Sep 29, 2024: The case against restarting Three Mile Island’s Unit-1


Radioactive: The Women of Three Mile Island

Did you catch "The Meltdown: Three Mile Island" on Netflix?
TMI remains a danger and TMIA is working hard to ensure the safety of our communities and the surrounding areas.
Learn more on this site and support our efforts. Join TMIA. To contact the TMIA office, call 717-233-7897.

    

Good afternoon Eric,
 
Here is our article about Three Mile Island (Google translate might help)
Thank you again for our participation
Best regards
 
 
PS the radio version is in the same link, just click on this in the article
 
 
US Correspondent/Correspondant aux États-Unis
Radio-Canada/CBC
Washington, DC 
 
https://twitter.com/fredericarnould?lang=fr

SUN DAY CAMPAIGN

8606 Greenwood Avenue, Suite #2; Takoma Park, MD 20912-6656  
Twitter: Follow @SunDayCampaign  
   
   
Brief News Update & Analysis  
   
 
SOLAR IS 78% OF NEW US GENERATING CAPACITY YTD
AND THE LARGEST SOURCE OF NEW CAPACITY
FOR 13 MONTHS STRAIGHT
 
AT 11% OF NEW CAPACITY, WIND ADDED MORE
THAN NATURAL GAS & NUCLEAR POWER COMBINED
 
MIX OF ALL RENEWABLES HAS PROVIDED
90% OF NEW CAPACITY IN 2024 YTD
 
 
For Release:  Monday, December 2, 2024
 
Contact:         Ken Bossong, 301-588-4741
 
Washington DC – A review by the SUN DAY Campaign of data newly released by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) reveals that the mix of renewable energy sources (i.e., biomass, geothermal, hydropower, solar, wind) accounted for almost 90% of total U.S. electrical generating capacity added in the first three-quarters of 2024. Moreover, September was the thirteenth month in a row in which solar was the largest source of new capacity.
 
 
Renewables were 82.4% of new generating capacity in September and 89.6% in first three-quarters of 2024:
 
In its latest monthly “Energy Infrastructure Update” (with data through September 30, 2024), FERC says 47 “units” of solar totaling 1,786 megawatts (MW) were placed into service in September along with two units of wind (156-MW) and one unit of hydropower (1-MW). Combined they accounted for 82.4% of all new generating capacity added during the month. Natural gas provided the balance: 410-MW. [1]
 
During the first nine months of 2024, solar and wind added 18,635-MW and 2,626-MW respectively. Combined with 213-MW of hydropower and 6-MW of biomass, renewables were 89.6% of capacity added. The balance consisted of the 1,100 Vogtle-4 nuclear reactor in Georgia plus 1,387-MW of gas, 11-MW of oil, and 8-MW of “other.”
 
 
Solar was 75.7% of new capacity in September and 77.7% during the first nine months of 2024:
 
Solar has now been the largest source of new generating capacity added each month for thirteen months straight: September 2023 – September 2024.
 
The new solar capacity added from January through September accounted for 77.7% of all new generation placed into service for the period.
 
In September alone, solar comprised 75.7% of all new capacity added.
 
Adjusting for the differences in capacity factors among solar, nuclear power, and natural gas, the new solar capacity added thus far in 2024 is likely to generate more than four times as much electricity as the new nuclear capacity and over five times as much as might be expected from the new natural gas capacity. [2]
 
 
Solar plus wind are now more than 21% of U.S. generating capacity; all renewables combined are 30.3%:
 
New wind capacity accounted for much of the balance YTD (10.9%) which is more than the new natural gas capacity (5.8%) and nuclear power capacity (4.6%) combined. New solar capacity is approximately seven and one-half times that of the combination of natural gas and nuclear power.
 
Taken together, the installed capacities of just solar (9.4%) and wind (11.8%) now constitute more than one-fifth (21.2%) of the nation’s total available installed utility-scale generating capacity: wind – 11.8%; solar – 9.4%.
 
However, approximately 30% of U.S. solar capacity is in the form of small-scale (e.g., rooftop) systems that is not reflected in FERC’s data. [3] Including that additional solar capacity would bring the share provided by solar + wind closer to a quarter of the nation’s total.
 
