Sunday, April 20, 2008
News From the Week of April 14, 2008
Domenici Pans Yucca-Only Approach
Cashing in on Your Solar Savings: Bill Would Force Utilities to Pay for Excess Power
NRC Issues Report on Italy Waste
Justices to Decide Environmental Dispute Involving Utility Industry
Senate Passes One-Year Extension For Renewable Energy PTC
NRC Indicates 'Human Performance' Issues at Perry Nuclear Plant
Xcel Requests Extensions on Nuclear Plant Licenses
Utah Nuclear Waste Company Ramps Up Campaign Contributions
Unit 1 Corrections To Be Applied To Other 2 Reactors at Brown's Ferry NPP
Activists Warn Ontario Taxpayers on Hook for More Cost Overruns at Bruce Nuke Plant
Domenici Pans Yucca-Only Approach
Apr 11 - Las Vegas Review - Journal
Political support for a Yucca Mountain repository eroded further on Wednesday when a leading Senate advocate of nuclear power said it has become "foolhardy" to plan to store used nuclear fuel at the Nevada site.
Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., said the strategy to place spent nuclear fuel underground has become badly outdated in light of advances in waste reprocessing that could wring more energy from the assemblies. Even after nuclear fuel has been recycled, the resulting waste products might not need to be placed in the Nevada volcanic ridge, he said. At that point, the waste would be less toxic and could be stored safely in salt formations in New Mexico or elsewhere.
"The current strategy of limiting our options to a permanent repository for the disposal of spent fuel is deeply flawed," Domenici said. He said he was writing a bill that would alter the "Yucca only" approach.
"I'm talking about a bill that will start over and draft new law that puts America on a new path for commercial waste," he said after a Senate energy and water subcommittee hearing on the Yucca Mountain budget.
The senator's comments are reflective of a shift among key lawmakers frustrated by a decade-long delay in developing the Yucca Mountain repository, and who now are more amenable to alternatives they say are becoming more viable.
In the meantime, the Department of Energy continues to work toward licensing and building an industrial site 100 miles northwest of Las Vegas to handle 77,000 tons of waste generated by the government and commercial utilities.
At the hearing, senators praised DOE nuclear waste director Ward Sproat, saying he has put the Yucca program finally on a track. But Domenici, a 35-year Senate veteran who has written a book on nuclear policy and authored key bills promoting the technology, said it might be too late.
"I am not saying that Yucca should go away, but I am saying you don't need Yucca" for managing power plant fuel, he said. "It would never have been the direct policy of the country for Yucca if you were going to have recycling like we are talking about. I want to make it very clear that I would not stop Yucca flat now," Domenici said. "I wouldn't just say cut it off because it may be used for something," perhaps burial of waste from Navy ship reactors, other military nuclear waste and other highly radioactive material that cannot be recycled.
Domenici said he was writing a bill that would divert a portion of the nuclear waste fund being set aside to build Yucca Mountain. Some of the funds in the account, which now totals $21 billion, would be steered to finding and developing reprocessing sites, and temporary nuclear fuel storage nearby. The bill would direct the Department of Energy to negotiate with interested communities.
Domenici is retiring from the Senate at the end of the year and was uncertain whether his bill would go anywhere. He said he is shopping it to senators and influential members of the House.
"This one I am really going big on," he said. "I don't know whether we can get this done while I am still a senator. ... But I want to lay down at least a cornerstone to what I think is absolutely imperative."
(c) 2008 Las Vegas Review - Journal.
TOP
Cashing in on Your Solar Savings: Bill Would Force Utilities to Pay for
Excess Power
Apr 12 - San Jose Mercury News
Electricity generated by a solar roof cuts a homeowner's utility bill, but some of those folks are upset when they learn that the best they can do is end up with a $0 bill, no matter how much power they produce.
That could be about to change.
AB 1920, working through California's Assembly, might mean that big utilities, such as Pacific Gas & Electric, would have to write checks to customers whose solar-roof power generation exceeds the amount they use.
California could be the first state with such a program, although others, including Michigan, Minnesota and Rhode Island, are considering similar strategies. Under California's Solar Initiative and current laws, the size of a solar installation is limited so that generation and consumption are roughly equal.
That's why Chris Bellizzi, who lives in a 5,100-square-foot home in Saratoga with a 3.73-kilowatt photovoltaic array on his roof, ended up owing PG&E just 25 cents in September. (Customers with solar systems reconcile generation/consumption accounting with PG&E once a year.)
Bellizzi sees an unfairness in the system. "If you owe them, you've got to send them a check," said the owner of a tree service. "If they owe you, they'll pocket it."
In fact, he said he abandoned his usual power-conserving ways last year when it looked as if PG&E would get $100 he feels he earned from his solar roof. "I used a bunch of power I normally wouldn't," he said, telling his kids they could run the air conditioning more.
That's just the type of "perverse message" that prompted Assemblyman Jared Huffman, D-San Rafael, to introduce AB 1920. The measure passed the assembly's utilities and commerce committee this week and will be heard by the natural resources committee Monday.
The state, through the California Solar Initiative, wants 1 million solar roofs. Huffman said his bill will reduce some of the impediments to getting to that goal.
Right now, the size of a solar installation directly relates to the amount of power a homeowner or business uses, he said, so bigger systems that make more power aren't allowed. "If they generate surplus power beyond their own energy needs, that's a gift to the utility," he said. "There's no compensation."
That's enough to keep some folks from installing solar, Huffman said, and it certainly limits the size of installations.
"This bill for many people will improve the economics," he said. PG&E, based in San Francisco, has 20,000 solar customers right now, generating 175-megawatts of electricity. Of those, spokesman Keely Wachs said, 22 percent have a financial credit at year's end. That's because the state mandates that utilities pay solar owners a "premium rate" of 30 to 35 cents a kilowatt-hour for the power they generate. But even if they earn it, those customers don't get the extra money.
Only 7 percent of PG&E's solar customers generate more kilowatt-hours than they use, Wachs said.
The utility, which touts itself as a major proponent of solar, finds itself in the unusual position of arguing against AB 1920. PG&E feels the bill would mean that all of its customers would end up subsidizing those with solar systems, who tend to be wealthier customers. Plus, as written, the bill requires only investor-owned utilities, such as PG&E and Southern California Edison, to make payments, not municipally owned utilities, Wachs said.
The utility feels that AB 1969, passed in 2007, offers a better solution, he said. Under that law, customers can decide to become energy producers and sell power to PG&E. But with that option, they would lose both solar-initiative rebates and the premium rate for their power, earning a market rate of perhaps 9 to 10 cents a kilowatt-hour. And this would apply only to customers who decide to enter into the agreement and forgo other payments, while Huffman's AB 1920 would apply to everyone with a solar roof.
A San Francisco ratepayer advocacy group shares PG&E concerns, which itself is a rare occurrence. The Utility Reform Network, which usually criticizes PG&E for wasting customer money, opposed AB 1920. "Homeowners who generate excess electricity should be paid fairly for that electricity, but shouldn't be subsidized a third time by the rest of the ratepayers, who already fund generous subsidies for rooftop solar," said TURN staff attorney Marcel Hawiger.
Supporters of the bill include Environment California. "We should take away any disincentives there are," said Dan Jacobson, the group's legislative director. "We don't expect this to be a huge moneymaker," he said. "It's not like people won't need to get jobs and live off their solar. This will only help to pencil out solar a little faster."
Huffman said it's likely the bill will be altered to reflect some of the concerns, and questions about how much to pay for the excess power haven't been resolved. He thinks the bill's chance for passage is "pretty good."
Contact Matt Nauman at mnauman@mercurynews.com or (408) 920-5701.
TOP
NRC Issues Report on Italy Waste
Apr 11 - Deseret News (Salt Lake City)
By Stephen Speckman Deseret News
In an uncommon move this week the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued what it calls a "fact sheet" on EnergySolutions' application to import low-level radioactive waste from Italy. NRC spokesman David McIntyre said release of the document was due to an outpouring of interest that includes members of Congress. The public comment period on the issue was recently extended to June 10.
"We have received an unusually high number of comments on this application," McIntyre said. There are over 900 comments, "overwhelmingly against" EnergySolutions' proposal.
EnergySolutions wants to import up to 20,000 tons of contaminated materials from decommissioned nuclear facilities in Italy. Most of the materials would be recycled in Tennessee and less than 1,600 tons of what's left over would be shipped to Clive, Tooele County, for disposal at an EnergySolutions dump site.
EnergySolutions spokesman Mark Walker would only say Thursday that the new NRC document is part of the process. His company will continue to follow the guidelines of the process until a decision about its license is made.
McIntyre said one of the main questions the NRC answered in an April 9 letter to Rep. Bart Gordon, D-Tenn., comes down to whether EnergySolutions is properly licensed in each state to do what they're proposing. "Both Tennessee and Utah have said 'yes' to that," McIntyre said.
The gist of this week's letter to Gordon described the NRC's role as regulatory, to ensure that the import process can be done safely and securely under state and federal laws, McIntyre said.
Last month Gordon and fellow House Energy and Commerce Committee members Reps. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, and Ed Whitfield, R-Ky., sponsored legislation that would ban import of nuclear waste unless it was originally produced in the U.S. An exception would be U.S. military waste generated abroad.
According to the NRC's fact sheet, the Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act places the responsibility of regulating access to low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities on individual states. The document goes on to say that the NRC will consult with all affected states before it
grants the license to import the waste.
The NRC still expects to hear from the eight member states of the Northwest Interstate Compact on Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management, which McIntyre said is scheduled to meet in May to discuss the application. There may also be an adjudicatory hearing for the Atomic Safety Board's chance to weigh in on the matter.
Utah's own advisory Radiation Control Board wrote a letter to the NRC opposing the import proposal. Gov. Jon Hunstman Jr. penned a cover letter to the NRC urging it to be the deciding agency on whether portions of the "finite" amount of this country's disposal space for radioactive material should be set aside for importing waste from other countries.
If EnergySolutions can clear all of the hurdles currently in its way, it could begin importing waste from Italy as soon as August. To critics of the proposal, the NRC's fact sheet this week has only added fuel to a growing opposition movement.
"Though it may contain useful information, people should not take issuance of a fact sheet to mean the license application will be opposed by the NRC," Friends of the Earth's Tom Clements said Thursday. "Pressure should be kept up to stop the license and prevent Tennessee, Utah and the nation from becoming an international nuclear waste dumping ground."
