would challenge reactor safety.

Operators recognized the abnormal condition and decided to take the unit out of service. In this kind of situation the proper way to do that is to manually scram the reactor, and that’s what they did. A reactor scram sounds like a serious thing to do, but what all that means is they signal the plant’s control rods to insert into the reactor to stop the neutron chain reaction. Control rods move pretty quickly, and within a second or two the reactor is shutdown.

The technicians and engineers troubleshooting the problem determined that the cause of the control system malfunction was excessive traffic on the closed internal Ethernet network. There was actually an article about this particular failure on a technology web site I follow called ComputerWorld. According to that article, this type of failure is not uncommon in that particular type of process controller. One fix is to install digital firewalls between different controllers and between different segments of the control network that will block excessive data. These networks are between the process controls in the field and the control room, mind you, and are internal to the plant. The NRC reviewed the plant’s response to the problem and agreed with the approach.

That’s where it gets humorous. These two congressmen, Thompson and Langevin are convinced that the plant shutdown might have been caused by external hackers using a denial of service attack on the plant’s computer network. They are calling the malfunction a “cyber-security event” and are demanding the NRC institute comprehensive anti-cyber attack policies on safety and non-safety systems. So tell me this…if the digital control systems are a closed network, and are not connected to the Internet, how could the system be hacked? Maybe these two congressmen have been listening to Senator Ted Stevens who became infamous in geek circles when he referred to the Internet as “a series of tubes.” Let me see if I can find a copy of that audio – it’s all voer the internet. Ahh yes here it is…

You'll have to listen to the podcast to hear Ted Stevens!

What’s so scary about this is these are the people who are setting policy and passing laws to regulate technologies they obviously don’t understand! Thompson is the Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security, and Langevin is the Chairman of the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cyber security, and Science and Technology.

One last point I need to make – control systems like these have nothing to do with reactor safety. The instrumentation in a nuclear plant is separated into two distinct categories – protection and control. Protection systems, as the name implies, automatically reduce power or shut the plant down, and start safety equipment when conditions warrant. Control systems are used for non-vital plant control – things like non-vital cooling water, air systems, feedwater and condensate. A malfunction in a control system can very easily cause the plant to shut down, but that has economic impact, to the plant owner, but not safety impact. Protection and control systems are isolated from one another such that a failure on a control system can’t cause a malfunction on a protection system. The systems that were affected by the excessive network traffic at Browns Ferry are control systems, not protection systems. That’s another example to illustrate the two congressmen Thompson and Langevin don’t understand the technology they are tasked with governing.

Brazil to Resume Angra-3 Project

On a brighter note, on Monday Brazil’s president approved the resumption of constructidon of the Angra-3 nuclear plant, a project that has been on hold for several years. They’ve been discussing restarting construction since 2003, and finally decided it is time to get it going again. Angra 1 and 2 together provide 2000 MWe, about 1.5% of Brazil’s electricity. The new unit will add another 1300 MWe. The project is expected to cost $3.6 billion, and the plant will come online in 2012.

UK Energy White Paper Calls for Nuclear Build

British Prime Minister Tony Blair is a big advocate of building new nuclear plants in the UK as a way to curb greenhouse gas emissions, and to provide price stability as oil and natural gas prices continue to rise. The Energy White Paper he commissioned was released this week, and his successor Gordon Brown will continue the fight. Mr Brown was quoted as saying it’s important that Britain not become reliant on imported gas for its energy supply, something that is destined to happen if they continue down the present course as their internal gas supplies run out. He said that it would not be sensible to rule out nuclear energy.

Trade and Industry Secretary Alistar Darling, countering claims that wind energy can meet the demand said, “On very hot days or very cold days, if the wind doesn’t blow, then you would have a big problem.” Mr Darling also said there needs to be a mix of nuclear and renewables.

The white paper was originally due out in March, but was delayed by legal challenges from Greenpeace and the Green Party.

Anti-Nuclear Groups Continue Vermont Yankee Tax Battle

Here’s a great example of how statistics can be twisted and shaped by whoever is using them to tell a story. In a recent show I discussed the proposal being argued in Vermont that would level a special tax on Vermont Yankee nuclear plant to pay for a home heating oil conservation program. The bill is being pushed by anti-nuclear activists who this week released a report that claims Vermont has the highest per capita amount of radioactive waste of any state in the USA. Well, I haven’t had a chance to read the report or to verify the facts in it, but at first glance I’d guess it’s probably true. The anti-nukes are referring to the used reactor fuel that is stored at Vermont Yankee.