With the inclusion of hydropower (7.7%), biomass (1.1%) and geothermal (0.3%), renewables now claim a 30.3% share of total U.S. utility-scale generating capacity.
 
 
Solar’s share of installed U.S. generating capacity is greater than either nuclear power or hydropower:
 
The latest capacity additions have brought solar’s share of total available installed utility-scale (i.e., >1-MW) generating capacity up to 9.4%, further expanding its lead over nuclear power (7.9%) as well as hydropower (7.7%).
 
Installed utility-scale solar has now moved into fourth place – behind natural gas (43.4%), coal (15.5%) and wind (11.8%) - for its share of generating capacity.
 
 
Solar will soon become the second largest source of U.S. generating capacity:
 
FERC reports that net “high probability” additions of solar between October 2024 and September 2027 total 94,491-MW – an amount more than four times the forecast net “high probability” additions for wind (22,711-MW), the second fastest growing resource. FERC also foresees growth for hydropower (1,290-MW), biomass (124-MW), and geothermal (90-MW).
 
Taken together, the net new “high probability” capacity additions by all renewable energy sources would total 118,706-MW with solar comprising nearly 80% and wind providing another 19%.  
 
On the other hand, there is no new nuclear capacity in FERC’s three-year forecast while coal, oil, and natural gas are projected to contract by 19,863-MW, 2,244-MW, and 1,145-MW respectively.
 
If FERC’s current “high probability” additions materialize, by October 1, 2027, solar will account for nearly one-sixth (15.5%) of the nation’s installed utility-scale generating capacity. That would be greater than either coal (13.0%) or wind (12.6%) and substantially more than either nuclear power (7.4%) or hydropower (7.3%).
 
In fact, assuming current growth rates continue, the installed capacity of utility-scale solar is likely to surpass coal and wind within the next two years, placing solar in second place for installed generating capacity – behind only natural gas.
 
Meanwhile, the mix of all renewables is adding about two percentage points each year to its share of generating capacity. Thus, by September 30, 2027, renewables would account for 36.7% of total available installed utility-scale generating capacity - rapidly approaching that of natural gas (40.3%) - with solar and wind constituting more than three-quarters of the installed renewable energy capacity.
 
 
The combined capacities of all renewables, including small-scale solar, remain on track to exceed natural gas within three years:
 
As noted, FERC’s data do not account for the capacity of small-scale solar systems. If that is factored in, within three years, total U.S. solar capacity (i.e., small-scale plus utility-scale) is likely to surpass 300-GW. In turn, the mix of all renewables would then exceed 40% of total installed capacity while natural gas’ share would drop to about 37%.
 
Moreover, FERC reports that there may actually be as much as 216,989-MW of net new solar additions in the current three-year pipeline in addition to 66,308-MW of new wind, 9,131-MW of new hydropower, 199-MW of new geothermal, and 195-MW of new biomass. By contrast, net new natural gas capacity potentially in the three-year pipeline totals just 18,029-MW. Thus, renewables’ share could be even greater by early fall 2027.
 
 
"New solar capacity added in 2024 thus far will produce more electricity than will be generated by new nuclear power and natural gas additions," noted the SUN DAY Campaign's executive director Ken Bossong. "Unless derailed by the incoming Trump Administration, solar - which has now been top dog for 13 months straight - is poised to continue dominating capacity additions for at least the next three years." 
  
# # # # # # # # #  
   
Source:  
FERC's 6-page "Energy Infrastructure Update for September 2024" was released on November 29, 2024, and can be found at: https://cms.ferc.gov/media/energy-infrastructure-update-september-2024.
 
For the information cited in this update, see the tables entitled "New Generation In-Service (New Build and Expansion)," "Total Available Installed Generating Capacity," and "Generation Capacity Additions and Retirements."

Notes:   
[1] Generating capacity is not the same as actual generation. Fossil fuels and nuclear power generally have higher "capacity factors" than do wind and solar (see Note #2 below).
 
[2] EIA reports capacity factors in calendar year 2023 for nuclear power and combined-cycle natural gas plants were 93.0% and 59.7% respectively while those for wind and utility-scale solar PV were 33.2% and 23.2%. See Tables 6.07.A and 6.07.B in EIA's most recent "Electric Power Monthly" report. 