E-mail: sspeckman@desnews.com
TOP
Justices to Decide Environmental Dispute Involving Utility Industry
WASHINGTON (The Associated Press) - Apr 14 - By PETE YOST Associated Press
Writer
The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear an environmental case in which utility companies want to revive an industry-friendly regulation put in place by the Bush administration. The dispute with environmental groups revolves around the harm
companies cause when they draw water from rivers and lakes to cool electric generating equipment, then return it to the waterway. The process kills aquatic life.
The Environmental Protection Agency allowed the industry to forgo the most expensive solution, installing closed-cycle cooling systems which would cost billions of dollars at 550 generating units around the country including 104 nuclear power plants. The units account for 40 percent of the country's energy production.
The EPA rule allowed the companies to decide how to comply with the Clean Water Act by conducting cost-benefit analyses of the available options. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York City ruled against the companies, saying they must adopt the best technology available.
The appeals court called into question EPA's conclusion that closed-cycle cooling costs could not be reasonably borne by the industry. Last month, the Bush administration said in a court filing that it would support the industry position were the case to come before the Supreme Court.
With a new administration taking office next January, an EPA run by different presidential appointees might choose to change positions on the issue.
Robert Goldstein, general counsel at Riverkeeper Inc., one of the environmental groups involved in the dispute, said "it's about time this law enacted in 1972 get some teeth."
"We've seen this so many times with this administration, regulations basically to alleviate the burdens of the law rather than to impose the burdens of the law," said Goldstein.
The cases are Entergy Corp. v. EPA, 07-588; PSEG v. Riverkeeper, 07-589; and Utility Water Act Group v. Riverkeeper, 07-597.
TOP
Senate Passes One-Year Extension For Renewable Energy PTC
Wind Energy Weekly - 4/14/08
The U.S. Senate overwhelmingly approved a housing bill amendment from Senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and John Ensign (R-Nev.) that includes an extension of the renewable energy production tax credit (PTC).
The Clean Energy Stimulus Act provides for a one-year extension of the PTC, a federal incentive which provides a tax credit of 2 cents per kWh to wind farms and other renewable energy facilities for electricity produced. Following the vote, AWEA released the following statement by Senior Director of Governmental & Public Affairs Gregory Wetstone:
"Today's 88 to 8 Senate floor vote on the Clean Energy Stimulus Act is a testament to the strong support for renewable energy across the political spectrum. We are especially grateful to Senators Maria Cantwell and John Ensign and the many bipartisan cosponsors of this legislation. We look forward now to working with our many friends in the U.S. House of Representatives to secure an extension of the renewable energy tax credit, spurring economic growth and creating jobs even as we move to reduce global warming pollution."
This was the fourth time the full Senate has voted on a PTC extension. The three previous efforts narrowly fell short of the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster, in two cases by a single vote, as a result of partisan disagreements over issues related to how the credits are paid for. This latest vote is a demonstration of the broad bipartisan support the wind industry can secure when it is able to separate the PTC from other sources of controversy.
The next challenge is to get the House of Representatives to support this approach. The House has on multiple occasions passed a long-term PTC extension coupled with provisions designed to offset the budget impacts of an extension through the elimination of tax incentives for the oil and gas industry. Wind energy advocates generally seek to decouple the PTC extension from issues related to tax policy for the oil and gas industry to allow for smoother passage.
AWEA urges its members to contact their Senators to thank those who supported the Cantwell- Ensign amendment and to express disappointment to the few who did not.
TOP
NRC Indicates 'Human Performance' Issues at Perry Nuclear Plant
PAINESVILLE, Ohio (The Associated Press) - Apr 14
Regulators overseeing the Perry nuclear power plant in northeast Ohio have expressed concerns about staff performance. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has sent a letter to the power plant's management about what is described as "an adverse trend in human performance."
Akron, Ohio-based FirstEnergy Corp. operates the plant in North Perry, about 25 miles east of Cleveland. Company spokesman Todd Schneider says FirstEnergy intends to explain at a public meeting Tuesday in Painesville how it has a plan to satisfy NRC concerns with how the Perry plant staff follows procedures.
In May of last year the NRC ended a period of heightened regulatory oversight at Perry.
TOP
Xcel Requests Extensions on Nuclear Plant Licenses
MINNEAPOLIS (The Associated Press) - Apr 15
Xcel Energy says it wants to extend licenses to operate the Prairie Island nuclear plant near Red Wing. Xcel submitted applications Tuesday for 20-year license extensions for the two reactors at Prairie Island. The plant's current licenses expire in 2013 and 2014.
Xcel also wants to increase Prairie Island's power generation capacity. The company says it will ask the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission later this spring to increase the generating capacity of each reactor by about 80 megawatts. Right now each reactor generates up to 538
megawatts.
Xcel also says it will ask state regulators to increase the number of used fuel storage containers at the site.
Xcel officials say the Prairie Island plant generates about 20 percent of the electricity used by Upper Midwest customers.
Editor's note: The plant is owned by Northern States Power Company (NSP), a subsidiary of Xcel Energy, and is operated by the Nuclear Management Company (NMC). In 1991, the company requested permission from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission to eventually store waste in 48 dry casks on the site. Opposition by environmentalists and the neighboring Prairie Island tribe led the Minnesota Legislature to decrease the number of allowed casks to 17. Eventually, those casks filled, and Xcel Energy requested that the limit be expanded beyond 17 casks. The legislature granted the request, but required the company to make greater use of renewable energy such as wind power and to pay the local Indian community up to $2.25 million per year to help with evacuation improvements and the acquisition and development of new land and to help pay for a health study and emergency management activities.
TOP
Utah Nuclear Waste Company Ramps Up Campaign Contributions
SALT LAKE CITY (The Associated Press) - Apr 16 - By BROCK VERGAKIS
Associated Press Writer
A Utah disposal company seeking federal permission to import more than 20,000 tons of nuclear waste from Italy has raised its campaign contributions to lawmakers by hundreds of thousands of dollars. Salt Lake City-based EnergySolutions Inc. is aggressively donating to members of key energy committees in Congress as it increasingly seeks lucrative federal contracts and legislation beneficial to the nuclear power industry.
Since 2005, the company's political action committee, executives and investors have poured nearly $400,000 into congressional campaigns through January, up from about $40,000 in the four previous years, Federal Election Commission reports show.
The company's growing influence in Washington will be tested this year as it tries to kill a bill that would ban the importation of low-level radioactive foreign waste, which would be disposed at its dump in western Utah's desert.
"I'm sure this means many millions of dollars to them, so I'm sure they're going to be working hard to stop it," said Rep. Bart Gordon, D-Tenn., the bill's co-sponsor. U.S. Rep. Ed Whitfield, R-Ky., is also a co-sponsor.
EnergySolutions increased lobbyist spending from $680,000 in 2006 to more than $1 million last year, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan research group.
The company already handles some foreign waste, but the amount it wants to import from Italy would be the largest ever from another country, Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman David McIntyre said.
The volume and the publicity surrounding it have generated more than 900 public comments on the company's application to the NRC, he said. Import-license applications typically don't receive more than a handful of comments, if any.
EnergySolutions says it welcomes the comments but contends Gordon's bill is unnecessary.
"The NRC has the scientific and technical expertise to make thoughtful decisions based on the facts," EnergySolutions spokesman Mark Walker said.
The company has never shied away from the fact that it donates heavily to state politicians, but the emphasis on contributing to nearly four dozen federal lawmakers from across the country is new.
Political giving, Walker said, "gives us the opportunity to participate with elected officials and offer solutions to growing concerns within the energy sector."
Last year, EnergySolutions CEO Steve Creamer donated the maximum allowed by law - $28,500 - to Democratic and Republican senatorial campaign committees.
The biggest recipient of EnergySolutions' recent spending spree is Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., an ardent supporter of nuclear energy. Graham has received $24,000 in campaign contributions from EnergySolutions' PAC and more than $19,000 from company investors and
executives since December 2006. He is encouraging the NRC to allow the construction of two nuclear power plants in South Carolina, where EnergySolutions manages the site through which the Italian waste could be imported.
The company wants to import the waste through the ports of Charleston, S.C., or New Orleans for processing in Tennessee.
After processing, about 8 percent, or some 1,600 tons, would be shipped to EnergySolutions' Utah facility, about 70 miles west of Salt Lake City, for disposal. It is the largest and only privately owned radioactive-waste dump in the United States.
The plan has drawn opposition from environmental groups.
"Public opinion should rule and not political opinion that's influenced by campaign donations," said Tom Clements of Friends of the Earth in Columbia, S.C. He fears Charleston will become the nation's gateway for nuclear waste, putting it at risk in the event of an accident.
The bill by Gordon, Whitfield, and Jim Matheson, D-Utah, would allow only nuclear waste that originated in the United States or came from an overseas American military base. "If we start taking it from other countries, then it's going to diminish our ability to take care of our waste with a rejuvenated nuclear power industry," Gordon said.
EnergySolutions says capacity is not an issue, insisting that the Italian waste would represent less than 1 percent of all waste disposed at its Utah site each year.
Gordon said the bill would also limit the possibility of terrorists targeting a shipment at a U.S. port.
It's unclear when the legislation will receive a hearing, but the NRC is expected to rule on the Italian waste this summer.
Gordon, Whitefield and Matheson sit on the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Since 2005, committee chairman John Dingell, D-Mich., has received $6,000 from EnergySolutions' PAC, while executives and company investors have given him more than $7,000 since December. Matheson has received $6,000.
EnergySolutions has spent heavily to polish its image and bought the naming rights to the arena where the NBA's Utah Jazz play. It became a publicly traded company in November.
TOP
Unit 1 Corrections To Be Applied To Other 2 Reactors at Brown's Ferry NPP
Apr 17 - McClatchy-Tribune Regional News - Karen Middleton The News Courier,
Athens, Ala.
Earlier this year the Nuclear Regulatory Commission assigned a yellow performance indicator for the newly restarted Unit 2 reactor because of five unplanned scrams in its first 7,000 hours of operation.
The NRC uses color-coded performance indicators and inspection findings to evaluate performance at all nuclear power plants. The colors start with "green" and then increase to "white," "yellow" or "red," commensurate with the safety significance of the issues involved.
While yellow indicates "substantial safety issues" in the grading system, NRC Region II officials said in a Wednesday meeting at Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant that all three reactors "operated in a manner that preserved public health and safety" throughout 2007.
