Will Utah counties fund thorium reactor?

Could a coalition of rural counties in Utah and a startup company develop a thorium-fueled nuclear reactor for electric power and other purposes?

According to its website, the Seven County Infrastructure Coalition is currently comprised of seven counties in eastern Utah: Carbon, Daggett, Duchesne, Emery, San Juan, Sevier, and Uintah.  The website describes the Coalition’s main roles and mission as "to identify revenue-producing infrastructure assets that will benefit the region" and "to plan infrastructure corridors, procure funding, permit, design, secure rights-of-way and own such facilities," with operation and maintenance possibly outsourced to third parties.

Apparently under consideration by the Coalition are energy projects, including a "thorium energy" project and a "hydrogen plant" project.  For example, the "Procurement" section of the Coalition's website includes a Request for Qualifications for Project Analyst for Potential Thorium Energy and Hydrogen Plant Projects, as well as a Request for Qualifications Project Financial Analyst on Potential Thorium Energy Project.

Under the Project Analyst RFQ, which closed August 1, 2017,

The Coalition seeks an individual or team to act as a Project Analyst to advise it and its member counties on two proposed projects, how to evaluate emerging technologies, and the respective project teams. One project is a thorium energy facility for producing electricity, etc. as proposed by Alpha Tech Research Corporation. The second project consists of hydrogen plants to be used as fueling stations for hydrogen/electric semi-trucks as proposed by Nikola Motor Company, LLC.

Responsibilities defined in this original RFQ would include evaluation of the thorium energy and hydrogen plant projects, including an evaluation of "the feasibility and viability of projects in general, as well as the proposed projects, and determine how the Coalition and its members may use their assets to best benefit the public."

According to its website, Alpha Tech Research Corp.'s motto is "Changing the face of nuclear power with clean, safe, molten salt reactor technology."  But little other public information is easy to find on the company.

Thorium is a radioactive element that can be used in a nuclear reactor as a fuel for power production.  It is distinct from the uranium-based fuel used in traditional nuclear power plants.  Some limited research and development was conducted on thorium-based reactors in the twentieth century, but recent projects and all commercial reactors rely the uranium fuel cycle.  Proponents of thorium reactors suggest abundant fuel supplies and reduced weapons proliferation risk compared to uranium, combined with other advantages of nuclear power such as reliable baseload generation with zero carbon emissions.  Some point to Utah's mineral richness as a cost-effective source for lithium, beryllium, and other materials that could be useful in molten salt reactor resign. But crucially the technology, regulation, and business structures necessary to support a thorium reactor may not yet exist.

Fifteen days after the Project Analyst RFQ closed, the Coalition issued another request for qualifications "to seek an individual or team to act as a Project Analyst to advise it and its member counties on a proposed project related to thorium energy. In addition, the Coalition seeks guidance on how to evaluate emerging technologies, and companies or groups proposing projects to the Coalition. The thorium energy facility for producing electricity, etc. is proposed by Alpha Tech Research Corporation." Proposals under this subsequent RFQ are due by 2:00 PM on October 2, 2017.  According to the Salt Lake Tribune, a coalition representative reported, "The coalition’s initial request for qualifications drew no adequate responses by its Aug. 1 deadline."  (Query why not.)

It's unclear how far the Utah counties' efforts can go.  The coalition's stated criteria for evaluating potential projects include requiring appropriate project benefits (such as facilitating needs in rural Utah that would otherwise go unaddressed), as well as avoidance of any "fatal flaws" (such as "obvious non-Coalition sponsor that should take the lead", project success unlikely" and "low perceived benefit compared to cost.")  The coalition is presumably at the stage where it is seeking expert advice to help it evaluate the thorium energy project under these criteria.