[3] In a September 12, 2023 news release, EIA states: “More than one-third of U.S. solar power capacity is small-scale solar. … We expect small-scale solar capacity … will grow from 44-GW in June 2023 to 55-GW by the end of 2024.” See: https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/BTL/2023/09-smallscalesolar/article.php
 
# # # # # # # # # 
   
The SUN DAY Campaign is a non-profit research and educational organization founded in 1992 to support a rapid transition to 100% reliance on sustainable energy technologies as a cost-effective alternative to nuclear power and fossil fuels and as a solution to climate change. Follow on Twitter (or “X”): @SunDayCampaign  
Thanks to Bob Schaeffer for finding this. Nov 2024 report from Kerrisdale Capital on Oklo. References IEEFA's SMR/new reactors cost chart (page 10) and even hyperlinks on page 1 to the term "Nuclear Bros." to Dr. Ed Lyman's great blog.
 
Excerpt: We believe investors should be wary of unsubstantiated claims spouted by these "Nuclear Bros.” Recent SMR projects have experienced dramatic cost escalation, Oklo does not have the long-term supply of enriched uranium fuel it needs (and won’t well into the 2030s), and sodium-cooled reactors have well-documented reliability problems.  

https://www.kerrisdalecap.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/OKLO-Kerrisdale.pdf

Westinghouse, Core Power join forces for floating nuclear power plant - World Nuclear News

Eric,
 
Hearings cannot be requested on exemption requests. However, there is an opportunity to do so regarding license amendment requests.
 
As is the case with the Palisades potential restart review, there will be license amendment requests associated with the Three Mile Island 
Unit 1 potential restart licensing reviews.
 
Neil Sheehan
NRC Public Affairs
 
https://files.constantcontact.com/abc65024401/7ee258bf-32c2-48a3-bbd6-c0cec7c545aa.jpg?rdr=true

Beyond Nuclear Bulletin
November 21, 2024


POWER OP-ED
Nuclear relapse recalls boondoggles
 
Beyond Nuclear’s radioactive waste specialist, Kevin Kamps, has published an opinion-editorial in POWER. It focuses on Holtec’s zombie reactor restart scheme at Palisades, and so-called “Small Modular Reactor” new build proposals there, and at Big Rock Point, both on Michigan’s Lake Michigan shore. This Great Lakes State nuclear "poster child" is a leading edge microcosm of the nuclear power establishment’s money grabs, extreme risk taking, and propaganda push across the country, and planet-wide. The George W. Bush administration attempted a quarter-century ago to pave the way for gigantic new reactors in the U.S. But of three-dozen proposed, only two achieved operational status, seven years behind schedule, and more than double the initial price tag.
Read More

ANTI-NUKE NEWS
Showing up in MSM, trade press, more
 
Activists, some of whom have dedicated most of their lives to the cause, sometimes break through the Main Stream Media, and even into nuclear power industry trade press publications (see POWER op-ed entry). Eric Epstein, Three Mile Island Alertchair, was quoted on November 17 in the Financial Times regarding zombie nukes like TMI-1 electrifying AI data centers: “We haven’t even cleaned up Three Mile Island unit two, the site of the accident is still highly radioactive...and now we’re going to generate more nuclear waste. It’s disappointing and it’s manifestly unfair.” In the Chicago Tribune on November 16, Nuclear Energy Information Servicedirector, Dave Kraft, was quoted: “We really need to question AI itself. Is all that energy intensity worth it?”
Read More


EX-WESTINGHOUSE VP JAILED
South Carolina customers to pay
 
On November 20, 2024, ex-Westinghouse Electric Corporation Vice President and head of the company’s AP1000 advanced reactor global marketing, Jeffrey Benjamin was sentenced in the District of South Carolina Federal Court to one year and a day in prison and a $100,000 fine for his role to defraud the South Carolina Public Utility Commission and state electric ratepayers of billions of dollars following the SCANA utility's 2017 abandonment and $9 billion sunk cost in the failed construction of V.C. Summer nuclear plant. 
 
SCANA CEO Kevin Marsh and Chief Operating Officer Stephen Byrne were also convicted of fraud and sentenced to prison. 
 
