Nuclear renaissance in the United States: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎History: more recent poll
expand
Line 1: Line 1:
Many license applications filed with the [[Nuclear Regulatory Commission]] for proposed new reactors have been suspended or cancelled.<ref name=eo>Eileen O'Grady. [http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64N5S420100524 Entergy says nuclear remains costly] ''Reuters'', May 25, 2010.</ref><ref>Terry Ganey. [http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2009/apr/23/amerenue-pulls-plug-callaway-2/ AmerenUE pulls plug on project] ''Columbia Daily Tribune'', April 23, 2009.</ref> As of October 2011, plans for about 30 new reactors in the United States have been "whittled down to just four, despite the promise of large subsidies and President Barack Obama’s support of nuclear power, which he reaffirmed after Fukushima".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/11/business/energy-environment/after-fukushima-does-nuclear-power-have-a-future.html |title=After Fukushima, Does Nuclear Power Have a Future?|author=[[Stephanie Cooke]] |date=October 10, 2011 |work=New York Times }}</ref> The only reactor currently under construction in America, at [[Watts Bar Nuclear Generating Station|Watts Bar]], [[Tennessee]], was begun in 1973 and may be completed in 2012.<ref name=matt2010>Matthew L. Wald (December 7, 2010). [http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/nuclear-renaissance-is-short-on-largess/ Nuclear ‘Renaissance’ Is Short on Largess] ''[[The New York Times]]''.</ref><ref name=dis2010>{{cite news|url=http://www.economist.com/node/17627569 |title=Team France in disarray: Unhappy attempts to revive a national industry|date=December 2, 2010|work=The Economist}}</ref> Matthew Wald from the ''[[New York Times]]'' has reported that "the [[nuclear renaissance]] is looking small and slow".<ref name=mlw>{{cite web|author=Matthew L. Wald. |url=http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/23/aid-sought-for-nuclear-plants/ |title=Aid Sought for Nuclear Plants|work=Green|publisher=The New York Times|date=September 23, 2010}}</ref>
Many license applications filed with the [[Nuclear Regulatory Commission]] for proposed new reactors have been suspended or cancelled.<ref name=eo>Eileen O'Grady. [http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64N5S420100524 Entergy says nuclear remains costly] ''Reuters'', May 25, 2010.</ref><ref>Terry Ganey. [http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2009/apr/23/amerenue-pulls-plug-callaway-2/ AmerenUE pulls plug on project] ''Columbia Daily Tribune'', April 23, 2009.</ref> As of October 2011, plans for about 30 new reactors in the United States have been "whittled down to just four, despite the promise of large subsidies and President Barack Obama’s support of nuclear power, which he reaffirmed after Fukushima".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/11/business/energy-environment/after-fukushima-does-nuclear-power-have-a-future.html |title=After Fukushima, Does Nuclear Power Have a Future?|author=[[Stephanie Cooke]] |date=October 10, 2011 |work=New York Times }}</ref> The only reactor currently under construction in America, at [[Watts Bar Nuclear Generating Station|Watts Bar]], [[Tennessee]], was begun in 1973 and may be completed in 2012.<ref name=matt2010>Matthew L. Wald (December 7, 2010). [http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/07/nuclear-renaissance-is-short-on-largess/ Nuclear ‘Renaissance’ Is Short on Largess] ''[[The New York Times]]''.</ref><ref name=dis2010>{{cite news|url=http://www.economist.com/node/17627569 |title=Team France in disarray: Unhappy attempts to revive a national industry|date=December 2, 2010|work=The Economist}}</ref> Matthew Wald from the ''[[New York Times]]'' has reported that "the [[nuclear renaissance]] is looking small and slow".<ref name=mlw>{{cite web|author=Matthew L. Wald. |url=http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/09/23/aid-sought-for-nuclear-plants/ |title=Aid Sought for Nuclear Plants|work=Green|publisher=The New York Times|date=September 23, 2010}}</ref>


