The Real TVA Problem at Belleforte

Dan Yurman has an interesting account of the TVA Bellefonte units 1 and 2 story. Bellefonte 1 and 2 were reactors that TVA suspended construction on in 1988, and surrendered their construction license for in 2006. Now two years later TVA wants the NRC to reinstate the construction license for the two Generation II reactors. TVA in the mean time had filed a licensing application to build two new Westinghouse AP-1000s at Bellefonte. Clearly some explanation is in order.

Yurman explains that the cost od new reactor construction and TVA which was speaking confidently of reactor construction prices of $4.5 billion for the new AP-1000s. It was obvious at the time that TVA had made a major mistake in canceling its license or units 1 and 2. Unit one was 88% complete, and TVA was facing a future in which long term reliance of coal generated electricity could not be assumed. As it has turned out the cost of construction of new nuclear plants has risen dramatically during the last few years, and TVA which was talking confidently of building its new AP-1000's at Bellefonte for no more than $3 billion a unit, now is saying that the cost is going to run more like $4.5 billion each. Suddenly TVA's investment in the incomplete Belleforte Units, starts taking on real value. Dan Yurman suggest that it might cost TVA as little as 3.6 billion to complete the incomplete Bellefonte units. Thus completing the Belleforte units would cost TVA only 40% of what the New AP-1000s would cost. If we get a carbon tax, TVA will want all 4.

However there is more to the story. Power generating costs are rising dramatically. This is the case for both Nuclear facilities, wind generators, or solar facilities. Demand created by the Asian building boom is rapidly driving up the price of building materials. In addition, traditional reactor construction methods are inefficient, chaotic, archaic and expensive. This problem is imposed by reactor size.

Nuclear power construction costs can be lowered significantly if we introduce more efficient and safer reactor technology, build reactors in factories, build smaller size reactors, and take innovative approaches to reactor siting. In order to do so, there must be some government program to develop advanced nuclear technology. Unfortunately the government stopped supporting innovations in nuclear technology around 1969, and has left the task of technological innovation in reactor design to other countries. High reactor costs are part of the price of technological backwardness. And in terms of reactor technology, the United States is extremely backwards.

Given a commitment to the development of advanced reactor designs, the United States could very well now have safer, high performance, reactors that produce 1% of the nuclear waste of conventional technologically retarded reactors. The present love affair with renewable energy now is a factor in our technological backwardness. Democratic politicians are not supporting reactor research programs that will produce the sort of reactor we need, while the Bush administration, which in theory supports nuclear energy, is just as clueless about what should be done.

Energy pundits like Joe Romm, back renewables and the crazy idea that we really don't need much post carbon-electricity if we get efficient enough. Economists say that energy efficiency actually increases energy use, contrary to Romm's claim. Romm is a strident enemy of efficiency that involves new highly efficient, low cost reactor technology. Strident nuclear opponents, like Romm, who claim to be environmentalists, mindlessly oppose any advance in nuclear technology.

TVA faces a troubled future if it does not recognize its need to access new low-cost nuclear technology. Coal fired power plants may soon be taxed at the rate of $45 per ton of CO2, making fossil fuel generated electricity prohibitively expensive, and TVA owns caoa fired power plants rated at 15 Thousand MWs. TVA has built hydroelectric dams almost everywhere in the Tennessee River Valley. The Southeaster United States has very poor wind resources. In addition the Southeastern United States is often cloudy, making it a very poor candidate for solar generated electricity. Thus TVA needs to build reactors, but conventional reactors are growing very expensive. Hence TVA need a low cost alternative form of nuclear power.

The need for a low cost alternative form of nuclear power is not just a TVA problem, or even a national problem, it is a world wide problem. In fact, other nations, France, Japan, China and even South Africa have recognized the problem and started programs to develop advanced technology low cost reactors that can be built in factories. The United States, no longer a technological leader leaves it to others to solve its problems.