Unit 1 was restarted May 22, 2007, after a 22-year shutdown and a five-year, $1.8 billion recovery. The Tennessee Valley Authority took Unit 1 off line in 1985 because of safety concerns.
Unit 1 is one of just eight reactors of a total 104 in the U.S. to receive the yellow performance indicator.
Thierry Ross, senior NRC resident inspector said within the industry, 7,000 hours is not enough hours to give an idea of overall reactor performance. "Typically, it takes 36 months of data for a valid performance indicator," said Ross.
NRC Public Affairs Officer Roger Hannah further explained during a break that, "If you have a bad period, the findings are not valid until your have larger period of time to gauge performance. It should not be gauged on an isolated period."
It was determined that the Unit 1 shutdowns -- or scrams -- resulted from problems in the electronic hydraulic controls and in the moisture separator drain tank.
Browns Ferry Site Vice President Rusty West said the lessons learned from Unit 1 reactor's first 7,000 hours would be applied to units 2 and 3. "We do value the process and agree," said West.
West said that although the yellow performance indicator might make it seem that plant officials do not value the health and safety of the public, that is not the case.
"We will make sure we resolve this before going forward," said West. "Safety is paramount to TVA. All the corrective actions will be applied to all three units."
Unit 3 reactor is currently down for refueling. TVA spokesman Craig Beasley said that when Unit 3 was taken out of service for refueling and maintenance a month ago, it was expected it would be off line for two or three months.
Typically, those in the nuclear industry are vague about the length of outages because of how it can affect the price of energy on the open market.
NRC will conduct a supplemental inspection of Unit 1 in the summer.
TOP
Activists Warn Ontario Taxpayers on Hook for More Cost Overruns at Bruce Nuke Plant
(The Associated Press) - Apr 17
Environmentalists are warning that Ontario electricity consumers are on the hook for some of the escalating costs of refurbishing two reactors at the Bruce nuclear station.
Bruce Power says the estimated cost for bringing the two reactors back on line could be $3.4 billion, up from the original estimate of $2.5 billion.
The World Wildlife Fund says the province's hydro customers will have to pay more than $237 million as their share of the cost overruns to date.
WWF spokesman Keith Stewart says that figure dwarfs the $163 million the Liberal government spent on energy conservation programs during its first mandate.
Bruce Power spokesman Steve Cannon says the nuclear sector isn't alone in facing higher costs for construction materials and labour.
Cannon says about 60 per cent of the work on the two reactors has been completed, including many jobs such as replacing steam generators that had never been done before.
The two reactors at the Lake Huron nuclear plant that were idled in the 1990s are scheduled to be back on line by mid-2009 or early 2010.
TOP
Monday, April 14, 2008
News From the Week of April 7, 2008
Sierra Club Sues Duke Energy Over Coal-gasification Plant
Study: New Street Light Technology Could Save Energy, Money
Local Woman Takes On a Power Giant
"Unusual Event" at Waterford Nuclear Power Complex
Bills Offer More Tax Breaks to Save, Produce Alternative Energy
Labor, Environmentalists Join Forces to Launch National 'Green Jobs for America' Campaign
NRC Monitoring Unusual Event At Millstone 2 Nuclear Plant
US Senate Votes For Solar, Wind Tax Credits; Faces Hurdles
Senate Passes Tax Incentives for Energy Efficiency
Feds Propose Florida Power & Light Fine for Sleeping Security Guards at Nuclear Plant
Sierra Club Sues Duke Energy Over Coal-gasification Plant
INDIANAPOLIS (The Associated Press) - Apr 4 - By RICK CALLAHAN Associated
Press Writer
The Sierra Club is suing Duke Energy Corp. over an aging coal-fired power plant in southwestern Indiana set to be replaced by a high-tech plant, alleging that the current facility violates provisions of the Clean Air Act. The federal lawsuit filed Thursday in Indianapolis is the Sierra Club's latest action targeting Duke's planned $2 billion coal gasification power plant in Edwardsport. It alleges that Duke has not obtained required permits for changes it has made over the years to the 160-megawatt coal-fired plant and has failed to install rigorous pollution controls the group contends are required under the Clean Air Act.
Because of that, the lawsuit claims, Duke cannot claim emission reductions from the shutdown of the older plant toward its new 630-megawatt coal gasification plant, for which the company obtained a state air permit in January.
"That plant has been operating illegally without pollution controls for over a decade so they can't take credit and claim voluntary reductions when those emissions have been illegal for all those years," said Bruce Nilles, a Madison, Wis.-based attorney for the Sierra Club.
Duke spokeswoman Angeline Protogere said Duke's Edwardsport coal-fired power plant operates in full compliance with the Clean Air Act. She said the air permit approved in January by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management is a "legal air permit." Because the new plant's future emissions were compared with the existing plant's emissions as part of the permitting process, Protogere said Duke contended that it did not have to go though a review to identify the best available control technology. She said IDEM agreed with that position in approving the permit.
"Some critics don't acknowledge the plant's advanced technology because they don't want anything to do with coal," Protogere said in a statement. "Once this plant is completed, it will be one of the cleanest coal-fired plants in the world."
Protogere said construction is under way on the new coal gasification plant along the White River near Edwardsport, about 15 miles northeast of Vincennes. The current plant was built in stages between 1944 and 1951, she said.
The Sierra Club's suit asks the court to prohibit Duke from building the new plant and from continuing to operate the current plant unless the company makes the emissions control upgrades and obtains the permits the group maintains are needed.
Dan Murray, assistant commissioner for IDEM's Office of Air Quality, said the Sierra Club's contentions of Clean Air violations are not correct. "I am not aware of any pending or open enforcement actions against Duke for any of these things the Sierra Club is alleging," he said.
Duke says the plant, tentatively slated to open in 2012, stands to become the nation's first large scale project to use coal gasification technology. Unlike traditional coal-fired power plants that burn coal to produce electricity, coal gasification converts coal into a synthesis gas that's processed to remove pollutants such as mercury and sulfur. That gas is then burned in a traditional turbine power plant to produce electricity.
In February, the Sierra Club joined three other groups in appealing Indiana's approval of an air permit for the new plant. They contended that plant would allow air pollution increases that would raise nearby residents' risk of heart and lung ailments and other conditions.
They also warned that the plant would boost emissions of pollutants linked to global warming and burden Duke ratepayers with paying for a costly coal plant.
TOP
Study: New Street Light Technology Could Save Energy, Money
WASHINGTON (The Associated Press) - Apr 7 - By SARAH KARUSH Associated Press
Writer
The nation's roads are a major source of greenhouse gases - but it's not just from the cars and trucks traveling on them. The lamps that light the way for those vehicles gobble up their share of energy, too.
By switching to a more efficient lighting for their roads, the 10 largest metropolitan areas could reduce annual carbon dioxide emissions by 1.2 million metric tons - the equivalent of taking 212,000 vehicles off the road - and save $90 million a year, according to a study released in March.
"Even if there wasn't the thought of global warming, this would make sense because it saves electricity, it saves taxpayer dollars," said Robert Grow, the study's author and government relations director of the Greater Washington Board of Trade. "It's really a no-brainer."
Grow wrote the report as part of a fellowship on sustainable growth funded by the Ford Foundation through the American Chamber of Commerce Executives. He focused on two strategies. One would be to simply change the type of lamps used to electricity-sipping light-emitting diodes, or LEDs. The other would be to create a centrally controlled street-light network that allows managers to adjust brightness based on environmental conditions and to quickly pinpoint malfunctioning lights - including ones that stay on in broad daylight.
Grow said he was surprised to learn that more hasn't been done already to improve street light efficiency around the country.
Perhaps the biggest effort is in Ann Arbor, Mich. The city announced in October that it would convert all its downtown street lights - some 1,400 - to LED lights, an effort estimated to cut electricity use in half. The Ann Arbor lights are manufactured by Durham, N.C.-based Cree Inc.; other manufacturers promise similar savings.
LED traffic lights have become common in much of the country, but LEDs that produce white light, instead of red or green, use newer technology. Ram Sarma, street light coordinator for Virginia's Arlington County, said LED street lights have only now been around long enough for local decision-makers to have data about actual costs and potential savings.
Arlington, which has committed itself to reducing greenhouse gases produced by the county government by 10 percent from 2000 to 2012, is in the process of installing five LED street lights. The county wants to gather feedback from drivers on the quality of the light they produce before it embarks on a wholesale replacement project.
The high pressure sodium lamps that the county now uses are about a decade old. They are about 25 percent to 30 percent more efficient than the mercury vapor lamps they replaced, Sarma said.
Besides LEDs, Grow looked at the centrally managed street light network being implemented in the city of Oslo, Norway. The system feeds data into a control center that keeps track of lights that need to be fixed and automatically dims street lights based on the season, local weather and
traffic density. Street lights at dawn, for example, don't have to be at full power to still do their job, said Julia O'Shaughnessy, a spokeswoman for San Jose, Calif.-based Echelon Corp., which owns the technology being used in Oslo.
Sarma said he had heard about that technology but that the capital costs were too high and potential savings not great enough for Arlington to try it.
Grow estimated it would cost nearly $70 million to install such a system throughout the entire Washington region and would take about seven years to pay for itself in energy and maintenance savings.
Based on Oslo's experience and the estimates of LED streetlight manufacturers, Grow's analysis assumed a 50 percent reduction in electricity usage for any kind of street light improvement. He calculated the Washington region alone could save $6 million a year on electricity and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by nearly 78,000 metric tons.
Grow then extrapolated his basic assumptions to the 10 largest metropolitan areas. Besides Washington, they include New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas, Philadelphia, Houston, Miami, Atlanta and Detroit.
Maryland State Highway Administrator Neil Pedersen said his office was reviewing Grow's report and that it would seriously consider efficiency improvements to the lights on the roads it operates.
"There are capital costs associated with it that we need to understand," he cautioned. "There's still questions about what the longevity is of some of these lights."
TOP
Local Woman Takes On a Power Giant
Apr 6 - McClatchy-Tribune Regional News - Stephanie Vosk Cape Cod Times,
Hyannis, Mass.
For Christmas, Mary Lampert asked her husband for a nuclear engineer.
For her birthday -- the Duxbury resident will turn 66 tomorrow --Lampert is just looking for some peace and quiet.
