5 Comments

  1. As much as I enjoy the enthusiasm of B&W for the Mpower reactor, being first to produce power is a real long shot.
    The competition has long since filed their design certification applications. The lead site for each of those designs have submitted their COLs.
    B&W has released a target of 1st quarter of 2012 for design application submittal (Not the 1st quarter of 2010 erroneously listed on the NRC web site). There is no reference site yet for an Mpower reactor (although TVA is considering it).
    A shorter build time can only do so much for catching up.
    Bill

  2. “A shorter build time can only do so much for catching up.”
    True, but easier financing might more than make up for that.

  3. ?A shorter build time can only do so much for catching up.?
    One of the favorite arguments of solar advocates is that it takes too long to build a nuke and that solar can come on line faster.
    If you take the capacity of the new nuke in being built in Finland (near the arctic circle) times the design CF times design life you get about 18,000 MW-years of generating capacity per year of construction.
    However, the plant is taking two years longer to build so now we are down to 13,000 MW-years of generating capacity per year of construction. On the positive side if the plant runs longer than designed we could get 20,000 MW-years of generating capacity per year of construction.
    Then I use the same method for my favorite utility scale solar PV systems and get 30 MW-years of generating capacity per year of construction.
    So no, you can not catch up bu building smaller.

  4. Kit, are years of construction fixed regardless of capacity? They might be, today, but you aren’t “thinking outside the box”. If someone came up with a nuclear power module that would be safe regardless of where it was sited, then construction could be as simple as pouring a concrete pad, putting the module on it, and hooking up the wires.
    You wouldn’t even need a license for the site, just a design that was NRC certified, and a module prebuilt to that design. All you’d need was 20 days, perhaps, not 20 years.

Comments are closed.

Similar Posts

  • Should Exxon remain a petroleum and petrochemical company, or become an energy company?

    There is nothing like high retail gasoline prices to get Americans talking about energy issues. Even some of the American aristocracy – members of the Rockefeller family -are taking advantage of the current interest to try to gain more support for a shareholder initiative suggesting a change in ExxonMobil’s corporate structure. Since about 2003, certain…

  • Arstechnica – Nuclear Power, Yes Please

    Arstechnica has a story titled Nuclear power? Yes please! inspired by a session titled Keeping the Lights on: The Revival of Nuclear Energy for Our Future held on February 14, 2009 at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting in Chicago. Apparently the writer has been mulling over the topics discussed during…

  • Progress Energy may hire 1000 entry-level employees by December 2005

    A friend pointed me to a great article about the North Carolina State nuclear engineering program. Campus reactor leads the way in ‘nuclear renaissance’. Here is a quote from the article that should make young technical types sit up and take notice: Jacobson echoed Ferrell’s statements, when she also added the market for hiring at…

  • Lead, Follow, or Get Out of the Way – Jaczko Needs to Understand What "Promote the Common Defense and Security" Means With Regard to Energy

    I just had a BFO (Blinding Flash of the Obvious) moment. I have figured out why Chairman Jaczko seems to be working at cross purposes to the Secretary of Energy and the President by insisting that his job as an independent regulator of nuclear energy does not include efforts to encourage its growing use. The…

  • Heritage Foundation comments on 2009 Energy Budget

    The Heritage Foundation published a blog titled Less Is More for Energy In Bush’s Budget on February 4, 2008. The entry talks about the budget items submitted by the Administration for energy in 2009. Heritage likes the idea of spending large sums of money on Carbon Capture and Sequestration (CCS) and likes the fact that…

  • Who funds "Environmentalists"?

    The following post was first created as the response to one more article from a “pro energy” guy who does not understand his competition. The original article can be found at the Energy Pulse web site under the title of Oil Now and Oil Tomorrow. In case you do not want to wade through all…