Environment & Energy
Related: About this forumTVA, Eyeing Coal Phaseout by 2035, Will Rely on Nuclear
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) expects to phase out its coal generation by 2035, but achieving net-zero carbon emissions without raising power prices or adversely affecting reliability will require substantial investments in energy storage and carbon capture and sequestration (CCS). TVA also will need to extend the lifetime of its nuclear power, and adopt the use of small modular reactors (SMRs), said Jeffrey Lyash, its president and CEO.
During a fireside chat with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va) on April 28 hosted by the nonprofit international think tank the Atlantic Councilan event focused on the future of low carbon generation in the Appalachian regionLyash noted the self-funded U.S. corporate agency has already retired 60% of its coal generation. Our coal units will continue to retire over the next 15 years because theyve reached the end of life, he said.
However, TVAs 2035 coal phaseout is still an aspirational target that will depend on environmental impact studies, and ultimately, a board-approved recommendation by the company, spokesperson Jim Hopson told POWER. While TVA does not intend to invest in its coal plants to extend their lifetimes and it knows the path that it generally wants to take, environmental impact statements sometimes can take years to fully prepare and to complete all the necessary studies, so it is unlikely that the board will receive a recommendation for all the plants simultaneously. he explained. Its possible, but more than likely, coal will be phased [out] over a period of a few years.
The declaration is still a noteworthy development for TVA, which federal legislation created in 1933. As the nations largest public power supplier today, the entity has a footprint that serves 10 million people, including in most of Tennessee, northern Alabama, northeastern Mississippi, and southwestern Kentucky and portions of northern Georgia, western North Carolina, and southwestern Virginia.
***
more: https://www.powermag.com/tva-eyeing-coal-phaseout-by-2035-will-rely-on-nuclear/
Nowhere mentioned in the article is the fact that the reason it's called the Tennessee Valley Authority in the first place is that it was originally created to harvest the power-generating potential of the Tennessee River and its tributaries; that's why the Oak Ridge gaseous diffusion plant was built in TN during WWII, as well as aluminum plants (think electrolysis). When I was growing up in northern AL that was what TVA was known for -- building dams. Here a dam, there a dam, dam dam dam dam dammity dam ! Toward the end of their dam-building phase they got pretty high-handed about forcing people off their land, flooding traditional NA tribal lands, etc., turning activists against them (see e.g. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Hearings/rohIuffBpWMC?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=Whitehead beginning on p.97). In one particularly infamous case, they bulldozed a NA widow's home with all her goods inside, leaving her weeping over her smashed wedding china. Although TVA brought cheap electricity and economic growth to the area, pubic opinion began to turn less favorable over such issues. Their oldest nuclear plant, at Browns Ferry, generated a lot of controversy over reported construction problems (and rumored worse). I was rather surprised when I learned that they have been building coal plants since the 1940's and that coal became their main source of electricity (I moved out of the area in my teenage years, or maybe I would have learned more about this as it happened, but the coal operations seem to have generated a lot less publicity at the time than the dams and nuclear plants). Their NG-burning plants also seem to have gotten less notice.
Well, now it looks like they are phasing out all those coal plants, and a number of them have been torn down already (Google "TVA demolition" for some satisfying videos). The future of the TVA seems to be nuclear, which I suspect comes as a big surprise to many in the area. It certainly does to me; I thought they had unofficially put off more nuclear plans for quite some time, last I had heard.
Loki Liesmith
(4,602 posts)hunter
(38,310 posts)Alas, we'll probably keep burning natural gas because it's "better than coal" and keeps the solar and wind energy fantasies alive.
70sEraVet
(3,493 posts)We live near a 50 year old coal-burning plant on the Cumberland River. The river provides the water for the boilers, and also allows the mountains of coal to be transported by barges.
It seems that with modern technology, the movement of the river could be used to generate the power without altering the river. There is such a thing as Run-of-the-River power, where a dam is not needed (eliminating the need to displace large numbers of people).
Please check this out;
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Run-of-the-river_hydroelectricity