Since moving to town in 1987, Lampert has been fighting for change at the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station in nearby Plymouth. She formed the citizen group Pilgrim Watch in 2004. She has spent day after day, dollar after dollar, preparing to almost single-handedly take on Pilgrim's owners at a hearing before a panel of judges from the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board on Thursday.
Pilgrim Watch has about 70 members, but it's Lampert who has researched endlessly and taught herself how to battle a power giant. It's Lampert who has succeeded in a demand for a hearing, a stage only one other citizens group has reached in the relicensing of about 50 nuclear power plants across the country.
"I'm not a lawyer, I'm not a nuclear engineer, the group is unfunded," said Lampert, who has degrees in the field of sociology. The last chemistry class she attended was at the Beaver Country Day School in the ninth grade, she said.
With the nuclear engineer and hydrologist she hired in tow, Lampert will argue one reason why the plant -- about 15 miles from her house -- should not be relicensed for 20 years.
Her contention that the plant does not have an adequate plan to maintain buried tanks and pipes is the only one of many issues she raised that made it to the hearing stage.
"I have a right to live here in safety and know what's being emitted," Lampert said. "I have a right to feel secure."
Entergy Nuclear Operations, which owns the plant, will present its own experts to dispel Pilgrim Watch's argument, spokesman David Tarantino said. "The plant is saying that the plan for ensuring the integrity of underground pipes and tanks is working and they are in good condition and that we have adequate monitoring in place," he said.
Tarantino declined to speculate on the hearing's outcome or the possibility of an appeal by Entergy, but he said if the safety and licensing board makes reasonable recommendations, the plant would likely comply.
Pilgrim's license expires in 2012.
Last September, a watchdog group in New Jersey argued before the safety and licensing board that the drywell casing at the Oyster Creek Generating Station would not survive another 20-year license. A drywell casing is part of the containment system for a nuclear reactor. The board disagreed, but the case is still on appeal.
The New England Coalition on Nuclear Pollution, another citizen watchdog group, will get its hearing in July on the relicensing of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station.
Whether the watchdog groups are successful in their quest to block relicensing, the hearings draw out the relicensing process. Without hearings, decisions are handed down in about 22 months. With hearings, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission sets a 30-month timeline for relicensing decisions.
The Oyster Creek relicensing process has already gone beyond 30 months, NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said.
In most of the relicensing cases in recent years, the NRC did not get hearing requests, he said. In New Jersey, while the outcome of the Oyster Creek hearing is still up in the air, it nevertheless helped to spotlight the issue, Sheehan said.
No relicensing application has ever been denied.
"It's the way the process is designed to work," Sheehan said. "It's another opportunity for any individual group or governmental body that wants to raise issues to do that."
TOP
"Unusual Event" at Waterford Nuclear Power Complex
WATERFORD, Conn. (The Associated Press) - Apr 7
Operators at the Millstone 2 Nuclear Power plant in Waterford say they detected "an unusual event," the lowest of four emergency classifications, during preparations for a shutdown Sunday. The plant is beginning a shutdown process for refueling and maintenance.
A spokesman for Millstone owner Dominion Nuclear Connecticut says that in preparation for the refueling outage, water has to be moved through the system.
In Sunday's incident, about 1,000 gallons of water from the reactor coolant system flowed into a 500,000-gallon refueling water storage tank. Spokesman Peter Hyde and the NRC say the leak was stopped and none of the water had been released into the environment.
Some low-level radioactive gas was released through the tank's designed vent but Hyde said it was within allowed federal limits. The NRC said is evaluating the release and sent inspectors to the plant to monitor the company's actions.
TOP
Bills Offer More Tax Breaks to Save, Produce Alternative Energy
COLUMBIA, S.C. (The Associated Press) - Apr 7 - By JIM DAVENPORT Associated
Press Writer
Bills offering bigger tax breaks for South Carolina residents to buy energy efficient homes and appliances are expected to come before lawmakers this week.
"Based on everything I see, we're heading toward energy shortages up the road unless we employ energy conservation, energy efficiency and energy production," said Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell. The Charleston Republican has three bills Tuesday before the Senate Finance Committee that deal with energy-related tax breaks.
One bill eliminates sales taxes on a variety of home products that meet or exceed federal Energy Star rating requirements including refrigerators, water heaters, dishwashers, clothes washers, air conditioners, fluorescent light bulbs, programmable thermostats and doors and windows. But the items must be bought this October or April 2009 and the break is limited to $2,500 in merchandise.
"Every kilowatt hour we can save off of energy efficiency is the cheapest energy we can produce," McConnell said.
People tend to buy the cheapest and least energy efficient models because there's little incentive to look for energy efficiency in South Carolina, said Erika Hartwig, the renewable energy coordinator for the State Energy Office.
A second bill would give a sales tax break to companies buying machinery, tools or parts to produce electricity from alternative sources, including solar, wind, tides and biomass.
That kind of break and other energy production incentives have been a huge benefit for companies like Ecogy Biomass, a company that began turning soy oil into biodiesel in Estill in January.
Hal Wrigley, president of Ecogy Biomass and Knightbridge Biofuel said the soy oil for his biodiesel cost $1.75 a gallon a last year and was $5.25 a gallon last month. "Right now, the only lucrative place to sell it is over in Europe," Wrigley said.
Wrigley wants to see more incentives that encourage companies to mix biodiesel with regular diesel and tax breaks for truckers and other consumers buying biodiesel. Other bills being considered address existing incentives for people installing solar water heaters or panels to generate electricity.
State and federal income tax breaks for installing those devices have helped Bruce Wood's Sunstore Solar in Greer. South Carolina had lagged North Carolina and Georgia for years in state tax breaks, Wood said. That meant that he was doing 70 percent of his business out of state. But now 75 percent of his business is in South Carolina and his payroll has tripled to nine people.
"There's a green movement that's afoot," Wood said.
The tax break makes the cost of putting in solar panels more reasonable while shortening the time it takes for the systems to pay for themselves with reduced energy bills. A solar hot water system that costs $6,000 comes earns an $1,800 federal tax credit and $1,500 from the state.
That means the system will be paying for itself in less than six years, instead of the 12 years it would take without the break, Wood said.
Encouraging alternate sources of energy could help the state's economy too. One recent report showed the state could expect to create more than 22,300 jobs in wind, solar, geothermal and biomass production, Hartwig said.
Energy independence has another benefit in South Carolina. "Last year we spent $18 billion on energy in South Carolina and almost all of that money left the state to import" oil and coal, Hartwig said.
TOP
Labor, Environmentalists Join Forces to Launch National 'Green Jobs for America' Campaign
PITTSBURGH, April 8, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --
The United Steelworkers (USW), the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Blue Green Alliance, a partnership of the USW and Sierra Club, today launched the national Green Jobs for America campaign. The campaign will focus on the ability of a serious commitment to clean, renewable energy to make us more energy independent, help us end our dangerous dependence on fossil fuels and create over 820,000 new green jobs
nationwide.
The time for a national push for renewable energy is now, said USW International President Leo W. Gerard. What is really exciting about this campaign is the opportunity to create jobs, help fix our broken economy and contribute to solving the biggest environmental challenge of our generation at the same time.
The Green Jobs for America campaign will demonstrate that investing in clean, renewable energy is the best way to fight global warming, bring skyrocketing energy costs back under control, create new, good-paying jobs and put us back on the path toward economic growth and prosperity. In addition to encouraging the right investments from the private sector, the
campaign will also focus on the kinds of policies that are needed to fight global warming, expand clean energy production and reform unfair trade agreements.
The public education campaign will take place in New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Indiana, Missouri, Virginia, Tennessee, Florida, Oregon, and Nebraska. The campaign will run through September 15, 2008.
Teams of organizers from the USW, Sierra Club, NRDC and Blue Green Alliance will undertake grassroots organizing activities, conduct a series of public events, release independent studies highlighting the potential for tens of thousands of new green jobs in each state and generate thousands of signatures on a petition calling for green jobs, clean energy solutions and fair trade agreements.
An independent study conducted last year for the Blue Green Alliance by the Renewable Energy Policy Project found that these twelve states in particular stand to gain nearly 170,000 new manufacturing jobs in wind turbine manufacturing and almost 93,000 new manufacturing jobs making the parts for solar power equipment.
Blue Green Alliance Executive Director David Foster said that green jobs are not only those that produce a green product designed for a specific environmental purpose but also include existing jobs that involve a green process or a green purpose. He said that steelworkers building components for wind turbines are performing green jobs, as are chemical workers making
products that are not harmful to humans or the environment.
The green revolution isn't just creating new and different jobs," Foster said. "It's revitalizing and creating new investment in a lot of the jobs we already have.
The campaign builds on the momentum of the Good Jobs, Green Jobs National Conference held in Pittsburgh last month, which brought together over 1,000 participants, over 80 organizations, elected officials, and leaders from industry, community groups, environmental organizations, and labor unions. The Green Jobs for America Campaign expects to add additional allies to this new national movement focused on making the clean energy future a reality.
We saw a glimpse of the clean energy future last month in Pittsburgh, said Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope. The Green Jobs for America campaign will bring the power of that future to communities across the country. We aim to show people that we can start building that clean energy future today -- a future that promises a strong economy, good jobs, fair trade agreements, a clean environment, and a stable climate for our children and grandchildren.
Energy efficiency is a largely untapped resource that can save consumers and businesses money on their energy bills and cut our global warming emissions, all while creating tens of thousands of new jobs.
Technologies like wind and solar are just part of the story. This is also about job security. Making homes, offices and factories more energy efficient not only saves money, it also represents a huge growth opportunity for the people who build our communities and keep them running, said Frances Beinecke, President of the Natural Resources Defense Council. Were talking about architects and engineers. Drywall and lighting contractors. Electricians and carpenters. Everything from construction to computing. And these are jobs that cannot be shipped offshore, and pay lasting dividends to the American economy.
Founded in 2006, the Blue Green Alliance is a strategic partnership of the United Steelworkers, North Americas largest manufacturing union, and the 1.3 million members and supporters of the Sierra Club, the nation's oldest and largest grassroots environmental organization.
The Natural Resources Defense Council is a national, nonprofit organization of scientists, lawyers and environmental specialists dedicated to protecting public health and the environment. Founded in 1970, NRDC has 1.2 million members and online activists, served from offices in New York, Washington, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Beijing.