Vermont is a pretty small state by population – only 608,000 people, and Vermont Yankee produces a lot of energy. That’s why Vermont has the highest percentage of nuclear generated electricity of any state in the USA – more than 70%, and the plant has been around for a long time churning out low cost, emissions free electricity. So it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to conclude that Vermont would have more used fuel on hand per capita than other states in the Northeast. Here’s some other statistics:

1. Vermont is #1 when it comes to avoiding air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.
2. Of the seven states in Vermont’s region – NY, MA, CT, RI, ME, NH, and VT – Vermont has the lowest electricity prices.
3. Here’s another one – thus far over the life of the plant, Vermont Yankee has paid $632 million into the Nuclear Waste Fund that was set up by the US government to pay for long term storage of the used nuclear fuel.
4. And we’re not talking about a large amount of waste. It’s actually a pretty small number; about 650 tons in VT. Used fuel is pretty dense stuff, so it does not take up a lot of space.
5. You’ve probably heard this analogy before, but if you took all the used fuel from all the commercial nuclear plants that have ever run in the USA over the last 50 years. That’s enough to have generated one-fifth of the USA’s electricity for 50 years! That fuel would fit on a single football field and would only cover it to a depth of 7 feet.
6. By comparison, if Vermont Yankee was a coal plant it would burn 2.5 tons of coal PER MINUTE!

So the anti-nuclear folks are trying to make the case that because Vermonters are holding more used fuel per capita, they are justified in raising taxes on Vermont Yankee. Statistics aside, the proposal to tax one energy source to reduce reliance on another source does not pass the sanity test. And why would you tax a low cost, clean energy source to help reduce consumption of higher cost dirty energy? So Governor Douglas, I hope you are listening! This proposed tax is unfair, and worse. It will end up costing Vermonters more in the long run, and it will demonstrate to businesses that the State of Vermont will break promises to satisfy the political wins of the fringe elements in the state.

Tornado Warnings Cause Electricity Price Spike

On May 16th an unusual weather condition existed in New York – there was a strong frontal system passing though the east coast and there were tornado warnings issued across the state from 12:30 PM to 6:00 PM – just in time for the daily peak demand. The fear that tornadoes would upset the electricity supply caused power prices to spike to more than $1,500 per megawatt hour. This event points out a few realities – the reserve capacity in the US Northeast is very low and can’t sustain much in the way of lost generators. In addition, the reserve energy that is available is very high cost power – from gas and oil fired units. As the price of oil continues to rise the cost of peaking power will go even higher. People around the country are already writing letters to their congressmen because of high power prices. If we don’t start building new plants soon the problem will just continue to get worse.

USA Today Story Generates Buzz

“Utility Workers Brace for Worker Shortage” – that was a headline story in the USA Today business section last week. I’ve been telling my listeners for quite some time that this is a great time to get into the nuclear industry. In reality, jobs are plentiful though out the energy sector. Many of the same skill sets are in demand in the oil and gas industry, chemical and pharmaceutical, and other manufacturing fields. The USA Today story, and I’ll put a link to it in my show notes, says that one-half of the 400,000 utility workers across the country could retire in the next five to ten years. It also points out that lineworkers are one of the highest paid professions – the average annual compensation is about $75,000 and many earn more than $100,000. Shortages of engineers in some areas have already caused General Electric and the NRC to miss deadlines associated with the design reviews for new nuclear plants.

So if jobs are so abundant in other industries, why would you want to get into the nuclear industry? Well, here are a few things that come to mind;

• It’s safer – the nuclear industry has the lowest injury rate for workers.
• The nuclear industry has strict regulations and testing that ensure people are fit for duty.
• It pays well – nuclear worker salaries are higher than their counterparts in other comparable industries.
• There’s a lot of variety – if you get tired of one career you can change careers without losing seniority or benefits. Many people start in one area, maintenance for example, then move into outage planning, then later become instructors.
• Rapid advancement – if you want to move up the career ladder into management opportunities are there. Managers are on average older than the workers and are retiring in greater percentages.
• You can’t be off-shored – manufacturing and petro-chemical industries are relocating to other countries where labor costs are lower. That can’t happen with electricity generation. The power plants need to be relatively close to the load.

