By Peter Nye

Despite being largely ignored—and some would argue better forgotten—for nearly three decades, nuclear power has re-emerged as a darling on the national stage. In June, the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) restarted its 1,200-MW Browns Ferry Unit 1 reactor in northern Alabama after a five-year, $1.8 billion refurbishing project—making it the first “new” U.S. nuclear reactor to come on-line in 11 years. TVA has also announced plans to complete work on the mothballed 1,180-MW Watts Bar Unit 2 plant at a cost of $2.49 billion. Its sister reactor, Unit 1, had been the last U.S. commercial nuclear power facility to begin operation.

In September, the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) announced that it expects to receive up to 29 applications from utilities to build new nuclear power plants in 20 states, chiefly in the South. Applications for the streamlined, combined construction and operating licenses—the first in nearly 30 years—are already rolling in.

To ensure proper oversight, NRC has also created an Office of New Reactors staffed with 400 inspectors, nearly as many as oversee the nation’s existing 104 commercial nuclear power units. The agency believes the next wave of nuclear power plants could begin feeding the grid between 2015 and 2020.

This unlikely revival comes courtesy of perhaps the central issue swirling about legislative circles today: climate change.

“Electric utilities are scrambling for ways to generate more electricity while curbing emissions of greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide, blamed for contributing to global warming,” explains John Holt, NRECA senior principal for generation & fuel. “As a result, lots of attention has been focused on nuclear power. It’s the only source other than coal that can generate adequate amounts of reliable baseload power to meet growing demand, and it only emits steam—clean water vapor.”…

Overall, nuclear power plants provide 20 percent of the nation’s power supply, second behind coal. For electric co-ops, 13 percent of the power produced by generation and transmission (G&T) co-ops, and 15 percent of all power requirements, are supplied by nuclear units, trailing only coal at 80 percent and 62 percent, respectively.

Earlier this year, EPRI released a study, Electricity Technology in a Carbon-Constrained Future, showing how U.S. electric utilities could reduce carbon dioxide emissions below 1990 levels within 23 years—even as they add about 40 percent more load, half of which will be generated by coal—by taking aggressive steps in seven principal areas, including nudging nuclear power up to 25 percent of market share by 2030….

At present, 10 G&Ts hold minority shares in 13 different nuclear units owned and operated by investor-owned utilities, representing more than 3,150 MW. The largest G&T owner, Oglethorpe Power Corporation, headquartered in Tucker, Ga.—which supplies wholesale power to 38 electric distribution co-ops around the Peach State—maintains a 30 percent stake in the two-unit, 2,320-MW Vogtle Nuclear Plant near Waynesboro, as well as a similar share in the two-unit, 1,630-MW Hatch Nuclear Plant near Baxley. Both facilities are operated by the Southern Nuclear Operating Company, a subsidiary of Atlanta, Ga.-headquartered Southern Company….

Another G&T in a similar position, Allegheny Electric Cooperative in Harrisburg, Pa., owns 10 percent of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station (SSES), a two-unit, 2,360-MW nuclear power plant located along the Susquehanna River near Berwick in the north-central part of the Keystone State. Allegheny Electric supplies wholesale power to 13 electric distribution co-ops across the Commonwealth and one in New Jersey, serving more than 220,000 homes, businesses, farms, and industries.

“SSES provides roughly 60 percent of our power requirements,” notes Dick Osborne, Allegheny Electric vice president-power supply & engineering. “We became a part owner in 1977 when we needed more generation and when a lot of G&Ts were being encouraged by the federal government to get involved in nuclear power. It’s a very stable, reliable source of power and remains very competitive with coal- and natural gas-fired generation.”

The plant’s principal owner and operator, Allentown, Pa.-based PPL Corporation, notified the NRC in June that it might apply for a combined construction and operating license on a third unit at SSES. Osborne asserts, “Allegheny Electric is very interested in working with PPL on continuing our joint-ownership relationship.”

Even with climate change pressures, nuclear power still faces heavy political and philosophical opposition in many circles. In February, Standard & Poor’s Rating Services noted that nuclear “is realistically only available to those G&Ts that are participants in an existing plant considering unit expansion.”

Holt reports that eight G&Ts have talked with investor-owned utilities about possible participation in new nuclear power plants. But he cautions that if proposed plants manage to overcome nearly three decades of “application drought” and the prospect of community hostility, and if Congress maintains federal Price-Anderson Act limits on utility liability in case of a nuclear accident and delivers loan guarantees sufficient to satisfy financial institutions, and, finally, if owners are able to line up necessary financing themselves, nuclear reactors will still take longer to build and cost at least three times more than similarly sized coal- or natural gas-fired generating stations.

“If plans for a nuclear plant of 1,000 megawatts to 1,500 megawatts capacity were permitted in 2008, the earliest one could go on-line would be 2015,” Holt estimates. “The cost would be at least $5 billion, and maybe higher, per unit of that size.”

Excerpted with permission from the November 2007 issue of Rural Electric Magazine^© National Rural Electric Cooperative Association. See “Related Links” for complete article.