For more information, please visit:
www.bluegreenalliance.org
www.usw.org
www.sierraclub.org
www.nrdc.org
SOURCE Blue Green Alliance
TOP
NRC Monitoring Unusual Event At Millstone 2 Nuclear Plant
(The Associated Press) - Apr 8
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is monitoring an Unusual Event declared early this afternoon at the Millstone 2 nuclear power plant in Waterford, Conn. An Unusual Event is the lowest of four levels of emergency classification used by the NRC.
Dominion, the plants owner and operator, made the declaration at 1:17 p.m. after an increase in unidentified leakage was detected at the plant. Millstone 2, a pressurized-water reactor, was shut down at the time for a scheduled refueling and maintenance outage.
When operators placed a system into service to further cool down the plant, they observed increased reactor coolant system leakage and an increasing level in an on-site water-storage tank. The leakage between the reactor coolant system and the storage tank was captured by the tank and therefore there was no liquid release to the environment. The leakage to the tank has since been halted.
The storage tank, by design, has a vent to the atmosphere. Some low-level radioactive gas was likely released through the tank vent. The NRC is independently evaluating any potential release and radiological consequence.
The NRC began formally monitoring the event at 2:30 p.m. today. Inspectors assigned to the plant reported to the site to follow the company's actions in response to the event. In addition, the Incident Response Center at the NRC's Region I Office in King of Prussia, Pa., was activated to track developments at the plant, maintain close communications and determine if any additional actions were needed.
Millstone 3, an adjoining pressurized-water reactor operated by Dominion, was not affected by the event and continues to operate at 100-percent power.
Federal and state officials have been notified regarding the event.
TOP
US Senate Votes For Solar, Wind Tax Credits; Faces Hurdles
Dow Jones & Company, Inc. - Apr 10
The U.S. Senate on Thursday voted to extend tax credits for wind-power and solar-energy projects, but the measure is unlikely to become law in its current form due to concern it would add to the nation's deficit.
By 88-8, the Senate added the renewable-energy tax credits to a major housing bill. Companies such as utility XCel Energy Inc. (XEL), the largest U.S. seller of wind-generated energy, have been calling on Congress to act quickly. The tax credits expire at the end of the year, but executives are making decisions now about whether to invest in renewable projects beyond
this year.
The U.S. House of Representatives has hardened its opposition to this version of the tax-credit extensions, which are estimated to cost $6 billion over 10 years. House leaders have strong objections to deficit-financed tax breaks, and with few exceptions offset lost tax revenue with tax increases or spending cuts elsewhere.
"I doubt that the House will accept these extensions without some corresponding offsets," said Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., on the Senate floor. "This leaves the administration with a key role to play in developing a compromise that will be acceptable to both chambers."
The warning to the White House came amid negotiations with Bingaman and Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., about a compromise measure that would offset the budget shortfall created by extending the renewable-energy tax credits. While the Senate Democrats have reportedly given ground by dropping plans to finance the renewable-energy
tax breaks by taking away tax breaks from oil companies, the talks appear to have reached an impasse.
The White House "rebuffed our request to identify any acceptable offsets," Bingaman said. He called on the Bush administration "to work with Congress in good faith to find a way to pay for these incentives."
A Treasury Department spokeswoman referred calls to a Treasury tax aide, who declined to comment.
Details Of Senate Measure
Under the Senate measure, put forward by U.S. Sens. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., and John Ensign, R-Nev., companies would be able to continue taking a tax credit equal to 30% of the cost of buying solar equipment through the end of 2016.
Companies would be able to take a tax credit for starting up through next year new projects that produce electricity from renewable sources such as solar and wind power.
A host of other tax credits would be extended, including those for producing energy-efficient dishwashers, washing machines and refrigerators, and for residential purchases of solar hot water heaters and solar panels used to generate electricity.
Solar energy company stocks and options surged last week on optimism that Baucus was working on a compromise bill. Stocks in companies including Evergreen Solar Inc. (ESLR), First Solar Inc. (FSLR), SunPower Corp. (SPWR), Energy Conversion Devices Inc. (ENER), and Suntech Power Holdings Co. (STP) all rose at least 7% on Friday.
-By Siobhan Hughes, Dow Jones Newswires; 202-862-6654; Siobhan.Hughes@
dowjones.com
TOP
Senate Passes Tax Incentives for Energy Efficiency
ROSSLYN, Va., April 10, 2008
Today, the U.S. Senate passed a comprehensive piece of housing legislation that included several critical tax incentives that encourage use of energy-efficient technologies and renewables. The bill, S. 3221, aimed to assist ailing homeowners included several provisions that are set to expire. The tax incentives included in this bill are one-year extensions that will allow homeowners and businesses to better plan for the future and should have a stimulative effect in the economy. Due to these tax incentives, such as the energy-efficient commercial buildings tax deduction, more energy-efficient products manufactured by NEMA companies will be used in the marketplace.
This Senate-passed legislation includes:
-An extension of the energy-efficient commercial buildings tax
deduction,
-Extension of the renewable energy production tax credit,
-Extension of the solar energy and fuel cell investment tax credit,
and
-Extension of residential energy efficient property tax credit.
The current commercial building tax deduction will expire on December 31, 2008. The deduction and incentives assist homeowners and businesses to purchase and install energy-efficient technologies, which provides economic benefits in lowering energy bills, contributing to construction and manufacturing jobs, and benefiting the environment. "While negotiations continue on a long-term extension of these tax incentives, NEMA calls upon the U.S. House of Representatives to act swiftly to pass this legislation so it can be signed into law," urged NEMA President and CEO Evan Gaddis.
"NEMA has been vigorously lobbying Congress for a long-term extension of the commercial building tax deduction and other energy efficiency and incentives, and while this is only a one-year extension, NEMA praises the U.S. Senate for its action on ensuring this vital incentive is continued," commented Gaddis.
NEMA is the trade association of choice for the electrical manufacturing industry. Founded in 1926 and headquartered near Washington, D.C., its approximately 450 member companies manufacture products used in the generation, transmission and distribution, control, and end-use of electricity. These products are used in utility, medical imaging, industrial, commercial, institutional, and residential applications. Domestic production of electrical products sold worldwide exceeds $120 billion. In addition to its headquarters in Rosslyn, Virginia, NEMA also has offices in Beijing, São Paulo, and Mexico City.
TOP
Feds Propose Florida Power & Light Fine for Sleeping Security Guards at
Nuclear Plant
MIAMI (The Associated Press) - Apr 10
The federal government wants to fine Florida's largest electric company $130,000 because security guards slept on duty at a nuclear plant.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission says Florida Power & Light Co. violated security requirements at the Turkey Point plant from 2004 to 2006. It says guards served as lookouts while others slept on the job.
The commission says in a letter to the utility that its "inattentive behavior" is of particular concern and can't be tolerated.
The utility's nuclear spokesman says the company has made security changes to ensure this doesn't happen again.
The guards were employed by Wackenhut Nuclear Services. Wackenhut did not return phone messages.
The commission says Wackenhut has agreed to make sure its workers are
attentive on the job.
TOP
Sunday, April 6, 2008
News From the Week of March 31, 2008
NRC says TVA Using Old River Data to Support New Reactors
Future Jobs Loaded With 'Green'
NRC Responds To Unusual Event At The Byron Nuclear Plant
NRC Adds Sequoyah Plant To Initial Scope Of State-Of-The-Art Reactor Consequence Analysis
NRC says TVA Using Old River Data to Support New Reactors
KNOXVILLE, Tenn. (The Associated Press) - Mar 28 - By DUNCAN MANSFIELD
Associated Press Writer
The Tennessee Valley Authority used a decade-old computer model to forecast river flooding affecting what could become one of the United States' first new nuclear plants of the 21st century.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission on Friday cited the country's largest public utility for "quality assurance" violations in its bid for a build-and-operate license for a two-reactor nuclear station at its never-completed Bellefonte site in northeast
The computer model failed to reflect modifications to the upstream Chickamauga Dam, the effects of a new Chickamauga Lock or even valley wide flooding in 2003, according to the NRC. Supporting data not only was old - developed using the comparatively ancient Fortran computer program - it couldn't immediately be found, NRC engineering division director Patrick Hiland complained in a March 19 letter to TVA nuclear vice president Ashok Bhatnagar.
Bottom line: "TVA was unable to provide evidence to confirm that TVA conducted verifications and validations to ensure that the (forecasting) computer program functioned correctly," Hiland wrote.
The NRC cited TVA for three level-four violations, the lowest level on NRC's list, and probably will not assess fines, NRC spokesman Roger Hannah said.
However, the problems have come up less than two months into a multiyear process to license one of the first U.S. nuclear plants applied for in 30 years, and one that will use a next-generation Westinghouse AP1000 pressurized-water reactor design. The nuclear industry is watching.
"TVA is going to work with the NRC to resolve these issues," TVA spokesman Terry Johnson said, adding there "is the possibility that other issues are going to be raised as they go through this application review."
TVA, which provides electricity to about 8.7 million consumers in
They have applied for permission to build and operate a plant on the site of a two-reactor station TVA began in the 1970s, scrapped before it was finished in the 1980s and wrote off in the 1990s.
Not much of that old plant would be remain for the new plant. TVA has yet to say if it will build the station, although agency officials say they likely will need the power by 2017 or 2018 when the plant could be finished.
TVA manages the entire
TOP
Future Jobs Loaded With 'Green'
Mar 29 - McClatchy-Tribune Regional News - Rob Varnon Connecticut Post, Bridgeport
Global warming and limited resources are forcing humanity to change how it gets energy, but in that change could lie a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for businesses and individuals to make money and reshape the world.
This according to a panel of business and government representatives speaking at a recent forum about green energy at Fairfield University's Dolan School of Business. With more than 65 people in the audience, the Wednesday evening event attracted a strong mix of students, area residents and professors. Two managers from General Electric Co. spelled out why the conglomerate is investing so heavily in wind and solar energy plants across the globe.
"A lot has changed in the world," said Kevin Walsh, renewable energy managing director for GE Energy Financial Services. Walsh, a
His GE EFS colleague, Jerry Eyster, went into more detail to show the audience how big the mission of curbing global warming is and, therefore, how much potential there is for students and visionaries to carve out solid careers.
Eyster, a senior vice president of strategic marketing, said in order to stabilize the temperature of the planet, the world will have to cut 1 gigaton of carbon dioxide -- which is one of the "green-house gases" blamed for thickening the atmosphere around the planet so heat cannot escape -- in the next 50 years to keep the temperature to only a 1-to-2 degree increase.