In 2008, the [[Energy Information Administration]] projected almost 17 gigawatts of new nuclear power reactors by 2030, but in its 2011 projections, it "scaled back the 2030 projection to just five".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://bos.sagepub.com/content/67/4/8.abstract?etoc |title=The implications of Fukushima: The US perspective |author=Mark Cooper |date=July 2011 vol. 67 no. 4 |work=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists |page=8 }}</ref> A survey conducted in October 2011 found that 62 percent of Americans favor the use of nuclear reactors.<ref>{{cite web|title=Americans' Support for Nuclear Energy Holds at Majority Level 6 Months After Japan Accident|url=http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/americans-support-for-nuclear-energy-holds-at-majority-level-6-months-after-japan-accident-130981293.html|publisher=PR Newswire|date=3 October 2011}}</ref>
In 2008, the [[Energy Information Administration]] projected almost 17 gigawatts of new nuclear power reactors by 2030, but in its 2011 projections, it "scaled back the 2030 projection to just five".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://bos.sagepub.com/content/67/4/8.abstract?etoc |title=The implications of Fukushima: The US perspective |author=Mark Cooper |date=July 2011 vol. 67 no. 4 |work=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists |page=8 }}</ref> A survey conducted in April 2011 found that 64 percent of Americans opposed the construction of new nuclear reactors.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://bos.sagepub.com/content/67/4/43.abstract |title=Nuclear power and the public |author=M. V. Ramana |date=July 2011 vol. 67 no. 4 |work=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists |page=44 }}</ref> A survey sponsored by the [[Nuclear Energy Institute]], conducted in September 2011, found that "62 percent of respondents said they favor the use of nuclear energy as one of the ways to provide electricity in the United States, with 35 percent opposed".<ref>{{cite web|title=Americans' Support for Nuclear Energy Holds at Majority Level 6 Months After Japan Accident|url=http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/americans-support-for-nuclear-energy-holds-at-majority-level-6-months-after-japan-accident-130981293.html|publisher=PR Newswire|date=3 October 2011}}</ref>


==History==
==History==

Revision as of 04:39, 22 October 2011

Many license applications filed with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for proposed new reactors have been suspended or cancelled.[1][2] As of October 2011, plans for about 30 new reactors in the United States have been "whittled down to just four, despite the promise of large subsidies and President Barack Obama’s support of nuclear power, which he reaffirmed after Fukushima".[3] The only reactor currently under construction in America, at Watts Bar, Tennessee, was begun in 1973 and may be completed in 2012.[4][5] Matthew Wald from the New York Times has reported that "the nuclear renaissance is looking small and slow".[6]

In 2008, the Energy Information Administration projected almost 17 gigawatts of new nuclear power reactors by 2030, but in its 2011 projections, it "scaled back the 2030 projection to just five".[7] A survey conducted in April 2011 found that 64 percent of Americans opposed the construction of new nuclear reactors.[8] A survey sponsored by the Nuclear Energy Institute, conducted in September 2011, found that "62 percent of respondents said they favor the use of nuclear energy as one of the ways to provide electricity in the United States, with 35 percent opposed".[9]

History

Proposed plans to add a new reactor to the North Anna Nuclear Generating Station have brought public protest. On August 7, 2008 six activists from the Peoples Alliance for Clean Energy were arrested at the North Anna Information Center for trespassing.[10]

In April 2009, Ameren Missouri canceled plans to build a second reactor at its mid-Missouri nuclear power plant. A key stumbling block was a law barring utilities from charging customers the costs of a new power plant before it starts producing electricity. The new nuclear plant would have cost at least $6 billion.[11][12]

In August 2009, the Tennessee Valley Authority, faced with "falling electric sales and rising costs from cleaning up a massive coal ash spill in Tennessee", trimmed plans for the potential four-unit Bellefonte nuclear plant to one reactor.[13]

In March 2010, Exelon withdrew its application for a construction and operating license for a twin-unit nuclear plant in Victoria County, Texas, citing lower electricity demand projections. The decision left the country’s largest nuclear operator without a direct role in what the nuclear industry hopes is a nuclear renaissance. In August 2010, Exelon bought John Deere Renewables, and is moving into wind power.[14]

As of September 2010, ground has been broken the Vogtle project and one other reactor in South Carolina. Two other reactors in Texas, four in Florida and one in Missouri have all been "moved to the back burner, mostly because of uncertain economics".[15]

