Upload
mervin-lane
View
231
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Nuclear Renaissance-
Real, or Imaginary ?
Framework:
• I. A Bit of History
• II. Change Happens
• III. On the Threshold– Maybe
• IV. Where Things Stand Now
History
• Pearl Street, Lower Manhattan, 9/3/1882
Shippingport, 1957
Dresden Unit 1
Generation II Delays1) Intervenors:
LaSalle County 1 & 2: Approx. 3 years2) Design Changes:
LaSalle County 1 & 2: Approx. 18 mos.(Pressure suppression chamber reanchoring)
LaSalle County original dates: 1974, 1975
LaSalle County actual dates: January & October 1984
3) Quality Problems:Marble Hill, IN, and Cincinnati G. & E. plant cancelled
Load Patterns
One last thing...
US coal-fired plants are OLD !
For 14 coal-fired units in this territory (about 5000 mw), a rough weighted-average age is 47 years !
Mechanical condition alone may make these candidates for retirement– what would a carbon tax do ?
• CHANGES IN THE WIND...– 1992: Disaggregation of the industry– Environmental refocussing:
• 1969: SO2
• 1980’s: Ozone, oxidants
• 1990: Mercury
• 1995– Greenhouse gases, CO2
ON THE THRESHOLD
• Nuclear as baseload
DAILY INTEGRATED ELECTRIC LOAD
ON THE THRESHOLD
•Nuclear as baseload
•Unable to follow load
•Economics:
•High first cost
•Low operating cost
NEW PLANT DESIGNS
1) Emphasis on passive safety(Engineered safeguards are not first-
line defense)2) Precertified designs (Except for site-related differences)
WESTINGHOUSE AP-1000 REACTOR
BUT...
BUT...
Financing is MUCH more difficult!
--Disaggregation of industry makes
utility financing like manufacturing
POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS1) Consortia
2) Government loan guarantees
WHERE WE STAND NOW:
-More than 30 announced projects(some construction started)
-17 requests for COL (26 units)(but nothing issues until 2011)
-Mostly consortia-Mostly existing sites
(reduced likelihood of interventions)-Gov’t loan guarantees piddly
SPENT FUEL DISPOSAL ISSUES:
New Reactors Filed for C.O.L.