While green-house gases are not the only reason for rising temperatures, Eyster said the consensus feeling is that carbon dioxide does contribute to warming and, therefore, reducing this gas could help stabilize the Earth's temperature.
But the magnitude of cuts needed is daunting. One gigaton is more than all the potential solar energy on the planet, he said, or all the potential wind energy. "It is a big problem and it's going to take a lot of people with a lot of skills," Eyster said.
One tough issue is how to deal with the emerging industrial nations, he said. From 1900 to 1999,
Eyster said most of the green-house gases in the
This need doesn't just mean the world needs engineers with new ideas-- it also needs financiers with vision.
Martin Whittaker, director of Norwalk-based Mission Point Capital Partners, said his firm specializes in investing in green technology. The company, founded in 2006, invests in fledgling companies and helps build them up to the point where they can be sold to larger corporations or taken public, he said.
Whittaker said his firm invests in some basic areas, including in companies that create systems that produce energy from fossil fuel more efficiently or from fuels that release no green house gases.
Frank Wolak, vice president of business development at Danbury-based Fuel Cell Energy, said technical careers also abound. His company has been installing fuel cells, which generate electricity through a highly efficient system, throughout the world and country. He highlighted several examples of how the technology was being used, including the Sierra Nevada Brewery project. The brewery's fuel cells run partially on a beer byproduct, reducing the amount of natural gas the brewery consumes to make electricity, he said.
While the panel was generally confident in the future of green technology, all said these devices still need government support through subsidies or by placing taxes on the emissions generated by older technologies, such as coal-burning plants.
Robert Wall, director of the Connecticut Clean Energy Fund's market initiatives, said the state is doing its part in this arena. For example, Wall said, the CCEF has helped GE and Bigelow Tea in
Rob Varnon, who covers business, can be reached at 330-6216.
TOP
NRC Responds To Unusual Event At The Byron Nuclear Plant
(The Associated Press) - Mar 28
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has responded to an unusual event at the Byron Nuclear Power Plant. The unusual event was declared on March 25, at
An unusual event is the lowest of four levels in the NRC's emergency classification system. An unusual event is declared when events are in process or have occurred which indicate potential degradation in the level of safety of the plant. No release of radioactive material requiring offsite response or monitoring has occurred or is expected to occur.
We activated the regional
The unusual event was declared when outside electrical power delivered to Byron Unit 2 was interrupted due to a problem with electrical transformers. Both Byron units are in a stable condition. The incident presents no threat to public safety.
Byron Unit 1 is shut down for a refueling outage. Unit 2 did not shut down as a result of the off-site power loss. Unit 2 is sharing off-site power with Unit 1 and will continue to do so until off-site power to Unit 2 is restored.
The NRC will continue to evaluate the utility's response to the event, its efforts to identify the root cause of the problem, the proposed actions to fix the problem and the implementation of repairs.
TOP
NRC Adds Sequoyah Plant To Initial Scope Of State-Of-The-Art Reactor Consequence Analysis
(The Associated Press) - Mar 28
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is adding information from the two reactors at the Sequoyah nuclear power plant to the continuing State-of-the-Art Reactor Consequence Analysis (SOARCA) project, which will be used to realistically model the outcomes of potential accidents at commercial U.S. reactors.
The Tennessee Valley Authority, which operates the plant outside of
The staff is moving SOARCA through its first phase, which focuses on ensuring the project's analysis methods mesh properly and have the data necessary for the most realistic results. The pressurized water reactors at Sequoyah join the project's first two plants, the boiling water reactors at Peach Bottom in
Having Sequoyah's data means we can examine one more combination of reactor and containment types found in the
Our research replaces what was done 25 years ago - studies that were so conservative that the results fell short of what's useful for guiding public policy. Those study results have often been misused, Eltawila said.
The advanced computers, detailed software models and vast information databases available today are in a much better position to realistically evaluate potential nuclear power plant accidents. Everyone should have a clearer understanding of the realistic consequences of such potential accidents once we're finished.
Nuclear power plant accidents are extremely unlikely; should one occur, several layers of plant safety features and emergency procedures would mitigate most types of accidents. Nevertheless, it's important to understand an accident's possible consequences. SOARCA will analyze
analyses will use site-specific weather and population data to determine how the accident might affect public health and safety. The staff will compile the analysis results and issue a public document once the entire project is
complete. More information on SOARCA is available on the NRC Web site here:
http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/regulatory/research/soar.html.
TOP
Sunday, March 30, 2008
News From the Week of March 24, 2008
Indian Point Guards Test Positive for Cocaine & Are Suspended
NRC Endorses Industry Revised Guidance On Conducting Hostile Action-based Emergency Drills
The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant Moves Step Closer to Re-licensing
Major Business Group Opposes Appeal of Power-plant Permit
Indian Point Guards Test Positive for Cocaine & Are Suspended
BUCHANAN, N.Y - (The Associated Press) - Mar 22
Two Indian Point nuclear power plant security guards have been suspended for coming to work with cocaine in their systems, a spokesman for the plants' owner said.
The workers' apparent drug use didn't compromise safety at the plant 35 miles north of midtown Manhattan, Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman Neil Sheehan said.
The security guards' suspensions came a month after a construction company supervisor tested positive for alcohol use and was barred from working at the plant.
The security guards - employed by New Orleans-based plant owner Entergy Nuclear - are on paid leave for two weeks. The company fires employees who fail drug tests twice, Entergy spokesman Jim Steets said.
One guard was tested for drugs after leaving her post unexpectedly and failing to respond when commanders radioed her Wednesday; she was found sick in a bathroom, Steets said. The other guard was tested Thursday because he was returning from an absence of more than 29 days; he had been on military leave, according to plant officials.
Federal regulations say there can be no trace of alcohol or drugs in anyone working at a nuclear plant. Only 209 of the more than 70,000 tests of nuclear plant workers and contractors nationwide in 2006 came back positive, according to the NRC.
Steets said the security guards' test results were unfortunate but showed that the plant was succeeding in efforts to make sure workers were fit for duty. The NRC is "satisfied with how the company is handling the situation," Sheehan said.
Another Indian Point security worker got into trouble in August, when the armed guard was found dozing at an inner-ring security gate. The NRC later determined the incident was of "very low security significance."
The plant has about 1,300 employees.
Critics regularly express concern about the plant's safety, but federal regulators have rejected calls to shut it down. Entergy has applied for new licenses that would let Indian Point keep running into the 2030s.
TOP
NRC Endorses Industry Revised Guidance On Conducting Hostile Action-based Emergency Drills
Mar 21, 2008 -- NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION DOCUMENTS AND PUBLICATIONS/ContentWorks
The NRC issued a document today endorsing revised guidance developed by the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) for how nuclear power plants should voluntarily conduct baseline hostile action-based emergency preparedness drills. The Regulatory Issue Summary (RIS) requires no action or written response by licensees.
Current NRC regulations do not require licensees to use hostile action scenarios in their emergency preparedness drills and exercises. However, in 2005, NEI offered a phased approach for licensees to voluntarily conduct such drills within a three-year period. These "off-year" hostile-action based drills, also called "Phase 3 Drills," are not evaluated by the NRC or the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and provide a "no fault" opportunity for licensees to demonstrate responses to the unique challenges
security actions pose to existing emergency preparedness programs. During 2007, nine hostile action-based drills were conducted, and 26 are scheduled for 2008.
The revised guidance being endorsed clarifies the scope and methods of demonstration of key objectives of these hostile-action drills. NRC is working with FEMA to identify proposed changes to emergency preparedness regulations and guidance to incorporate hostile action-based scenarios into biennial emergency preparedness exercises. A copy of the RIS can be found
at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/gen-comm/reg-issues/2008/index.html.
TOP
The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant Moves Step Closer to Re-licensing
MONTPELIER, Vt. (The Associated Press) - Mar 21 - By DAVE GRAM Associated
Press Writer
The Vermont Yankee nuclear plant on Friday moved another big step closer to being to run for 20 years beyond its currently scheduled 2012 shutdown date with the approval of its license renewal application by a Nuclear Regulatory Commission panel.
The federal agency's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards said it had reviewed a safety evaluation conducted by NRC staff and concurred with the staff that Vermont Yankee, a 650-megawatt reactor in
"The programs established and committed to by the applicant to manage age-related degradation provide reasonable assurance that (Vermont Yankee) can be operated in accordance with its current licensing basis for the period of extended operation without undue risk to the health and safety of the public," the panel concluded.
It also agreed with the staff's call for more analysis of metal fatigue in some plant components, including the nozzles of valves used to move water to and from the reactor.
"Performance of the remaining analyses at least two years before entering the period of extended operation will be a license condition," the panel said in a letter to NRC Chairman Dale Klein. "We agree with the staff's conclusion."
Vermont Yankee spokesman Robert Williams hailed the ruling.
"This is a very positive decision from the ACRS and a major milestone for us," Williams said. "It was an independent look at the NRC's recent safety evaluation and this independent scientific panel agrees that our long-term maintenance and inspection programs will ensure safe operations under a renewed license."
Arnie Gundersen, a nuclear safety expert who has testified in regulatory hearings as a witness for groups critical of nuclear power, took a different view. He said he remains worried that running the plant for an extra 20 years, in combination with the permission it won two years ago to boost its power output by 20 percent, had narrowed safety margins.
The positive ruling from NRC headquarters came the same day lawmakers in
-The Senate passed a bill that would require Entergy to top off Vermont Yankee's decommissioning fund before spinning the Vernon reactor, as well as five others into New England, New York and Michigan, off to ownership by a newly created company. Supporters of the bill expressed concern that the new company might not have the money to cover dismantling the plant when it eventually shuts down.
-Lawmakers had heard in committee testimony that the decommissioning fund is about $260 million short of current estimates of what is needed. Williams disputed this in an interview Friday, saying the fund's current funding level meets minimum NRC requirements.
-The Senate gave preliminary approval to a bill that would set up a new siting authority to find a new location for storage of highly radioactive spent fuel now being stored in dry casks at the plant site in
-Senate President Pro Tem Peter Shumlin, whose Windham County district includes Vermont Yankee and who has been a fierce critic of the plant, has pushed this measure, saying he wants other parts of Vermont to share the risks of hosting the high-level waste.