In its materials, the coalition emphasizes its expectation to rely on public-private partnerships, in part to allocate project risk to private entities with special expertise in taking those risks.  But developing the first commercial thorium reactor inherently involves a variety of risks -- including developing a technology that works, securing all necessary regulatory approvals, and having business or financial arrangements in place that make the project a success.  These risks could pan out in the counties' favor -- but might not.  A coalition of South Carolina utilities developing what would have been the nation's first new commercial nuclear reactor recently announced a decision to suspend that project partway through construction, following years of delay, billions of dollars in cost overruns.  While a thorium reactor might avoid some of these challenges, others are likely systemic to the state of the nuclear power industry from a technological, regulatory, and business perspective, and would be hard for the counties to avoid. The counties may also have more proximate opportunities to achieve similar goals, including by facilitating or developing renewable energy infrastructure.

At the same time, the coalition deserves credit for thinking proactively and considering its options.  Whether the coalition continues to pursue thorium energy, or focuses on less speculative projects, the coalition's fundamental mission remains "to improve the quality of life through cooperative regional planning, increased economic opportunity, and sustainable implementation."  With the right balance of risk and reward, its evaluation of proposed projects could advance that mission.

TVA to lose largest industrial customer

The Tennessee Valley Authority is losing its largest industrial customer, a government-owned uranium enrichment plant.  When the plant near Paducah, Kentucky closes next year, TVA will lose about 5 percent of its electricity sales, resulting in a loss of about $600 million in annual revenue. What does this mean for TVA and for its fleet of coal-fired electric generating facilities?

The Tennessee Valley Authority is the nation's largest public power provider and a corporation of the U.S. government.  TVA provides electricity for about 9 million people in seven southeastern states: Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia.  TVA is independently financed, meaning it neither receives no taxpayer money nor retains any earnings as profits.  It owns the most operating electric capacity of any utility in the U.S. (33,804 MW as of 2011), and leads the nation in both volume of annual energy sales (167,730 million kilowatt-hours) and annual revenue ($11.841 billion).

TVA's largest customer has been the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant.  Originally built by the U.S. Department of Energy to enrich uranium into fuel for U.S. nuclear power plants, the plant has been leased to and managed by USEC, Inc. since 1993.  Paducah has been the nation's only facility for processing low-enriched uranium since 2001.

Last month, USEC announced that it plans to close the Paducah plant in 2014.  When that happens, TVA will face a new, smaller landscape of demand for its power.  As a result, some observers expect TVA to close the nearby Shawnee Fossil Plant.  The Shawnee facility is a 1,200-megawatt coal-fired power plant built at the same time as the Paducah enrichment plant at a site about 2 miles away.

TVA has not yet indicated whether it will close Shawnee, but in recent months it has announced plans to close 3 other older coal-fired power plants: the Widows Creek Fossil Plant in northeast Alabama, and the John Sevier and Johnsonville fossil plants in Tennessee.  On the other hand, TVA continues to modernize and invest in refurbishing other older coal-fired plants, including the Gallatin Fossil Plant near Nashville, Tennessee.  TVA is investing about $1.1 billion in Gallatin to install pollution controls including sulfur dioxide capture technology.

How TVA responds to the loss of the Paducah uranium plant remains to be seen.  TVA's relatively low rates for power may attract another large industrial customer to the region.  If that happens, it may continue to operate the Shawnee facility and other plants that can be made economical.  Otherwise, TVA may find itself faced with choices to mothball Shawnee or to do something else with its newfound surplus power.

March 17, 2011 - how nuclear power works in 250 words

As we watch the situation in Japan, where a number of reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant have been damaged by the earthquake and tsunami, I've been looking for a simple explanation of how nuclear power plants -- in Japan and here in the U.S. -- work.  Perhaps because it's a complex technology, or because there are a variety of ways humans use nuclear fission to generate electricity, I haven't found a very simple explanation -- so I decided to write one up myself.

Most nuclear power plants use the energy released by fission -- splitting atoms (usually uranium or plutonium) to heat water into steam.  The steam spins a turbine, which spins a generator to create electricity.   These turbines work much like other steam turbines found in other thermal electricity plants (such as those powered by biomass, natural gas, or coal).

