Illinois remains 'asleep at the wheel" in Nuclear Renaissance

I was pleased to read in the Chicago Tribune on Friday, Feb.10, a report about the day before approval by the government to construct two new reactors at an estimate cost of $14 billion at Southern Company's "Plant Vogtle" in the state of Georgia. The  Tribune's article, U.S. approved first new nuclear plant in a generation, rightly called the reactor approvals the strongest signal yet that the three decade hiatus of nuclear plant construction is ending.    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-usa-nuclear-nrctre818209-20120209,0,6637411.story

 

This positive story was a good sign and a long awaited one.  Construction of nuclear power plants in the U.S. was frozen after the partial core meltdown of the Three Mile Island reactor at Middletown, Pa. in 1979.   The result:  The current 104 operating nuclear plants in the U.S. all date back to model designs of the 1960's and 1970's. 

 

Illinois has eleven of the 104 operating nuclear plants in this nation, with dual reactors located at several of the sites.  All eleven of Illinois's reactors are equipped with the 1970's Westinghouse designed PWR model (Pressurized Water Reactor), which is still in operation worldwide.  this is in contrast to the flawed GE turbine model of the same era.  

 

Accordingly to David Hollein of Barrington Hills, IL, a retired Westinghouse engineer who at the time was involved intimately in the construction of many more than just the eleven Illinois Nuclear Plants still in operation, "The Westinghouse PWR model could operate nicely for many decades if properly maintained like a car."

 

As has been done here in Illinois, almost all of the 104 operating U.S. reactors are either undergoing re-licensing and upgrading or have already done so, thus adding another 20 years of operational life. 

 

One exception is the sad tale of the Dual Nuclear Reactor at Zion, Illinois, which is now being decommissioned after it was prematurely and unnecessarily closed by Exelon in 1998.  Its closure happened even before its initial licenses were due to expire in 2012. 

 

The Zion Nuclear Power Station was the third dual-reactor nuclear power plant constructed in this nation.  Built in 1973, the first unit started 

 

Considering that it takes ten years to construct a new nuclear plant, the Zion Plant was located on an already seismically approved location.  David Hollein, as the Nuclear Project Engineer of the Dual Zion Nuclear Plant, insists without a doubt that upgrading the Zion Dual Plant was both possible and feasible at far less a cost than the price of building a new reactor. 

 

In a surprise move two years ago President Obama awarded $8.3 billion in loan guarantees to help build the dual Vogtle Reactor Plant.  It was way past time to do so!

 

Together the two reactors in Georgia will cost $14 billion and will generate 2,200 MW, enough to power one million homes.  One of the reactors is scheduled to come on-line in 2016, the other a year later in 2017.  http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/the-first-us-nuke-since-three-mile-island/2056

 

Given the intense coverage of the nuclear reactor natural disaster at Fukushima, Japan, it is noteworthy that the devastating event didn't deliver a death knell to Nuclear power.  Nor should it have, for the Japan reactor incident was caused by an intense earthquake that shut down the electricity needed for back-up generators to continue to pump water to cool the reactor, subsequently overheating and subsequent damage occurred.

 

The two Georgia reactors -- the first approved in over three decades by the Nuclear Regulation Commission by a 4 - 1 vote -- will incorporate the third generation of the Westinghouse A1000 model into their construction, with safety features that give people days instead of hours to restore electric power.  No human action is required to shut down the reactors, nor are pumps needed to cool the plant in the case of an emergency.  Instead, the use of physics and natural circulation along the containment walls will cool the reactors instead of relying on mechanical systems.     

 

Even so a "no" vote was cast by the chairman of the NRC.  He argued that the commission should delay approval until it requires all nuclear plant operators to include safety and operational lessons learned from the natural disaster and meltdown at Fukushima, Japan. 

 

Such a delay would have been pointless.   Wouldn't all reactors have to abide by any safety regulation and standards the NRC decided to put into effect?  

 

It just so happens that the chairman of the NRC who voted against granting the approval for the two Georgia reactors, Gregory B. Jacko, was the  the former science adviser to Senator Harry Reid who stopped the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository.  Gregory Jacko was appointed head of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by President Barack Obama on May 13, 2009.