Williams took a dim view of this as well. The Vernon site is "licensed for nuclear operations," and is under 24-hour guard, making it "obviously preferable" for storage of high-level radioactive waste, he said.
-Meanwhile, a House committee began taking testimony on a Senate-passed bill calling for a special inspection of Vermont Yankee before it gets a license extension.
TOP
Major Business Group Opposes Appeal of Power-plant Permit
VERNAL,
The nation's largest manufacturing group is asking the federal government to allow expansion of a coal-fired power plant in Utah.
The National Association of Manufacturers is challenging an appeal by conservation groups, which claim the plant would release nearly 2 million tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere annually.
The Environmental Protection Agency issued a permit Aug. 30, approving the expansion at the Bonanza plant southeast of Vernal. The new generating station is designed to turn waste coal into energy.
The EPA said it did not have to consider the effect of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse-gas emissions. Critics challenged it, citing a 2007 Supreme Court ruling that said the federal agency has the authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming.
The issue at the
The National Association of Manufacturers is concerned that including carbon dioxide in EPA approval regulations would bog down the system well outside the energy industry because the gas is so common.
"The EPA has the discretion to interpret what the permit requirements are in respect to carbon dioxide," said Quentin Riegel, vice president of litigation for the group.
The
TOP
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
News From the Week of March 17, 2008
Energy Department Floats Public-Private Plan for Nuclear Waste Dump At Yucca Mtn.
Boston Red Sox Join Solar Energy Team
DOE: Expect License Application For Yucca Mtn. After All
Renewable-Energy Supporters Rally in Reno Against Coal Plants
Wal-Mart's Latest Green Store Cuts Energy Use Up to 45 Percent
Cost of Coal Power is Rising
Energy Department Floats Public-Private Plan for Nuclear Waste Dump
- By ERICA WERNER Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - Mar 13, 2008 (The Associated Press)
Energy Department officials trying to promote nuclear power are suggesting that private industry assume some responsibility for the country's nuclear waste.
Edward F. "Ward" Sproat said Thursday that the idea could ensure more stable management and financial support for the long-delayed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump project in Nevada that he manages.
"I do think that providing some sort of an organization with legislative fiat that provides that stability and fixes some of these institutional problems is a good idea," Sproat said after addressing a conference of nuclear regulators. "But it's got to be done right." He heads the Energy Department's Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.
Even Yucca Mountain supporters say stability has been lacking at the 77,000-ton repository planned 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas. It is intended as the resting place for the spent reactor fuel and high-level defense waste piling up at power plants and other sites around the country.
Yucca Mountain's most ardent critic, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is in position to engineer annual budget cuts of $100 million or more.
Sproat suggested a public-private partnership modeled on, for example, the Tennessee Valley Authority, the nation's largest public power company. The TVA was created by Congress and has a board of directors appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, but raises its own money and manages its own employees.
A power point briefing prepared for lawmakers by Dennis R. Spurgeon, the Energy Department's assistant secretary for nuclear energy, includes a slide showing a "nongovernmental entity" that would manage nuclear waste disposal and fees from nuclear utilities in concert with a still undeveloped recycling program supported by the Bush administration. The power point was obtained Thursday by The Associated Press.
Yucca Mountain's opening date has been delayed repeatedly since the original 1998 goal. Sproat had pegged 2017 as the best achievable opening date. But that has slipped and he could not give a new one on Thursday. He did say that plans to submit a required construction license application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by the end of June are back on track, after coming into doubt this year because of Reid's budget cuts.
Meanwhile, liability to taxpayers is surpassing $7 billion because the department contracted with utilities to take possession of their nuclear waste beginning in 1998.
The idea of a public-private partnership to manage Yucca Mountain and other elements of spent fuel disposal has support from the nuclear industry and is garnering some interest on Capitol Hill. But the change would require legislation that also would have to deal with the liability to utilities and dedicating money from a special nuclear waste fund paid into by utilities, according to Sproat. No one thinks that could come about anytime soon.
"A move like that would greatly enhance the chances of success of the Yucca Mountain project and recently Congress is not inclined to enhance the success of the Yucca Mountain project," said Steve Kraft, senior director for used fuel management at the Nuclear Energy Institute.
Reid has long been declaring Yucca Mountain dead and his spokesman said no new plan would change that. "It's hard to privatize something that's not going to be built in the first place," said Reid spokesman Jon Summers.
TOP
Boston Red Sox Join Solar Energy Team
Posted by David Beard, Boston.com Staff
Batter up for solar!
Construction will soon begin on a solar hot-water project at
According to Christina Halfpenny of National Grid, the Sox will be able to meet 37 percent of its water-heating load in a system that will take 16 years to pay for itself, after incentives.
The Red Sox would not confirm the details on Friday. "It would be premature to make a comment at this point," a team spokeswoman said. She added that the team plans to make an announcement next month that will discuss some of the changes fans will see at
In September, the Sox announced it would explore making
Among the items considered at that time, beyond some rooftop solar panels, were recycling, improved refuse removal, and the installation of more energy-efficient lighting.
Editor's Note: The Sox will join the Cleveland Indians, and, in the National League, the Colorado Rockies and the San Francisco Giants in using solar power at their home fields.
TOP
DOE: Expect License Application After All
Mar 17.2008 (Las Vegas Review - Journal)
The Energy Department has readjusted its Yucca Mountain work plans after a deep budget cut and will be ready after all to apply for a license in June to build a Nevada nuclear waste repository, the program director said Thursday.
Managers postponed work on a Nevada rail line and other segments of the Yucca program, and redirected money and personnel to reach the most pressing goal of meeting a June 30 license application deadline, according to Ward Sproat, director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management.
Applying for a construction license has been a long-sought but out-of-reach milestone for DOE at Yucca Mountain. The department has encountered legal and budget problems, and a number of internal missteps in recent years.
Speaking at a conference organized by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Sproat expressed confidence the application will pass initial muster to be docketed by the NRC for more thorough safety reviews and hearings.
Cutbacks will reduce the work force from 2,600 to 1,500-1,700. The Energy Department has singled out key scientists and engineers within DOE, the U.S. Geological Survey, the national laboratories and contract firm Bechtel SAIC who will be needed to defend the license.
"We have identified who those people are to make sure they know their jobs are not in jeopardy," Sproat said. "We have an army of national lab PhDs and engineers on our defense team."
Sproat's upbeat assessment came minutes after a lawyer who represents Nevada in its ongoing battle against Yucca Mountain declared the program is on a "death watch" and is destined for failure.
Martin Malsch, of the firm Egan, Fitzpatrick & Malsch, said DOE will continue to face increasingly severe budget problems. He said DOE's application will be rushed and incomplete and predicted a "huge dispute" over whether it should be accepted for review by regulators.
Beyond that, Nevada is poised to challenge DOE's qualifications andother key aspects of the project, he said. On top of that, both Democratic presidential candidates have pledged to stop the program if elected.
"Yucca Mountain's breaths are short and its heartbeat is faint," Malsch said. "I really don't think it has very long to continue." In response, Sproat said: "The death watch is going to continue for a very long time because I see this program being very alive and well."
The Energy Department was sent back to the drawing boards late last year when Congress cut the 2008 Yucca Mountain budget by $108 million, a 22 percent reduction.
Sproat initially expressed doubt DOE would meet its deadline, but he said managers deferred work on all but the most pressing tasks. For instance, work on a proposed Nevada rail line to the site has been pushed back. To save money further, technical specialists were rotated in for short periods to perform specific tasks and then let go, Sproat said.
Questions remain about the repository, which would need billions of dollars to be built. Sproat confirmed the Bush administration is considering a proposal to reorganize the Yucca project and other nuclear waste programs into a government-chartered corporation similar to the Tennessee Valley Authority or the Bonneville Power Administration.
Promoters contend such an organization would have the advantages of a private business to hire and fire managers, set salaries to attract talent and promote accountability. Sproat said it would stop a revolving door that has seen numerous top managers trying to run the Yucca program for short terms.
But such a big change would require a number of fundamental changes and approval by Congress, which might not be willing to give up control.
The Energy Daily in a Feb. 26 story quoted sources saying the DOE proposal has been at the White House for consideration since at least December. Sproat could not confirm that, saying he understood the concept still was being mulled within DOE.
"I personally don't expect we are going to make anything significant happen on this over the next three to six months," he said. Steve Kraft, senior director for used fuel management at the Nuclear Energy Institute, said a "move like that would greatly enhance the chances of success of the Yucca Mountain project and recently Congress is not inclined to enhance the success of the Yucca Mountain project."
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., long has been declaring Yucca Mountain dead and his spokesman said no new plan would change that.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.Contact Stephens
Washington Bureau Chief Steve Tetreault at stetreault@stephensmedia.com or
(202) 783-1760.
(c) 2008 Las Vegas Review - Journal.
TOP
Renewable-Energy Supporters Rally in Reno Against Coal Plants
By MARTIN GRIFFITH Associated Press Writer
RENO, Nev. - Mar 15, 2008 (The Associated Press)
A group of renewable-energy supporters rallied Saturday in Reno against plans to build three coal-fired power plants in eastern Nevada near the Utah border.
Speakers urged Gov. Jim Gibbons, Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto and other local and state officials to join Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., in opposing the use of coal and supporting development of alternative energy sources.
They said coal-fired plants spew out pollutants that contribute to global warming, and a shift to renewable energy would create jobs in a state rich in geothermal, solar and wind power.
"As a mother, I am concerned about mortgaging our children's energy future with polluting coal plants instead of investing into positive renewable energy resources", said Sara Bruso of the Nevada Clean Energy Campaign. "Nevadans are looking to (Gibbons and Masto) for leadership on this."
About 50 people gathered at the downtown's Brick Park for the rally. They placed pictures of windmills and solar panels into a plastic "pot of gold" as a symbol of the bright future the new technologies promise for Nevada.
The rally comes as Sierra Pacific Resources, Dynegy-LS Power Group and Sithe Global Power are pursuing separate plans to build the coal plants near Ely and Mesquite. Gibbons, a Republican, has said the proposed coal plants will burn cleaner than older plants and are crucial for economic development.
Demonstrators urged Masto, a Democrat, to recommend a suspension of state proceedings on the plants. "Senator Reid has already taken a strong stand on this and our state and local officials should do the same," said state Demographer Jeff Hardcastle, who spoke as a private citizen.