More Coal Miners Die

In the past week two accidents, one in Siberia and one in China claimed the lives of more than 50 coal miners. This follows another accident last month in Siberia that killed more than 100. Why isn't the mainstream media, Greenpeace and the Union of Concerned Scientists, our valiant protectors of humanity, paying attention? You’ll have to listen to my podcast to hear my rant.

Go green, go nuclear and be safe out there!

John Wheeler

Episode 45

Listen to the Podcast Here

This is John Wheeler and you're listening to episode 45 of "This Week in Nuclear."

In my last show I mentioned the new informational video designed to inform young people about careers in nuclear science, engineering and technology. In this show I'm going to do something a little different - we're going to listen to the sound track of the video, then I have a panel of experts from he target audience who will critique the video ad share their thoughts on it.

You're listening to an audio podcast, but I'm also posting the video on my web site as a video podcast - it will show up as episode 46 of the show. I'll also imbed the video in my show notes so you can view it from there. You'll have to come back to the podcast to hear the critique by a panel of young people.

So, without further delay…lights..cameras..action!

Watch the Video Here




That was the audio from the new nuclear careers video.

Now we'll get on with the critique. I had a chance to play the video for Tiffany, Ally, Jack, Raya, and Charlie who are between 15 and 19 years old - the target audience of the video. Tune in to the podcast and hear what they had to say!

Happy Mother's Day!

John

Episode 44

Listen to the Podcast Here
Direct Download of MP3 File

1. Australia will change nuclear laws to allow plants
2. Queensland law bans nuclear plants
3. Iran’s former nuclear negotiator arrested
4. Engineer Accused of Taking Codes to Iran
5. US and Japan sign nuclear power pact
6. India/US Deal to be approved soon
7. Governor Spitzer Flip-Flops on Indian Point
8. Vermont Wants to Renege on Tax Deal with Vermont Yankee
9. Areva & Constellation Announce New Nuclear Plant Location
10. NJ Sues over Oyster Creek Decision
11. US Supreme Court Closes Coal Emissions Loophole

Nuclear Debate Continues in Australia

The nuclear energy debate continues to churn in Australia. This past week, Prime Minister John Howard told a Liberal Party conference that the 1999 law which bans nuclear power stations in Australia and limits uranium mining is no longer compatible with the need to act on climate change. He said that Australia would need progressively to wind down its reliance on traditional coal-fired power stations and adopt nuclear power generation. I’ve mentioned before that Australia has about one-third of the world’s known easily recoverable uranium, but they don’t refine any of it. The mine the ore and ship it to other countries to refine into usable fuel. And they have only one reactor – one at Lucas Heights that is used for research and for medical isotope production. You might wonder why a nation with such a valuable resource would be missing out on this fabulous opportunity – well the answer is very simple, and all you need to do is follow the money and the political power. Australia also has abundant coal and they generate almost all of their electricity from coal. The coal industry in AU is huge, with giant financial resources, and even greater political clout. The coal industry views nuclear energy as a direct challenge to their monopoly, and their cash flow. So it’s no surprise that the biggest opposition to John Howard’s plans to refine uranium into fuel, build nuclear plants is coming from regions with heavy ties to the coal industry. For example, last year Queensland Premier Peter Beattie supported the passage of a state law called the Nuclear Facilities Prohibition Act of 2006. It’s just what it sounds like – it prevents nuclear plants or uranium enrichment facilities from being built in Queensland, even if the AU federal government removes legal obstacles. Queensland just happens to be one of the two largest coal producing states in Australia. You might recall an earlier story I discussed in which the mayor of Townsville complained that nuclear plants are not welcome there because it would hurt the tourist industry. Well, Townsville is right on the edge of the largest coal mining regions in the state, and much of their income, and political contributions no doubt, are derived from the coal industry.

The anti-nuclear Queensland laws went into affect this week, and Queensland Mines and Energy Minister Geoff Wilson celebrated the occasion, and was quoted as saying "The Act bans nuclear facilities in Queensland in order to protect the health, safety and wellbeing of each and every one of us," He also said "There is no need for Queensland to go down the path of nuclear power plants when we don't need to." "Here in Queensland we have access to abundant, long-term supplies of coal and gas," and "We're confident that clean coal technology will provide a similar level of greenhouse abatement to that of nuclear generation and in a shorter timeframe." I wonder which clean coal technology he’s talking about. There’s still no economical way to remove CO2 from coal plant exhaust, and IF carbon sequestration is ever viable on a large scale, it certainly won’t be for many years.

