Below is an entry from the AP - Posted: 2008-01-23 18:17:56, and repeated over a number of days. This is an issue, but be assured that we nuclear power plant operators have only one primary priority, the health and safety of the public. So, read for your information, and in several instances, I have added additional commentary [shown as a red highlight]. Know that we would shut down our plant prior to any threat to the public....Entry starts below:
Nuclear reactors across the Southeast could be forced to throttle back or temporarily shut down later this year because drought is drying up the rivers and lakes that supply power plants with the awesome amounts of cooling water they need to operate.
With a lack of precipitation causing drought-like conditions throughout the Southeast, many nuclear reactors in the region may be forced to temporarily shut down since they need massive amounts of cooling water from lakes and rivers to operate.
Utility officials say such shutdowns probably wouldn't result in blackouts. But they could lead to shockingly higher electric bills for millions of Southerners, because the region's utilities may be forced to buy expensive replacement power from other energy companies.An Associated Press analysis of the nation's 104 nuclear reactors found that 24 are in areas experiencing the most severe levels of drought. All but two are built on the shores of lakes and rivers and rely on submerged intake pipes to draw billions of gallons of water for use in cooling and condensing steam after it has turned the plants'turbines. [For my nuclear plant, we had a forced shutdown in 2006 due to increased lake temperatures. We now install supplemental cooling, at a cost of $1.5M per year. We have a project for 2009 to make this supplemental cooling permanent.]
Because of the yearlong dry spell gripping the region, the water levels on those lakes and rivers are getting close to the minimums set by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Over the next several months, the water could drop below the intake pipes altogether. Or the shallow water could become too hot under the sun to use as coolant.
Extending or lowering the intake pipes is not as simple as it sounds and wouldn't necessarily solve the problem. The pipes are usually made of concrete, can be up to 18 feet in diameter and can extend up to a mile. Modifications to the pipes and pump systems, and their required backups, can cost millions and take several months. If the changes are extensive, they require an NRC review that itself can take months or longer. [At my nuclear plant, we estimated a minimum of $145M for this option, over a three year period]
During Europe's brutal 2006 heat wave, French, Spanish and German utilities were forced to shut down some of their nuclear plants and reduce power at others because of low water levels — some for as much as a week.
"Currently, nuclear power costs between $5 to $7 to produce a megawatt hour," said Daniele Seitz, an energy analyst with New York-based Dahlman Rose & Co. "It would cost 10 times that amount that if you had to buy replacement power — especially during the summer." [This is why alternative energy, such as solar or wind, will not be able to replace the base loaded nuclear and coal fired large plants]
Water sucked from lakes and rivers passes through pipes, which act as a condenser, turning the steam back into water. The outside water never comes into direct contact with the steam or any nuclear material. [So do not be concerned with nuclear safety, which is our number one priority, this is an efficiency issue, not a safety issue.]
No comments:
Post a Comment