Nuclear Power Gets a Big Boost in the US

  • Thread starter Thread starter gleem
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The decline of fossil fuels has intensified the focus on revitalizing the nuclear power sector, highlighted by the recent passage of the ADVANCE Act, which aims to streamline NRC regulations for reactor approvals. This legislation allows multiple reactors to be built on the same site with reduced delays, addressing previous inefficiencies in the approval process. Concerns remain about the lack of follow-through on domestic nuclear projects, particularly after significant investments in units like Vogtle 3 and 4. Meanwhile, efforts to reopen reactors, such as Three Mile Island and others in Michigan and Iowa, are underway to meet rising energy demands, including those from tech giants like Microsoft. The discussion reflects a broader economic context where the viability of nuclear energy is being reassessed amid changing market dynamics.
gleem
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Messages
2,700
Reaction score
2,171
The deemphasis of fossil fuels for energy production has put pressure on revitalizing the nuclear power industry. A good step forward was taken last month by the passing and signing of new legislation: the ADVANCE (Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy) Act. A key element of this legislation is streamlining the NRC and its regulations. If the NRC approves a project for a reactor, multiple reactors can be built on the same site with much-reduced delay and approval by the NRC. Previously, each unit at a site was reviewed and approved as a new reactor going through the same review as the previous one resulting in new requirements for that unit causing delays and increased expense.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/congress-advance-act-nuclear-power_n_6670a926e4b08889dbe5e626
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters, scottdave and Drakkith
Engineering news on Phys.org
Thanks, @gleem that is an interesting article.

The point about not continuing to build more AP1000 units in the US is particularly vexing to me. After all of the blood, sweat, and tears that went into constructing Vogtle units 3 and 4 it is truly a shame to see no follow through. Several AP1000 units were built in China, and Westinghouse is probably working towards winning some contracts outside the US. But every year that passes is another year of losing the domestic construction craft talent and supply chain capability.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters, Astronuc, phinds and 1 other person
gmax137 said:
After all of the blood, sweat, and tears that went into constructing Vogtle units 3 and 4 it is truly a shame to see no follow through.
Not to mention partially constructed VC Summer 2 & 3.

gmax137 said:
But every year that passes is another year of losing the domestic construction craft talent and supply chain capability.
That's been an issue in the US since the 1990s.
 
Constellation Energy will reopen Three Mile Island's reactor to sell electricity to Microsoft for their AI program.
They plan to spend $1.5B and have it running by 2028.

Another reactor in Michigan shut down in 2022 is also being reopened and is expected to go online in late 2025 at a cost of $2B. In addition a reactor in Iowa is being considered for reopening.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/t...n&cvid=306b93c2b91e41a1ac6f0d9fddc74b47&ei=43
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters
It's hard to imagine one company needing 800 MW of power. Wow.

Also, it is hard to imagine the economic landscape shifting so much in 5yrs.
 
I lot of these is hype and fear of missing out.

Ultimately, to make money someone has to sell something. McDonalds sells $100B worth of burgers per year. Is spending a billion on AI to increase sales sensible? Probably. $10B? Possibly. $100B? Probably not. So there will be some impact, but there will not be a gold rush.

Amazon wiped out Sears. But it wiped out Sears. Amazon's business is there because Sears isn't there any more.
 
Hello everyone, I am currently working on a burnup calculation for a fuel assembly with repeated geometric structures using MCNP6. I have defined two materials (Material 1 and Material 2) which are actually the same material but located in different positions. However, after running the calculation with the BURN card, I am encountering an issue where all burnup information(power fraction(Initial input is 1,but output file is 0), burnup, mass, etc.) for Material 2 is zero, while Material 1...
Hi everyone, I'm a complete beginner with MCNP and trying to learn how to perform burnup calculations. Right now, I'm feeling a bit lost and not sure where to start. I found the OECD-NEA Burnup Credit Calculational Criticality Benchmark (Phase I-B) and was wondering if anyone has worked through this specific benchmark using MCNP6? If so, would you be willing to share your MCNP input file for it? Seeing an actual working example would be incredibly helpful for my learning. I'd be really...

Similar threads

Back
Top