So the stage is set for a showdown between the Australian states and the federal government over the future of their energy supply. On one side you have a national policy of reducing reliance on coal, on improving air quality, and on limiting CO2 gas emissions, and on the other you have interests in protecting the coal industry. This will be interesting to watch it play out!

Iran’s Position Remains Unchanged

I haven’t talked about Iran in quite some time. There’s been a lot of political haggling and media attention, but in reality there’s been almost no change in the political standoff between Iran and the rest of the world over their renegade uranium enrichment program. More than a year has passed since the dispute first made it to the United Nations Security Council, and the two positions are virtually unchanged. Iran’s president Ahmadinejad continues to proclaim their right to enrich uranium for energy production. The IAEA continues to ask for transparency, and for Iran to stop enriching Uranium because of fears they are developing weapons. Iran continues to install more centrifuges in violation of the UN’s orders. While Iran has allowed some limited IAEA inspections, but they refuse stop the enrichment process. The UN imposed sanctions that really don’t amount to much.

A couple of months ago there was an interesting development when Russia refused to deliver fuel to Iran for the first core load at the Bushehr nuclear plant because Iran had failed to make payments owed Russia. That little squabble poured some cold water on an otherwise very cozy relationship between the two nations. It was interesting to watch Moscow’s posture with Iran toughen when the dispute was in full swing. I heard that the contract required payment in US dollars, but Iran tried to pay in another form of currency and the Russians refused. There’s some speculation that Iran is mishandling it’s cash flow and didn’t have the dollars to pay.

Ahmadinejad has Political Opponent’s Nuclear Expert Arrested

In a sign of the continued internal political dissatisfaction over Ahmadinejad’s policies, last week police arrested Hossein Mousavian, the country’s former nuclear negotiator. He was hauled him off to prison for interrogation, and Iranian newspapers report that Mousavian could face an espionage charge. Mousavian is an ally of former Iranian president Rafsanjani who remains a political adversary Ahmadinejad’s. Rafsanjani has maintained a more moderate stance toward the international community over Tehran’s nuclear program.

Mousavian was a member of the Iranian nuclear negotiating team until 2005. When Ahmadinejad defeated Rafsanjani, he replaced the entire nuclear negotiating team, including Mousavian. There’s some speculation that Ahmadinejad is attempting to eliminate anyone within Iran who might question his hard line positions, and Mousavian is someone with the knowledge and experience to speak intelligently about Iran’s nuclear position in international relations.

Engineer Arrested in US for Iran Trade ban Violation

In another but seemingly unrelated story, an Iranian born Engineer who worked at Palo Verde Nuclear Plant in Arizona for 16 years was arrested by US federal agents last week as he got off an airplane just having returned from Iran. Mohammad Alavi, who is a US citizen, has been charged with violating the trade embargo that prohibits Americans from exporting goods and services to Iran. If convicted, he would face up to 21 months in prison. While there are not many details of exactly what Mr Alavi did, it involved taking nuclear plant training software and computer access codes with him to Iran. In October, authorities alleged, the software was used to download training materials from Tehran, using Palo Verde user credentials.

The FBI said there's no indication the training software had any terrorist connections, and there is no evidence to suggest the software access was linked to the Iranian government. According to court records, the software is used only for training plant employees, but allowed users access to details on the Palo Verde control rooms and the plant layout. Officials of Arizona Public Service Co., the Phoenix-based utility company that operates the Palo Verde Nuclear Generation Station, said the software does not pose a security risk because it doesn't control any of the nuclear plant's operating systems.

That makes perfect since to me because designs for nuclear plants like Palo Verde are not secret. The security systems and procedures would be safeguarded, and would not be available using that sort of software. None the less, the utility said it has changed software procedures.

India/USA Cooperation Bill Close to Approval

The India/USA Nuclear Cooperation Deal is close to being approved. The two sides have been negotiating for the last several months, and reports indicate most issues have been resolved. Later this month Nicholas Burns, the US Undersecretary for Political Affairs will travel to New Delhi to finalize the deal and sign the agreement. There is recognition in both the USA and in India that with the US presidential elections nearing, they need to get this resolved and on the books soon. The deal is set to go into effect in 2008 and will open the door for cooperation between the two nations in developing nuclear power plants and civilian nuclear energy related industries.