David von Seggern of the Sierra Club praised the Reno City Council's recent resolution encouraging the use of solar power in city buildings.
Coal plants provide just over half of the nation's electricity. They also are the largest domestic source of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, emitting 2 billion tons annually, about a third of the country's total.
Wal-Mart's Latest Green Store Cuts Energy Use Up to 45 Percent
By MARCUS KABEL Associated Press Writer
BENTONVILLE, Ark. - Mar 18, 2008 (The Associated Press)
Wal-Mart Stores Inc. will open its latest generation of energy-efficient test stores this week with a Las Vegas Supercenter that uses new cooling technology to cut overall energy use by up to 45 percent.
The Las Vegas store opening Wednesday builds on advances in earlier pilot stores that reduced energy use in areas including lighting, refrigeration and water flow.
The previous pilot stores in the Midwest cut energy use up to 25 percent compared to a typical Supercenter built in 2005, the year Wal-Mart launched a broad environmental program to reduce energy use and packaging waste and to sell more sustainable products.
Wal-Mart said the new Las Vegas store adds to those savings with a new cooling system based on water evaporation for total energy savings of between 35 percent and 45 percent.
Wal-Mart has said it is the biggest private user of electricity in the world and has huge potential to cut back on greenhouse gases from fossil fuels burned to create electricity. It aims to use technologies proven in the pilot stores to develop a prototype in 2009 for all new Supercenters
that will be between 25 percent and 30 percent more energy efficient.
An outside engineering and efficiency expert said Wal-Mart's advances in saving energy, including the new Las Vegas store, are leading the field for big-box retailers. "This is not just a baby step. This is a big step," said Terry Townsend, past president of the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers.
Townsend said Wal-Mart's pilot stores are important because they show other retailers how to use available technology to improve energy efficiency. Wal-Mart says it is sharing its lessons with retail industry
groups.
The latest store is built specifically for the arid climate of Western states, where water evaporates faster than in the more-humid East. It uses rooftop cooling towers to chill water that then runs in conduits under the floor of the store. The radiant cooling from the floor
replaces traditional electricity-powered air conditioning.
The store also incorporates innovations from the previous pilot stores that include recycling heat from refrigerators and combining low-power LED lights in freezer cases with sensors that turn off those lights when no customers are around.
Cost of Coal Power is Rising
Mar 20, 2008 - The Kansas City Star (Kansas City, Missouri)
Electric bills are poised to soar for customers of utilities building coal-fired power plants.
The plants, long-trusted purveyors of low-cost power, no longer seem like such good bets because of soaring construction costs and the surging cost of coal. Moreover, many think Congress will impose penalties on emissions that contribute to global warming.
To be sure, some in the electric industry still view coal-fired plants as the best low-cost option to provide year-round power. But the growing costs, driven by burgeoning global demand, have prompted warnings of "seismic shifts" in the way the industry views the plants.
"It's a very tough environment right now," said Lawrence Makovich, a vice president for Cambridge Energy Research Associates.
Topeka-based Westar Energy, for example, was so troubled by the changes that it tabled plans for a coal-fired plant. But the shift is being played out in a more dramatic fashion at Kansas City Power & Light, which is leading a group of four utilities already building Iatan 2, an 850-megawatt coal-fired plant near Weston.
The plant, which was originally estimated to cost $1.3 billion, already is $400 million beyond that figure and is expected to go up further. In the wake of "cost pressures," KCP&L now is "refocusing" its Iatan 2 budget and could release a revised estimate as early as April.
"What we're seeing is that increased pressure on prices," said Michael Deggendorf, a vice president for KCP&L.
The utility has faced questions about mismanagement of the construction. But the utility has denied that and added that KCP&L has fixed prices on some components of Iatan 2, which should help moderate the increased cost.
Even so, the eventual cost of the plant could be daunting. The cost of similar plants built elsewhere have doubled or more. That could mean that Iatan 2 could ultimately cost $2.6 billion, plus financing expenses.
That would set the stage for a rate shock for KCP&L customers, which will be responsible for paying for a majority of the plant. At the original price of the plant, KCP&L estimated that rates could go up 20 percent. But a rate increase of as much as 40 percent is conceivable if costs mount as much as at other plants.
Such a spike in electric rates would have implications not only for the utilities and their customers but also for economic development. Affordable electricity has served as a major selling point for Kansas City in attracting business investments.
"The increased cost is an issue that we're facing all over the country," said Jim Zakoura, an area lawyer who represents industrial customers.
Cost vise
KCP&L isn't alone in getting squeezed by coal-plant costs. The cost for the two generators that Sunflower Electric Energy Corp. wants to build in western Kansas has more than doubled to $4.2 billion, according to industry experts.
David Schlissel, a senior consultant with Synapse Energy Economics, said cost issues facing utilities are akin to building a new home without knowing how much it would cost, how much the taxes would be or the cost of financing.
"It is a worn-out cliche, but I call it a train wreck," he said.
KCP&L officials said a specific cost estimate for Iatan 2 would not be available until the current review was completed. But they said it would be competitive with other new coal-fired plants. Iatan 2 could be open as early as 2010.
"We're moving forward," said Matt Tidwell, a spokesman for KCP&L.
The same goes for Sunflower Electric, which along with two partners is pushing plans for 1,400 megawatts of coal-fired generation in Kansas. Thecontentious project was halted last fall by the state's top environmental regulator. The project was resurrected by the Kansas Legislature, but that decision now faces a gubernatorial veto.
Steve Miller, a spokesman for Sunflower, said not building new coal plants could affect the economy because Americans continue to use more electricity.
"Does that mean we are going to continue to run dirty old power plants and we can't grow the consumption of electricity?" Miller said. "Surely America is not going to get to that point." Others are taking a more cautious approach.
Westar in late 2006 said it was postponing plans to build an 800-megawatt coal-fired plant. The plant's cost had initially been estimated at just over $1 billion. But rising costs for materials and labor increased the price to $1.7 billion. Today it would be more than $2 billion, said Jim Ludwig, a vice president for Westar.
In addition, the possibility of a carbon tax on greenhouse gases could cost utilities dearly. Even the price of coal can no longer be safely predicted. "All these things are converging," Ludwig said.
Westar decided to postpone the plant indefinitely. It sketched out its plans in a document released in February called "A Strategic Plan for Uncertain Times."
The document mentioned "seismic shifts" in the industry and recommended a plan to keep demand down as much as possible with energy efficiency. The company could improve the distribution of electricity on its lines so less power is lost. Meanwhile, consumers would be encouraged to conserve.
Westar also plans to have 300 megawatts of wind energy in operation by the end of the year. Gas-fired plants, which cost less to build but more to fuel, also would be used more by Westar. The utility relies on natural gas to generate 4 percent of its power. The national average for natural gas is about 10 percent.
Concerns about coal plants are spreading. "You've got to ask: 'Do you think we have reached a point where it economically doesn't make sense?' " said Michael Dworkin, law professor and
director of the Institute for Energy and the Environment at Vermont Law School.
The stakes are enormous, especially for utilities that are in the middle of constructing coal-fired plants.
Wall Street investors last month announced that loans to build coal-fired power plants were risky because of escalating costs and uncertainty about environmental regulations. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has stopped providing loans and subsidies to rural and municipal
utilities to build coal plants.
In a letter to Rep. Henry Waxman, a California Democrat, the agency's administrator wrote that there would be no loans until the agency could "develop a subsidy rate that reflects the risks associated with the construction of new base load generation plants."
Ripples from such decisions are already being felt. This month, Associated Electric Cooperative, whose territory includes all of Missouri except Kansas City and St. Louis, decided not to build a
plant 50 miles east of Kansas City. The cooperative was turned down for a federal loan.
In 2004, Southern Montana Electric Generation and Transmission Cooperative wanted to build a 250-megawatt coal plant. By last fall, the estimated cost of the plant was $750 million, said Jay Fletcher, spokesman for the federal government's utilities program.
On Feb. 19, the cooperative's request for a loan was turned down.
"One of the things we cited is the extremely high cost of the project," Fletcher said.
Fletcher said that in each of the past four years, the cost of building a power plant has gone up 30 percent. The measurement used to estimate costs reveal the increases. A few years ago, it cost about $1,500 a kilowatt hour to build a plant. The cost to build an almost 1,000-megawatt plant planned by AMP-Ohio is now at $3,000 a kilowatt hour.
Then there is the fuel.
Coal is still considered the cheapest fuel except for nuclear. But coal prices have gotten volatile.
In 2003, a ton of coal delivered to electric utilities was $24.74 a ton. Last year, it was $36.09, an increase of nearly 50 percent.
Prices are being pushed higher by burgeoning global demand driven by emerging economies such as China. Some estimates call for coal prices to eventually be less volatile, but others expect prices to continue to increase.
"There's not going to be a reduction short of a war or plague or radical new technology," Dworkin said.
Carbon taxes
Soaring construction and coal costs are known factors for the utility industry. What is less certain is when Congress will enact global-warming regulations requiring utilities to pay for emissions of CO2, a greenhouse gas.
Waxman and fellow Rep. Edward J. Markey, a Democrat from Massachusetts, filed a bill Tuesday that would place a moratorium on all new coal plants until technology is developed to control global warming emissions or CO{-2}.
"This bill will make companies prepare for the future and prevent them from building low-tech, coal-fired power plants before a global warming bill is passed," said Markey, chairman of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming.
One approach being considered is used in Europe, where emissions can cost up to $30 a ton.
"Federal regulation of greenhouse gases is no longer a matter of if --it is a matter of when," Schlissel said in testimony submitted to the Kansas Legislature.
Schlissel calculated that the CO{-2} emission penalties for Sunflower's proposed 1,400-megawatt plant could be from $67 million to $334 million annually by 2015. By 2030, the range is predicted to be $387 million to $966 million.
Experts do not think that the technology to prevent CO2 emissions will be available until at least 2030 -- if ever.
Miller, of Sunflower, discounted the cost of CO2 regulations. "I cannot believe our Congress, and our Legislature, is going to allow the price of electricity to get so high the common person can't afford to pay their bill," Miller said. "In the end, it is all going to be about what the ratepayers are going to pay. I can't see Congress putting trillions of dollars on the taxpayers."
To reach Steve Everly, call 816-234-4455 or send e-mail to severly@kcstar.com. To reach Karen Dillon, call 816-234-4430 or send e-mail to kdillon@kcstar.com.
TOP
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)