On October 8, 2010, Constellation Energy Vice President and CEO Michael J. Wallace informed the US Department of Energy that it was abandoning its partnership with Electricite de France (EDF) to build the Calvert Cliffs #3 nuclear plant due primarily to the high cost and "burdensome conditions" that the loan guarantee conditions, which the United States government would place on the project. Wallace, in his letter, stated that any next steps in the further pursuit of the loan guarantee and the overall project were "for EDF to determine".[16]

On Oct 29, 2010 Dominion president Tom Farrell told investors that Dominion had decided to slow its development of a proposed third reactor at North Anna Nuclear Generating Station and wait until the combined construction permit-operating license (COL) was approved by the NRC before deciding to complete the project. This approval is expected in early 2013.[17]

Generation III reactors are safer than older reactors like the GE MAC 1 at Fukushima, Vermont Yankee and other plants around the world. But after a decade in which the federal government policy promoted this new version of nuclear power, only one Generation III+ reactor project has been approved in the United States. Work on it has just begun in Georgia, and already "there are conflicts between the utility, Southern Company and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission".[18] Moreover, this project is going forward only because it is in one of the few regions of the United States (the Southeast) where electricity markets were not deregulated. That means "the utility, operating on cost-plus basis, can pass on to rate-payers all its expense over-runs".[18]

Following the March 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, NRG Energy has decided to abandon already started construction on two new nuclear power plants in Texas. Analysts attributed the abandonment of the South Texas Nuclear Generating Station project to the financial situation of the plant-partner TEPCO, the inability to raise other construction financing, the current low cost of electricity in Texas, and expected additional permitting delays.[19] NRG has written off its investment of $331 million in the project.[20]

A survey conducted in October 2011 found that 62 percent of Americans favor the use of nuclear reactors.[21]

See also

References

  1. ^ Eileen O'Grady. Entergy says nuclear remains costly Reuters, May 25, 2010.
  2. ^ Terry Ganey. AmerenUE pulls plug on project Columbia Daily Tribune, April 23, 2009.
  3. ^ Stephanie Cooke (October 10, 2011). "After Fukushima, Does Nuclear Power Have a Future?". New York Times.
  4. ^ Matthew L. Wald (December 7, 2010). Nuclear ‘Renaissance’ Is Short on Largess The New York Times.
  5. ^ "Team France in disarray: Unhappy attempts to revive a national industry". The Economist. December 2, 2010.
  6. ^ Matthew L. Wald. (September 23, 2010). "Aid Sought for Nuclear Plants". Green. The New York Times.
  7. ^ Mark Cooper (July 2011 vol. 67 no. 4). "The implications of Fukushima: The US perspective". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. p. 8. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  8. ^ M. V. Ramana (July 2011 vol. 67 no. 4). "Nuclear power and the public". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. p. 44. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  9. ^ "Americans' Support for Nuclear Energy Holds at Majority Level 6 Months After Japan Accident". PR Newswire. 3 October 2011.
  10. ^ "6 arrested in protest at North Anna site". Daily Progress. August 7, 2008. Retrieved 2008-10-16. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  11. ^ Nuke plant is, well, nuked. Not gonna happen
  12. ^ Terry Ganey. AmerenUE pulls plug on project Columbia Daily Tribune, April 23, 2009.
  13. ^ TVA plan for Ala. nuclear plant drops to 1 reactor
  14. ^ Matthew L. Wald. A Nuclear Giant Moves Into Wind The New York Times, August 31, 2010.
  15. ^ Matthew L. Wald. Aid Sought for Nuclear Plants Green, September 23, 2010.
  16. ^ Letter from Michael J. Wallace, Constellation Energy, to US Department of Energy Deputy Secretary Dan Poneman, October 8, 2010. [1].
  17. ^ "Dominion's 3rd-quarter net income declines". WTOP Radio. Oct. 29, 2010. Retrieved 2010-11-10. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  18. ^ a b Christian Parenti (April 18, 2011). "Nuclear Dead End: It's the Economics, Stupid". The Nation.
  19. ^ NRG ends project to build new nuclear reactors
  20. ^ Matthew L. Wald (April 19, 2011). "NRG Abandons Project for 2 Reactors in Texas". New York Times.
  21. ^ "Americans' Support for Nuclear Energy Holds at Majority Level 6 Months After Japan Accident". PR Newswire. 3 October 2011.

External links

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nuclear_renaissance_in_the_United_States&oldid=456781151"