 

The U.S. as a nation is begging for more nuclear power as nuclear power is still the best for producing large amounts of round-the clock, reliable electricity that is affordable, safe and clean.  

 

Twenty four new reactor application have been filed in addition to the two approved Georgia plants. Some of the newly filed U.S. reactor applications are slated to use the Westinghouse AP1000 turbine design.  http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/us-begs-for-more-nuclear/173

 

By-passing nuclear power to rely more on wind, solar, gas and other energy efficiency measures would be foolish and paramount to economic suicide for the U.S.   None of the before mentioned can produce sufficiently large volumes of base-load electricity as consistently and affordability as can nuclear power. 

 

Looking worldwide, with very few exceptions, countries are continuing their commitments to nuclear energy and realizing that it must be an integral part of their energy mix. Currently 60 reactors are being built worldwide, none of which has been canceled as a result of Fukushima. 

 

Present China has the biggest nuclear construction program.  With 14 operating nuclear plants, China has more than 25 reactors under construction.  Four of the reactors being built are using the modified Westinghouse AP1000 design (Westinghouse is now a unit of Toshiba.).  China's additional 25 reactors will increase the amount of energy generated by Nuclear power by 65%

 

India, likewise, is not allowing itself to fall behind in selecting nuclear as a very important and necessary energy source.  India currently has 200 reactors but wants to double the number in the next two decades.  http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/nuclear-industry-lives/1668

 

Unfortunately for the U.S., not all of the 20 plants now in various stages of planning will pan out because of lengthy court tie-ups from environmental extremists, etc., who oppose Nuclear power.

 

For those who do raise fierce objection to nuclear power, it behoove you to consider these facts:

 

1.  The U.S. Navy has been using nuclear power for its submarines and now ships since the 1950's without incident.  "Hyman George Rickover was a four-star admiral of the United States Navy who directed the original development of naval nuclear propulsion and controlled its operations for three decades as director of Naval Reactors.  Rickover's substantial legacy of technical achievements includes the United States Navy's continuing record of zero reactor accidents, as defined by the uncontrolled release of fission products subsequent to reactor core damage."    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyman_G._Rickover

2.  Compared to other mainline fuels, nuclear offers a pretty safe track record.  The human brain has evolved to latch on to big events like in Japan and the Ukraine and not the mundane.  More than 500,000 people die each year in China whose deaths are attributed to coal pollution.  In a study, nuclear came out safer than coal, oil, hydro, wind, and rooftop solar.   http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/nuclear-industry-lives/1668

 

Our own state of Illinois has fallen asleep at the wheel.  It will take a severe jolt to awaken legislators in the Democratically controlled House and Senate to come to their senses.  Based on their belief in Global Warming, Illinois Democratic legislators have mandated that 18% of Illinois's energy should come from wind and solar power by 2025.  Illinois has not even reached its mandated 2011 goal of one half of one percent!

 

It doesn't help that Chicago-based Exelon Corporation is investing in wind farms and solar panel projects eager to cash in on the very lucrative government subsidies provided by its wind and solar investments, even though Exelon is the largest nuclear operator in the United States.  

 

Exelon's CEO, John Rowe, has ties with the Obama administration through invited visitations to the White House and through his close connections with the Chicago political gang, including Chicago's Mayor Rahm Emanuel.  

 

Rowe, as a ardent supporter of "Cap and Trade" and green energy, has spent millions of dollars in lobbing Congress to pass Cap and Trade legislation.  http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0118/americas-best-company-10-exelon-utility-tax-carbon-windfall_print.html

 

Is it an wonder that Illinois has fallen asleep at the wheel with its energy policy that allowed the shut down and now the decommissioning of the 2,100 MW Dual Zion Nuclear Plant without justification, and when Exelon's CEO John Rowe is gleefully accommodating Illinois in its green energy pipe dream that can only lead to further economic decline of IL, already a failed state fiscally, and a continuation in 2012 of Illinois's 2011 last-in-the-nation job creation status.