The reactor is the heart of a nuclear power plant.  This key component differentiates nuclear plants from other thermal generators.  While most thermal generators create or release thermal energy (heat) through combustion, nuclear fission creates thermal energy by splitting atoms.  When one uranium atom splits, it releases heat and several neutrons -- subatomic particles that fly off the split atom.  If one of those neutrons smacks into another uranium atom at the right speed, that atom will then split, releasing more heat -- and importantly, more neutrons.  By controlling the speed at which these splits occur, operators create a sustained but controlled fission chain reaction.

When the heat produced by this chain reaction is absorbed by cooling water (like in your home’s boiler or car's radiator system), the water heats up to between 500 °F and 600 °F.  Depending on the reactor design, this heat either transforms the water into steam (in an open-loop boiling water reactor), or goes through a heat exchanger to create steam in a secondary loop (in a closed-loop pressurized water reactor).  Either way, the steam produced flows through a turbine, which spins a generator to create electricity.

That's an overview of the basics of nuclear power generation.  I've simplified it greatly to make it easier to understand.  If you dig deeper, the details are fascinating, and point to both the challenges and opportunities of harnessing fission to create electricity.

2/22/10

As expected, the federal Surface Transportation Board has received the Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Railway's notice of intent to abandon 233 miles of track in Maine, from Madawaska to Millinocket. Even though this line serves about 20 industrial freight customers, the Railway says it has been losing $4 million to $5 million a year through operating the lines because freight revenue has fallen. The typical freight shipped on the line includes lumber, plywood, logs and wood chips have fallen, all of which are in low demand given the slump in the housing market. If the rail is abandoned, it could cost 750 jobs as increased transportation costs would lead the region's manufacturers to scale back production.

Iran is choosing sites for uranium enrichment plants, claiming it wants civil nuclear power, not weapons.

Distributed generation gets a policy boost, with a finding that widely-adopted rooftop solar might be easier to develop than utility-scale solar arrays, due to the challenges of siting larger projects.

Much buzz today over Bloom boxes, distributed fuel cell arrays about to be announced. Bloom Energy, which raised $400 million in venture capital, holds a press conference on Wednesday at which it is expected to unveil its products. Interestingly, Google already has a 400 kW array in beta-testing operation.

Speaking of Google, FERC granted Google's market-based rate authorization. As someone who works with FERC's market-based rate structure, having filed a number of petitions myself, it is interesting to me to see how the media reports this: as enabling Google to purchase low-cost power. Surely we all want to purchase low-cost power -- what would it take to enable us all to purchase power at market-based rates? Most people would qualify -- no market power, etc.

Some question whether Energy Star really means much for appliance efficiency.

The administration's pro-nuclear news of last week continues to resonate, as Texas evaluates whether proposed new reactors there will receive similar government support.

Six Maine school and university oil-to-wood heating projects will receive more than $3.2 million in federal Recovery Act funds managed by the Maine Forest Service. The Presque Isle office of the University of Maine Cooperative Extension was awarded $16,575 for installation of a pellet boiler to replace the current oil boiler, displacing 1,850 gallons of fuel oil. (The existing boiler is around 10 years old -- are we incenting inefficient replacement of newer equipment while older, less efficient facilities remain?) Overall this project costs an estimated $40,169, with the remainder of the project funded by the Maine Economic Improvement Fund. Regional School Unit 29 in Houlton was awarded $750,000 for conversion of an oil boiler to a wood chip boiler at Houlton High School, displacing 65,000 gallons of the 85,000 gallons of fuel oil used annually by the district. The district uses about 85,000 gallons of oil a year, according to the superintendent. Here, the district will keep its oil boiler, but will rely on the new boiler for heating. Other winners are Oxford Hills High School, the Greenville School Department, Phillips Middle School and Poland Middle-High School. Maine Forest Service Director Alec Giffen said the six projects collectively “will annually avoid the burning of almost 263,000 gallons of oil, recirculate $600,000 in fuel dollars in the Maine economy, and avoid more than 5 million pounds of emissions from fossil fuels.”

More Maine stimulus: EECBG grants to central Maine communities.