Nuclear Blogger Carnival 298, at Yes Vermont Yankee

Once again, we are proud to host the Carnival of Nuclear Energy Bloggers, right here at Yes Vermont Yankee. The Carnival is a compendium of nuclear blogs that rotates from blog site to blog site, and it is always a pleasure and an honor to host it.

Let's start with blog posts directly about nuclear energy.  Nuclear power is moving forward, world-wide, despite opposition.

Fukushima Updates--Leslie Corrice

Takahama unit #3 restart

Takahama unit #3  has restarted, and this has spurred  numerous FUD-based press reports. The main reason is the use of MOX fuel bundles in 15% of the core. The postings also focus on allegedly inadequate emergency planning, the lack of a national nuclear waste disposal option, the inference that the only benefit of nukes is making money, and citizens claiming a violation of their human rights.

Neutron Bytes - Dan Yurman

SMR developers form advocacy group in DC

Leading developers and potential customers of small modular reactors (SMR) have formed a consortium, called SMR Smart, to advance the commercialization of the innovative light water reactor designs.

Also, developers of advanced nuclear reactors are pleased with their DC summit meeting held last week.

Next Big Future--Brian Wang

China plans on at least 110 Nuclear Reactors by 2030
Many will be 1400 MW or larger.  The Chinese supply chain is well in place.

Lightbridge is making progress on improved nuclear fuel
This fuel should increase energy production by 17% in existing reactors.

Bad air quality in Japan from lack of nuclear energy and air pollution in China
Hopefully, reactor restarts in Japan will ease the problem. But right now it is pretty bad, with 60% of monitoring sites in Japan above the particulate pollution standard. 

Neutron Bytes - Dan Yurman

French gov’t struggles to overcome a panic attack about UK’s Hinkley Point nuclear power project

French energy group EDF has postponed giving final approval for construction of the twin 1600 MW Areva EPRs in Somerset, UK. The current cost estimate, which is a work in progress, is pegged at between $18-20 billion.

The move to delay the final investment decision is said to have been made as a result of concerns within the French government and by investors about whether the financing was firmly in place for the huge project and whether costs could be contained over a decade long period of construction of the reactors.

Next:  Can renewables replace fossil fuel and nuclear?  Well, no. Here are some posts on that issue.

Forbes--James Conca
Exxon Believes That Global Use Of Oil And Gas Will Continue To Increase
The largest fossil fuel company in the world predicts our energy mix won’t change a whole lot over the next 25 years. In fact, Exxon Mobil projects that oil and gas will actually increase by 2040, even as coal decreases a bit. This unfortunate future stems from the age-old conundrum of trying not to eat sugar when your pockets are full of candy. The Earth has so much fossil fuel, and it has become so cheap to extract it, that it defies logic to think that humans will not keep burning it as their main source of energy.

Northwest Clean Energy--Meredith Angwin
Reality: Less nuclear means more natural gas
Vermont Yankee and San Onofre closed recently. Natural gas-fired plants took over and made the electricity that replaced the nuclear outputs.  Meanwhile, paper after paper, and study after study, trumpet the coming world of renewables.  These are just studies.  Though renewables maybe would'a, could'a, should'a replaced the closed plants, the reality is that less nuclear means more natural gas.

Atomic Insights--Rod Adams
Another day, another model “proving” capabilities of weather-dependent power

The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) jointly published a paper about a new model they've created to simulate using weather-dependent energy sources to reduce greenhouse gas production from the US electricity sector. 

Their scenarios include generous amounts of natural gas, a nationwide HVDC transmission network,  and other conditions. Some news outlets have published headlines citing  the large reduction without noting the required conditions. Shocking, isn't it?

The Atomic Show (podcast)---Rod Adams

Atomic Show #249 - All Electric America by S. David Freeman and Leah Y Parks

Freeman has been actively doubting the value of nuclear energy since the mid 1970s. He's now in his 90s. Leah Y Parks is a writer who earned an MS in environmental engineering and has some experience in developing water infrastructure projects. She, like Freeman, believes that wind, solar and water can do it all, even if all energy now supplied by burning fossil fuels is converted to electricity.  The conversation is civil, even though the participants have unresolvable disagreements. 