Japan and USA form GNEP Partnership

Japan and the USA have formed the first international agreement under the GNEP or Global Nuclear Energy Partnership. The two nations will work jointly on reactor designes and new types of fuel for Generation-4 reactors that may be built around the world. Assistant Energy Secretary Dennis Spurgeon said 222 reactors are planned for construction under the GNEP program. Interestingly enough, some elected officials in the new Democratically controlled Congress are of the opinion that GNEP was kicked off without sufficient congressional oversight. For example, Jeff Bingaman, the new chairman of the Senate Energy Committee stated he is looking forward to having the energy committee review the program. Bingaman took the reigns of the committee from Senator Pete Dominici, who is a strong supporter of nuclear energy. So here’s a classic example of how a change in the political party in power, and the subsequent change in committee leadership can cause previously approved programs to be drug back into the legislative process. It gives the new party in power the opportunity to weigh in on the policy and to attach their pork barrels to the programs. This is also an example of how shifting political winds create the environment of legislative uncertainty that makes investors second guess making long term investments. The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership will reduce the amount of used nuclear fuel that has to be stored in the USA because the used fuel would be reprocessed and reburned in the modern reactors. The new designed will be proliferation resistant, so concerns over diversion of reactor fuel for weapons are addressed. Critics say that the program is being invented as it moves along, but isn’t that always the way when you’re dealing with cutting edge technologies? You rarely have all the questions answered when you start. If engineers and technicians used the same logic when building and growing the Internet, we’d still be using 28K dial up modems!

NY Governor Spitzer Flip-flops on Indian Point

The new governor of NY State Elliot Spitzer is flip-flopping his position on Indian Point Nuclear plant. When he campaigned for Governor Spitzer promised to shut down Indian Point. I guess reality has set in; he knows that without Indian Point NY State can’t avoid skyrocketing electricity prices, can’t meet greenhouse gas reduction goals, and can’t prevent summer blackouts. So now he says Indian Point will have to stay on line until replacement power is built. That doesn’t mean he’s going to completely forget his promise to the anti-nuclear radicals who supported his election; this past week he joined Senator Hillary Clinton in calling for an independent safety assessment of Indian Point. He stated there were two reasons that the Independent Safety Assessment is needed; because IP was late installing emergency sirens with battery backup power, and because of ground water leaks from the spent fuel storage pool at the site. Let me explain why Spitzer’s logic is flawed: first of all, neither of the issues he cited has any safety significance at all. I’ve talked about the fuel storage pool leak before, and it has zero safety significance. Radiation can be measured at extremely low levels. Let me give you an example – the average person in the USA gets about 350 mrem per year from natural background radiation. According to the NRC web site, if your house was on the edge of the Indian Point site, and the plant was releasing radiation at the legal limit, which they are not, you’d get 6 more mrem per year. The minute amount of leakage from Indian Point is far less than the legal limit, so in reality you’d get less. By comparison, one dental x-ray gives about 3 mrem, and you would not think twice about getting two or three x-rays if you had a tooth ache!

On the issue of the battery backup for Indian Point’s emergency sirens – you might remember some discussion I had about this on a prior show. No other plant in the USA is required to have battery backups. Hillary Clinton managed to get this added to the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to appease her anti-nuclear supporters. Having a battery backup to emergency sirens may make them less likely to fail in some low probability off-the-wall situations, but it does not add appreciably to public safety. If they did, then it would be a part of federal law and would be required of all nuclear plant in the USA, and it is not. Indian Point was just fined $130,000 for being late implementing this new requirement; even though there is no safety value added, and even though they began the installation project voluntarily well before Hillary succeeded in making it a legal requirement. So back to the original issue, Hillary and Spitzer both know that the state of NY can not survive without Indian Point, but they are going to do everything they can to increase the cost of power they generate, and they’ll use the plant as a favorite target when they want to show how much they care about the voters.

Vermont Lawmakers Trying to Squeeze Vermont Yankee for More Taxes

Since I’m talking about politicians making “special” rules for nuclear plants, I need to mention what’s going on in Vermont. This past Tuesday the VT senate approved a bill that will levy a special $37 million tax on Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant to fund a state-wide energy efficiency program. That might not seem like a lot, but just last year Vermont Yankee agreed to contribute $25 million to a clean energy fund in exchange for state approval for a 20% power uprate. Some VT lawmakers are taking the position that because the plant is making good profits the state should take a larger share. Do you think they’d be making the same argument if it was a computer factory, a dairy farm, or a sawmill? Doesn’t it seem against the whole concept of a free market and capitalism to ask for more taxes just because a company does a good job and makes a greater return on their investment? Vermont Yankee will already pay more in income tax if they make higher revenues, so this is a tax on a tax. Come to think of it, it sounds a bit like socialism! Vermont Yankee is fighting the proposed tax increase because the State is reneging on the deal they made just a year ago. Vermont enjoys some of the lowest electricity rates in the nation, and has the lowest greenhouse gas emissions of any state for one reason and one reason one only – Vermont Yankee. It’s ironic that the same politicians who claim to be interested in preventing climate change, and protecting the ratepayers are the same ones who are trying to tax their nuclear plant out of business.