Another Westinghouse official, Carl Churchman, pled guilty to lying to the FBI and sentenced to six months home detention.
 

PALISADES ZOMBIE?!
NRC, FEMA revive emergency plans
 
Concerned local residents and environmental groups, including Beyond Nuclear, spoke out against Holtec's unprecedented, unneeded, insanely expensive for the public, and extremely high-risk restart scheme for the closed for good Palisades atomic reactor on southwest Michigan's Great Lakes shore. This was the third major hybrid public meeting in just the past four months. This time, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and Federal Emergency Management Agency, focused on re-establishing Palisades' emergency preparedness plans, which NRC had allowed previous owner Entergy, new owner Holtec, and state, county, and local governments to end, given its supposed permanent closure. Citing highly radioactive waste still stored on-site, Kevin Kamps stated “Emergency preparedness should never have been terminated in the first place."
 
 
 
 
 

Beyond Nuclear | 301.270.2209 | www.BeyondNuclear.org

Donate
TMI-2 SOLUTIONS, LLC, THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 2 - NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 05000320/2024003

ADAMS ACCESSION NO. ML24319A127
 

PJM’s Capacity Auction: The Real Story

Fossil fuel un-reliability and PJM’s failure to speedily connect new clean resources to the grid are to blame for the 2025/26 auction price spike.
 

 

View of the Herbert A. Wagner Coal Generating Station in Maryland. Fossil fuel plants like Wagner caused the price spike in PJM's latest auction.

On July 30, PJM announced the results of its capacity auction for 2025-2026, which showed total costs of nearly $14.7 billion, compared to last year’s $2.2 billion. There are two major causes for blame: fossil fuel un-reliability and PJM’s failure to speedily connect thousands of megawatts of wind, solar, and storage to the grid. This was foreseeable and preventable, and PJM’s failure to allow for new clean energy to come online and plan for more transmission has forced the bill onto ratepayers. 

In this blog, we’ll break down what happened, and show that solutions are within reach. 

What happened?

PJM’s capacity market is set up to ensure that there is enough electricity to meet demand on the hottest and coldest days of the year. Capacity auctions, which happen annually, occur when power plants are paid to commit to be available, or customers are paid to conserve during emergencies.

For years, PJM has over-relied on fossil fuel power plants, even while affordable new power sources are coming online. Gas plants are prone to fail during extreme weather, such as winter storm Elliott in 2022 – when we need them the most. Since PJM did not account for fossil resource weaknesses in its previous capacity market auctions, customers paid for these plants as if they were reliable. That’s like buying a house at full price only to realize the foundation is crumbling. It now turns out that the repairs are quite expensive.

Last year, PJM took the first step in remedying this problem by changing the way all resources are evaluated for reliability, resulting in a more accurate process known as “marginal capacity accreditation.” According to S&P Global, the result was that roughly 26 gigawatts (GW) of gas and coal resources were shown to be unreliable, and thus could no longer claim to benefit PJM at their assumed full output during all weather conditions. 

This chart shows the drivers for the change in PJM’s capacity prices between the last auction (for the 2024-5 year) and the most recent auction (2025-6). Both supply and demand changes drove the price increase. Negative values indicate reductions in capacity in PJM’s system, while positive values indicate additional available capacity. Market changes to better evaluate the reliability of all resources caused the shift in risk periods and resulting additional capacity (far left orange bar), the gas derates, the coal derates, the solar derates, and the changes to the Installed Reserve Margin (IRM). We can see that the reduction in gas capacity is the largest driver for the “tightening” of PJM’s system. Retirements and load growth, while significant, contributed less to the overall price. Only 110 MW (0.1 GW) of new resources came online to help provide capacity; the low number is due mostly to slow interconnection queues. 

Credit: NRDC

As with most markets, when supply falls, prices rise. With 26 GW of gas and coal resources now deemed to be unreliable and therefore not counted in its capacity market, the price of capacity in PJM spiked. Affordability, but not reliability, is now at risk.   

We need not have come to this place. Why? There are over 286 GW of new resources waiting to come online in the interconnection queue. That is far more than the 135 GW of resources that cleared in the PJM auction. Even a fraction of these queued resources could significantly improve reliability and affordability if they were able to come online. 