Yes Vermont Yankee--Guest Post

Overreach at the Attorney General's Office: Guest post by Deborah Bucknam

In this case, strong-arm tactics are being used to promote renewable use, whether people want it or not. Recently, the Vermont Attorney general's office announced that they were investigating Annette Smith for possibly "practicing law without a license." Ms. Smith is a prominent anti-wind advocate.  In this guest post, Vermont lawyer Deborah Bucknam explains that the preposterous charge will likely be thrown out. Nevertheless, the charge will  hamper free speech and encourage wind developers. 

Atoms Not Dams. Surprising Facts for Earth Day.

Clip Art Courtesy of Jim Scherrer

Earth Day is the day we consider how we affect the planet we live on.   Let's look at some surprising facts about just how good nuclear energy is for the earth.  Every day is Earth Day when you support nuclear energy! 

And when I say "surprising facts," I mean that I was surprised.  And I love nuclear energy!

The biggest power plants in America are nuclear

James Conca at Forbes describes the Ten Biggest Power Plants in America---Not What You Think.  They are "not what you think" because Conca looks at the power produced by these plants, rather than the nameplate size of the plants.

Yeah, yeah, we all know that nuclear has a great capacity factor.  But in terms of power-produced, did you know that the biggest plant in America is Palo Verde? It is the plant that produces the most electricity.  The Grand Coulee Dam comes in third, after Palo Verde and Brown's Ferry Nuclear Station.  As a matter of fact, seven out of ten of the "biggest" are nuclear.

Vermont Yankee made more power per year (lifetime average) than Hoover Dam

There's a comment on Conca's post by Edward Leaver.  Here's part of the comment:

Lake Mead is still the nations largest artificial reservoir…..Hoover Dam’s generation capacity is 2.1

Hoover Dam
More massive than Vermont Yankee
Less electricity per year

GWe, or was until drought-lowered water levels forced downgrade to 1.6 GW. It’s used primarily for load balancing California nuclear and regional coal; for all the mighty Colorado, Hoover’s plant factor is just 24%, and 24% of 2.1 GW is but 500 MWe…. Vermont Yankee  is was 620 MWe, 87% lifetime CF, for 537 MW average, handily beating Hoover.

Something to think about the next time someone explains how Vermont absolutely NEEDS to buy power from HydroQuebec, no matter how many Canadian rivers are impounded and how many square miles of forest are drowned. 

Hydro Power makes 7% of U.S. Electricity. Nuclear makes 19%

Well, yeah. I knew that nuclear made 19% of U.S. electricity.  But somehow, I thought nuclear was running neck and neck with hydro power as the best source of low-carbon power.  I mean, there are big dams all over the U.S.: TVA, the dams on the Colorado,  the dams on the Columbia. Not to mention dams on smaller rivers.

And all those hydro plants add up to less than 7% of U. S. electricity.  About a third of what our nuclear plants made.  And they take a lot of land and they change their local ecology.

In the old days, I was a member of the Sierra Club.  I was in college and the club was for "Atoms not Dams." And the club advocated for Wilderness Areas instead of ridge-top wind turbines.  And it was truly about saving the earth and the wilderness.

Sigh.  I am showing my age.

But I am still young enough to be surprised by how good nuclear energy is. Every day is Earth Day when you support nuclear energy! 

-------
End notes:

Wikipedia lists Hoover Dam as having a capacity factor of 23% not 24%. In his comment, Mr. Leaver seems to be giving Hoover the benefit of the doubt.

Well, okay. I still love the Grand Coulee Dam song by Woody Guthrie.

The High-Cost Consequences of New England's Energy Choices

Collage from "Green Lemons into
Lemonade"

Why Are My Electricity Bills Getting Higher?

Green Lemons into Lemonade is a Facebook Page of pro-nuclear art and satire.  I think you will like it if you like it (small pun).

The collage above shows the consequences of New England energy choices.  The woman on the left is Patricia Richardson, 78 and retired. She lives in Massachusetts,  has had energy audits on her house, and had insulation installed. Because electricity prices rising by 30 to 45% for the winter, her energy bills are still increasing. She wants to know why the prices are going up, and she doesn't feel she is getting a solid answer. She is quoted in  a New York Times article on the future of energy prices in New England:  Even Before Long Winter Begins, Energy Bills Send Shivers in New England.

