Thursday, February 7, 2013

Retiring Nuclear Plant - First Nuclear Plant to Close in Florida

Crystal River Power Plant - Courtesy of TBT
Anyone who is from or lives near Tampa Bay, Florida often thinks of "Three Sisters Springs" or manatees when they hear about the city of Crystal River, which is located in Citrus County. However, a completely different scene is currently taking place there not too far from all the manatees and that is a nuclear power plant.

The Crystal River Power Plant, commonly referred to as CR3, was built in 1977 and is located about just 8 miles north of the river. The pressurized water reactor nuclear plant has a capacity of 860 megawatts of energy and uses uranium dioxide as fuel. In addition, the nuclear complex includes four coal-fired generating units on site.

Red Indicates Crystal River - Courtesy of Wikipedia
The nuclear plant has been shutdown since 2009 when all of its troubles began. During 2009, a planned replacement of steam generators was done in-house by Progress Energy, now Duke Energy, instead of hiring one of the two companies other U.S. utilities used for similar work. The idea was to save money but it ended up costing them big time because during the replace it was discovered that the reactor's 42-inch thick concrete containment building was cracked. Trying to fix the crack only worsened the problem. The idle nuclear power plant has since cost about $300 million a year to buy replacement power.  The energy company has decided it is not worth it to continue to invest in this plant due to its failing infrastructure. The hope is that the site will one day become a new natural gas plant in the future. In addition to being the first nuclear reactor plant to close in Florida, it will be one of the first major ones to close in the entire Southeastern U.S. The closing of CR3 brings about a lot of questions. How long will the decommissioning process take? A similar plant in Wiscassett, Maine took nearly seven years. And, how much is this going to actually cost in the long run? A 2008 report by Duke Energy suggested it would cost nearly $621 million! 

From an urban planning prospective, this looks disastrous. Not only is a nuclear power plant that could have created much needed clean energy for Florida's future being lost but also some 400 out of 600 jobs. Where will this people work after the decommissioning job is complete on the nuclear plant site? And how is this going to impact the energy costs and availability in that area? Lastly, what is going to become of the site if there is not any money in the future to fund the construction of a new, natural gas plant? Will the site end of looking like Chernobyl, a dreary abandoned property that is unsuitable for residences and schools due to its industrial nature? What kind of message does the closing down of a nuclear power plant give to other areas when this is the very thing many people are trying to promote as a source of hope for the future of our energy needs?

2 comments:

  1. From a cost perspective, I do believe that decommissioning of the plant and the overall cost of that is not worth it. It would be better suited for the state or the government to continue funding and replace the overall infrastructure of the plant than to continue to replace parts of it and promote nuclear power as a viable renewable energy source. Although a new Natural gas plant would be an ideal solution as well, the total cost to decommission the nuclear plant and then to build a new plant for Natural Gas power generation doesn’t seem like a very knowledgeable decision, if I am understanding the basis of this read.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think this particular situation is representative of a mind set that is no good for sustainability: bottom dollar wins. What is cheaper may not always be the best decision. In fact quality is often something that requires a little sacrifice on the price end. I wonder if anyone has done the life cycle costing for this situation the takes into account the extra emissions by replacing the output of this energy with something more conventional. On the other had there are a lot of risks associated with nuclear energy due to radiation. Perhaps a natural gas plant would cause more positive attention than a nuclear plan closing. Hopefully there's not such a long road ahead which costs so much money deciding what should be done.

    ReplyDelete