The High Cost of Nuclear Power

[fascisthunter]

The High Cost of Nuclear Power
Joe Romm Testifies in the Senate
By Joseph Romm | July 16, 2008

CAPAF's Joseph Romm testifies today to the Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. Read the full testimony.

Nuclear power generates approximately 20 percent of all U.S. electricity. And because it is a low-carbon source of around-the-clock power, it has received renewed interest as concern grows over the effect of greenhouse gas emissions on our climate.

Yet nuclear power’s own myriad limitations will constrain its growth, especially in the near term. These include:

* Prohibitively high, and escalating, capital costs
* Production bottlenecks in key components needed to build plants
* Very long construction times
* High electricity prices from new plants


http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/07/nuclear_cost.html

[diane in sf]

1. Don't forget dealing with nuclear wastes, this hasn't been solved yet after all

the years of use and subsidies of this industry.

[fascisthunter]

3. and the long term effects of that waste

on the environment.... expensive cleanups.

[ben_meyers]

7. I'll guarantee you that someday, no matter how deep they bury it

we will be digging up that "waste" to be reprocessed and used. Keep in mind that in the early days of the petroleum industry gasoline was considered a "waste" by product of the refining process.

[ben_meyers]

2. How does Romm explain what has caused these problems?

I've asked him in the past to explain how the largest nuclear power plant could have been built over 20 years ago and what has caused the problems now? Over regulation and just plain stupidity from people like Joe maybe?


PALO VERDE NUCLEAR PLANT AZ.

The facility is on 4,000 acres (16 km²) of land and consists of three Combustion Engineering pressurized water reactors, each with an original capacity of 1.27 gigawatts electrical, current (2007) maximum capacity of 1.24 gigawatts electrical, and typical operating capacity 70%-95% of this. The plant is a major source of power for Phoenix and Southern California, capable of serving about 4 million people. The plant provides about 35% of the electricity generated in Arizona each year. The plant was fully operational by 1988, taking twelve years to build and costing $5.9 billion, eventually employing 2,386 people. The plant employs 2,055 full-time on-site workers.

It supplies electricity at a production cost (including fuel, maintenance and operation) of 1.33 U.S. cents per kilowatt-hour. This is cheaper than coal (2.26 cents/kWh) or natural gas (4.54 cents/kWh) in the region at the same time (2002), but more expensive than hydro (0.63 cents/kWh). Assuming a 60-year plant life and 5% long-term cost of capital, the depreciation and capital costs not included in the previous marginal cost for Palo Verde are approximately another 1.4 cents per kilowatt-hour. In 2002, the wholesale value of the electricity produced was 2.5 cents/kWh. By 2007, the wholesale value of electricity at the Palo Verde hub was 6.33 cents/kWh. Nuclear power generators are very profitable when fossil fuel prices are high.

Due to its location in the Arizona desert, Palo Verde is the only nuclear generating facility in the world that is not located adjacent to a large body of water. Instead, it uses treated sewage from several nearby municipalities to meet its cooling water needs, recycling 20 billion US gallons (76,000,000 m³) of wastewater each year. At the nuclear plant site, the wastewater is further treated and stored in an 80 acre (324,000 m²) reservoir for use in the plant's cooling towers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palo_Verde_Nuclear_Generating_Station

And yes it's in my backyard, and I sleep well at night thanks to reasonable air conditioning bills.

[Clear Blue Sky]

4. What are some good/practical/economic alternatives?

[fascisthunter]

5. wind, solar, tidal, and geothermal

there will be many alternatives, not just one.

[phantom power]

6. How much will that electricity cost?

[fascisthunter]

8. guess we'll see

[phantom power]

10. I wonder if Senor Romm will apologize when we confirm it's more expensive than nukes.

[fascisthunter]

11. I Doubt your wish will come true

and I'm sure it pisses you off. Have a nice day...

[phantom power]

12. True, I'm full of boundless rage...

It's the source of my super powers.

[XemaSab]

9. How many is a....

Oh, wait, wrong forum. x(

[Clear Blue Sky]

13. They are indeed alternatives

but with current technology only supply a fraction of the electric needs of the country.

Downsides too. No one seems to want a wind farm in their back yard.

[hunter]

14. I'll fight your tidal plants.

There are things a lot worse than nuclear power, and tidal power is one of those things.

[glitch]

15. Here's a good interview with Amory Lovins on how cost-effective nuclear energy isn't

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/7/16/amory_lovins_expanding_nuclear_power_makes

[hunter]

16. Lovins runs a public relations firm, but he calls it something else.

His environmental footprint would be quite a bit smaller if he packed up and moved his offices and his self to downtown Denver.

You know, Lovins should pay me for my green advice... :P