Why are prices going up? Part of the answer is that Vermont Yankee (and coal plants) are going off line. The New England gas pipelines cannot carry enough fuel to make up for the electricity production of the shuttered base load plants.

But...besides pipelines....

Another  reason for the high prices is the actions of the women in the right-hand picture.  They are Vermont Yankee opponents, dressed for a fun anti-nuclear demonstration. One carries a sign saying: "Vermont Yankee is Killing Us All."

Decisions and Consequences

New England is closing coal plants and my favorite nuclear plant. Meanwhile, locals fight hard against expanded gas pipelines.  To understand New England energy decisions (and their consequences), I recommend James Conca's clear and well-referenced post at Forbes: Pipeline and Nuclear Shortages Send New England's Utility Bills Soaring.  As Conca writes:

Not sure why New Englanders are so surprised (at the price rises). It was their choice to throw all-in for natural gas and renewables in a land of harsh winters. But they’ve refused to build new gas pipelines. And they’re shutting a nuclear plant that has 20 years of cheap reliable cold-resistant energy left on it.

That pretty much sums up the New England energy scene.  Thank you, James Conca.

State by State with the Carbon Rules: Vermont, New Hampshire, Washington

Double rainbow
Two states visible

State by State

In yesterday's blog post, I took a high-level look at the EPA's proposed carbon rules: The Carbon Regulations: Now What They Seem to Be. I concluded that the rules were political, backwards, unenforceable, and an open door for legal fees.

That was the overview.  Today, I will focus on three states of special interest to me: Vermont, New Hampshire, and Washington State.

Vermont and New Hampshire

In the op-ed I wrote for local papers, I compared Vermont and New Hampshire.

Vermont: Even after Vermont Yankee shuts down and Vermont begins importing more carbon-heavy power, Vermont will be a poster child for low-carbon energy. We won't be burning fossil fuels in-state.  We will have exported our compliance issues even as we import our electricity.

New Hampshire: New Hampshire is already a low-carbon state, getting only 10% of its electricity from coal. The EPA wants the state to cut back its utility carbon footprint by 46%.  New Hampshire hopes that its participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative will meet the new rules.

Guy Page of Vermont Energy Partnership wrote about Vermont's future with the new EPA regulations.  His op-ed also appeared in many local papers.  As he wrote: Despite EPA "pass," Vermont faces carbon reduction challenges. We had different terms for the same phenomenon. What  I call "exporting

Guy Page
plus
an ancestor

compliance issues, " Page describes as "being at the mercy of other state's plans and costs."  

Page knows the specifics about Vermont's electricity contracts and sources. His well-researched white paper on Vermont utility contracts should be required reading for anyone interested in this region's electricity: Vermont Electricity at a Glance: Vermont utilities’ electricity generation sources, contracts  and rates March 26, 2013

Washington State

At Forbes, James Conca writes about Washington state, which has an incredibly low-carbon fuel mix (mostly hydro and nuclear).  As typical for these backwards EPA rules, Washington must cut its carbon emissions by over 70% (yes, you read that right.)  Since Washington coal plants are due to retire, the state will be able to achieve the EPA goals. Conca's article focuses on Energy Northwest, a major utility in Washington.  He summarizes the situation very well: Nuclear-Renewable Mix Is Just What the EPA Ordered.

-----------
About the pictures

I usually source graphics from Wikipedia, but today I am using two of my own pictures.  The first shows a double rainbow over the Connecticut River on July 27. I took it from an upstairs bedroom window. The picture shows two states.  The pine trees in the foreground grow on our lawn in Vermont: the hills across the river belong to New Hampshire.  The double rainbow belongs to itself.

The second picture shows Guy Page standing in the State House in Montpelier.  Page is standing next to the official portrait of his great-grandfather, Vermont Governor Urban Woodbury.  Woodbury lost an arm in the Civil War: if you look closely at the portrait, you can see the empty sleeve.

About my op-ed

So far, my op-ed has appeared in Vermont Digger, True North Reports, Valley News, The Commons of Brattleboro, and the St. Albans Messenger.  It was originally published in the Valley News. I plan to publish it on this blog in the near future.