Unfortunately, PJM has slow-walked interconnection reforms to connect these resources to the grid. This sticker shock is a direct result of delays in getting new energy online, together with the transmission to support it. Many of these resources would have absorbed and buffered the price increases by increasing supply.

Fewer new resources and imports participated in the 2025/26 auction than ever before, showing a clear downward trend.

Credit:

PJM Interconnection, “2025/2026 Base Residual Auction Report,” July 30, 2024.

This doesn’t mean we need more gas – on the contrary, it shows that fossil fuels are expensive and unreliable, and a diverse resource mix will benefit the region far into the future. These high prices are sending a signal to build, and PJM shouldn’t stand in the way of progress. Instead, PJM seems more interested in keeping aging and expensive fossil plants alive, such as Brandon Shores in Maryland, rather than expediting the interconnection of new resources to the PJM power system.

What about retirements and load growth?

Around 6 GW of fossil plants retired since the last auction. The fossil lobby will say this is due to draconian regulations that are forcing power plants to retire before their time, but the truth is that most of these plants are no longer economically viable. Most of the retiring resources are decades-old coal plants, built in the 1960s, and some are facing bankruptcy. Lower-cost, reliable clean energy can replace even more of them, but only if they can get online – which requires PJM to accelerate the interconnection process. 

Projected load growth of 3.2 GW further strained the system, which is a 2.2% increase over the last planning year. Planning for load growth and retirements is important, but the principal driver of the capacity market price increase was PJM derating the gas plants to reflect their lower reliability value. The gas and coal derating (26 GW) was nearly three times as much as the combination of retirements and load growth. 

How can we fix this?

PJM needs new resources, and quickly. The good news is that  there are currently 268 GW of new resources patiently waiting to come online in PJM, and 95% of those resources are clean. Adding even a fraction of this capacity would dramatically reduce prices. 

To estimate the potential cost savings, we constructed a “no backlog” scenario in which 30% of renewable projects that have been stuck in the queue for at least five years were instead assumed to be operational and had bid into the capacity market. The capacity value of these new resources would amount to an additional 7 GW of supply in the most recent auction. Adding just 7 GW of new entry could have lowered the market clearing price from $269.92/MW-day to as low as $98, or by as much as 63%. PJM delays in implementing interconnection queue reforms have effectively blocked new entry, driving up capacity costs and failing to mitigate the price impact for consumers. 

The 2025/2026 BRA cleared 135 GW of capacity at a price of $269.92/MW-day. This graph reconstructs the supply curve that produced actual clearing results compared to a “no backlog” supply scenario that includes 7 GW of capacity value from new renewable entry. Additional capacity from backlogged resources could have lowered the market clearing price to under $100/MW-day.

Credit:

NRDC

There are three things PJM can do to bring down prices. 

First, PJM must comply with FERC’s interconnection Order 2023 as soon as possible. PJM has refused to comply with the order so far, but after this auction it should be able to see the urgency of meaningful interconnection reform and comply as soon as possible. 

Second, the region needs new, well-planned transmission. A new report from Americans for a Clean Energy Grid shows that the rate of building new transmission lines is at an all-time low. If PJM’s transmission planning had a grade, it would get a D-. FERC Order 1920 charts a path toward the grid of the future and requires that RTOs, like PJM, create a process to plan for new transmission that provides regional benefits. Doing so will help to add many gigawatts of clean capacity to the power grid.

Third, PJM should examine market barriers that could be quickly fixed before the next capacity market auction in December. For example, customers in PJM currently pay hundreds of millions of dollars to keep at least two coal plants on-line for reliability reasons. Remarkably, neither of these plants bid into the capacity market this year, significantly tightening the supply in the region. PJM should require these plants, and another other future plants in such circumstances, to bid into the capacity market. If they did, customers in Maryland would have saved up to $18 per month, and the PJM region as a whole would have saved $5 billion. 

PJM has the tools in its toolbox to bring down prices and ensure a reliable, clean supply of electricity for years to come. If it acts now, these price increases can just be a bump in the road to a more affordable, resilient grid.

Pages