Missouri Seeks to Become Global Producer of Small Nuclear Reactors

[FBaggins]

Missouri is putting its own plans for a second nuclear reactor on hold in an effort to be become the leader in new nuclear reactor technology. On Thursday, state political and energy leaders gathered on the lawn of the Missouri Governor's Mansion to announce a partnership between Ameren Missouri and Westinghouse Electric Company to seek competitive federal cost-share investment funds from the Department of Energy that would be used to manufacture Small Modular Nuclear Reactors in Missouri.

If approved by the DOE, the plan is for Missouri to become the home base for the construction and distribution of smaller nuclear reactors throughout the world. Based on Westinghouse's AP 1000 model large reactors, these new reactors would have about 1/5 the energy output and would be designed to replace aging coal-burning electric plants. Westinghouse officials say these smaller reactors can be produced in less than half the time of larger, traditional reactors and are designed for easy rail transportation.

...snip...

If successful in its federal funding pursuit, the new reactors would be constructed at the site of Ameren's Callaway Nuclear Generating plant in CallawayCounty, bringing new jobs to Mid-Missouri.

...snip...

"This investment is a once-in-a-generation opportunity that could spark a next-generation manufacturing industry in Missouri," said Gov. Jay Nixon.

http://ozarksfirst.com/fulltext?nxd_id=634612

Bravo!

[Cooley Hurd]

1. Manufacturing little Fukishimas and Chernobyls

Bravo?

[FBaggins]

2. These designs are dramatically safer than either of those.

Not that anyone who sees anything "nukular" as being "the next chernobyl" will be able to see that.

[GliderGuider]

3. In their dreams.

Have these guys not picked up a newspaper or read a public opinion poll about nuclear power recently?

They are counting on the trans-national corporate spin-and-reeducation machine to fix those polls. What they haven't figured out yet is that people are waking up from that trance and asking what the fuck they've been up to.

Stick a fork in it - its day is done, its race is run.

[FBaggins]

4. Hardly.

Have these guys not picked up a newspaper or read a public opinion poll about nuclear power recently?

You mean like this one?

Americans Still Favor Nuclear Power a Year After Fukushima

Majority also still sees nuclear power as safe
http://www.gallup.com/poll/153452/americans-favor-nuclear-power-year-fukushima.aspx

Just as importantly, support isn't homogeneous across the country. There are plenty of places where there's plenty of support... and a new generation of smaller/safer/cheaper reactors can only help.

[GliderGuider]

5. We'll see.

I think it's a forlorn hope, but only time will tell.

[FBaggins]

6. Well yes... but...

... "in your dreams" does seem to be an appropriate response in the other direction.

Nuclear power globally has not collapsed as many here fervently (or feverishly?) desire, and its actually starting to ramp back up again in the US. Many are grasping at any straw to convince themselves that it isnt happening...

...but it is.

[GliderGuider]

7. It hasn't actually been all that long yet.

A year isn't such a long time as these things go. Let's see what happens when the next 100 reactors come up for life extension or decommissioning.

The ongoing global economic meltdown is going to play a role as well. In 5 or 10 years there may not be enough money, need or appetite for new energy sources of any sort.

[FBaggins]

11. Well... the last point is certainly correct.

Economic weakness will continue to dampen demand and that (along with desire to preserve capital) will certainly cut demand for high-dollar projects.

But you're missing how that works in this case. We're talking about building an industry that produces small modular reactors. They're cheaper (certainly on a gross basis), so capital concerns are less of an issue. More importantly, the economic hit is not the same all around the world. There are plenty of countries with rapid growth and many of them want nuclear power and lots of it. This specific option is very exportable (and more of the work stays here).

[GliderGuider]

12. It really doesn't matter if I get how this particular industry might work.

I don't want to see any more nuclear of any sort built.
I don't want to see any more coal plants built.
I don't even want to see any more NG peakers built, though that's not likely.

I do think the unfolding global economic crash (to call a spade a spade) is going to make some of my wishes come true. I'm expecting a big-time decline over the next two decades in the amount of energy this old world needs and wants. It will hit nuclear first, and coal second. I'm happy with that prospect.

No money + public distaste = a poor future for nuclear.
No money + global warming = a poor future for coal.
No money + peak oil = a poor future for oil.

That's the world I hope we're moving into. It's time for a change.

[GliderGuider]

8. Poll vs. Poll

Citizens across world oppose nuclear power, poll finds

A new opinion poll from Ipsos MORI tells us: 62% of citizens in 24 countries across the world oppose the use of nuclear energy, with a quarter of those having changed their minds after the Fukushima disaster.

So what stands out? The most anti-nuclear nations in the poll, at about 80% against, were Italy, Germany and Mexico. Only three of the 24 countries had majorities that favoured nuclear power: India (61%), Poland (57%) and the US (52%). The UK and Sweden were split 50-50 within the uncertainty cited.

In France, where most of the electricity is produced by nuclear, 67% opposed it, the same percentage as in coal-rich Australia. Perhaps surprisingly, 42% of people in Japan, still recovering from the huge tremor that wrecked the Fukushima nuclear plant, remain supportive of nuclear power.

The pollsters also asked whether people opposed other ways of generating electricity. With 62% against, nuclear was the least popular, followed by coal (52% against), gas (20%), hydroelectricity (9%), wind power (7%) and solar power (3%).

It's worth keeping in mind that it's not the middle-of-the-road opponents who cause nuclear plans to be cancelled. It's the hard-core opponents, out a couple of sigmas from the mean. Any increase in either the number or dedication of those opponents presents a powerful challenge to the trans-national corporatist agenda for nuclear power. That 25% number I bolded above hints that this is what is happening.

[FBaggins]

9. Not really.

One is a global survey taken just weeks after a major nuclear disaster (and even then still showed support in the US).

The other is a very current poll of americans taken by the premier polling firm in the country.

It's worth keeping in mind that it's not the middle-of-the-road opponents who cause nuclear plans to be cancelled. It's the hard-core opponents, out a couple of sigmas from the mean.

That was certainly true three decades ago. Their influence appears to have waned.

That 25% number I bolded above hints that this is what is happening.

Hints thats what was happening a year ago. Did you know that they ran the poll again six months later?

Public Support for Nuclear Energy makes early recovery after Fukushima

The latest face-to-face survey of the British public by Ipsos MORI shows that public support for nuclear energy has bounced back strongly since its June 2011 low point in the wake of the Fukushima incident in Japan in March.

http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/2903/Nuclear-Energy-Update-Poll.aspx

Public support had been generally climbing for years prior to fukushima. It took a very understandable dip in the wake of fukushima... but there's every indication that much of the dip was temporary.

[GliderGuider]

10. Mmmm

Support for nuclear: Broad but shallow?

Digging into the Gallup data, one observes that strong support and opposition have both historically ranged around 23% and 21%, respectively; the bulk of support and opposition has been in the more moderated "somewhat support" (33%) and "somewhat oppose" (19%). How has this changed in the events following Fukushima? Overall, not much - overall support remains constant at 57%, although one observes some erosion in self-identified "strong" support. Meanwhile, strong opposition has hardened (growing from 18% to 24% in the last polling period).

Polls are not a reliable determinant of public policy, of course. As I said, we'll see.

But it wouldn't surprise me at all to find out that the opponents of nuclear power become quite hard-line when they are given openings such as public hearings on life extensions or new plants. They know that Fukushima has given them a precious wedge to drive into the process. Here's hoping they succeed.

[diane in sf]

13. morons, they should corner the market on buggy whips instead, less toxic, more up-to-date