UniStar Picks Calvert Cliffs Site for New Nuclear Plant

On a brighter note, this week Unistar, the joint venture between Constellation and Areva, announced they’ve selected the Calvert Cliffs site in Maryland as the location of their new nuclear plant, an EPR. They notified the NRC that they will be applying for a construction and operating license for a new unit that will be the third reactor at the site. Unistar has also discussed the possibility of adding another new unit at their Nine Mile site in New York, but with Elliott Spitzer at the helm that’s unlikely.

New Jersey Appeals NRC Ruling on Oyster Creek

There’s a legal battle being waged between the State of New Jersey and the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission over the Oyster Creek Nuclear Plant license extension. The outcome could have ramifications for the entire US industry. Oyster Creek is applying for a 20 year license extension, something that 48 other nuclear plants have already been granted in the USA. Recently the state argued that the NRC should consider the possible impact of a terrorist attack on the plant prior to granting the extension. The NRC considered the state’s request, and after a thorough review concluded that New Jersey’s concerns are speculative and theoretical, and potential terrorist attacks are already addressed in day to day oversight of the facilities. Needless to say, the state didn’t like the Commission’s ruling. Last Wednesday NJ State Attorney General Stuart Rabner filed a petition in the Federal Third Circuit Court of Appeals to challenge the ruling.

This is yet another example of how anti-nuclear groups use the legal system in an attempt to block nuclear plants from operating, or at a minimum it can raise costs by imposing more requirements, more evaluations, and more legal fees.

This is a similar approach to the case earlier this year in California where anti-nuclear groups succeeded in forcing the NRC to consider terrorist attacks in Diablo Canyon’s application for a license for dry cask fuel storage.

If NJ wins the appeal, then the same case could be made in more than 30 other license renewals that are either already underway or expected in the next few years. That does not mean that the license extensions would be blocked, though. It means that the license extensions would have to consider the potential impact of terrorist attacks which might make the reviews lengthier, and more costly. As you would expect, the Sierra Club celebrated New Jersey’s decision to appeal.

US Supreme Court Closes Loophole on Coal Pollution

And finally, last Monday the US Supreme Court acted to uphold Environmental Protection Agency rules that require aging coal powered electricity plants in the USA to install pollution controls when they do extensive upgrades. I’m probably overly simplifying, but the issue is this; the Clean Air Act requires new coal plants to include pollution control systems in their design. The law also required old plants to install similar equipment if the owners decide to do major upgrades to existing plants. This aspect of the law is designed to prevent owners of older dirtier plants from choosing to indefinitely upgrade and refurbish them to keep them running in lieu of building newer cleaner plants.

There’s also a provision from 2003 called the New Source Rule that allowed some older plants to be upgraded without installing pollution controls. Going back more than 10 years there are cases being argued between utilities and the EPA over whether or not plant upgrades or modifications should have included pollution controls.

In a nutshell, the ruling this week stated the New Source Rule was so lenient that it violated the Clean Air Act. Because of the new ruling, it will be much more difficult in the future for old coal plants to continue running indefinitely without installing pollution controls. That’s was the whole intent of the Clean Air Act, so it seems that the Supreme Court got us back on track. By closing this loophole in the EPA rules, the Supreme Court has made it more difficult for older coal plants to keep running. That means new power plants will have to be built to replace them. It also provides more incentive for emissions free electricity sources such as nuclear energy.

New Nuclear Energy Video

I’ve talked a lot about the demand for new talent in the nuclear industry, and how nuclear technology and engineering offers fantastic careers and high paying jobs. The Department of Energy is working to generate interest in nuclear careers and they released an informational video that targets young people. If you go to my web site at this week in nuclear.com you can view a copy of the video, or see it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TWF8HxuWIBI . I’ll cover it in more detail in the next show.

Go Green! Go Nuclear!

John Wheeler