Nuclear generation has inertia. Massive spinning turbines keep electricity flowing during grid disturbances. But nuclear generation also has a kind of inertia that isn’t governed by the laws of motion.

Starting—and then finishing—a power reactor construction project requires significant upfront effort and money, but once built a reactor can run for decades. Capacity factors of U.S. reactors have remained near 90 percent since the turn of the century, but it took more than a decade of improvements to reach that steady state. The payoff for nuclear investments is long-term and reliable.

A pair of bills working their way through the Iowa statehouse aim to promote nuclear energy projects in the state—in part by changing how the plants would be regulated and funded.

A joint resolution under consideration in the Wisconsin legislature aims to declare and promote the state’s support for nuclear power and willingness to deploy additional sources.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has denied plans for Talen Energy to supply additional on-site power to an Amazon Web Services’ data center campus from the neighboring Susquehanna nuclear plant in Pennsylvania.

Last April, Entergy had to close its Indian Point nuclear plant. That’s despite the plant’s being recognized as one of the best-run U.S. nuclear plants. That’s also despite its 20-year license extension process having been nearly completed, with full support from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

This closure was due in large part to opposition by antinuclear environmental groups. These groups also mobilized existing negative public opinion on nuclear energy to get politicians to oppose the plant’s license extension. Another factor is unfair market conditions. Nuclear energy doesn’t get due government support—unlike solar, wind, and hydro—despite delivering clean, zero-emissions energy.

Duane Arnold is to shut down in October. Photo: Wikimedia Commons/AsNuke

NextEra Energy is estimating that it will cost just over $1 billion to decommission its Duane Arnold Energy Center over a period of 60 years, including spent fuel management and site restoration costs, according to a post-shutdown decommissioning activities report (PSDAR) and a decommissioning cost estimate the company submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in April. The NRC, with publication in the June 19 Federal Register, is requesting comments on the Duane Arnold PSDAR until October 19.

An Atomic Safety and Licensing Board notified the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and other concerned parties that it will not render its decision on a challenge to a license amendment regarding concrete degradation at Seabrook until this summer. The decision on the challenge—which was brought by the C-10 Research and Education Foundation, an opponent of license renewal for the New Hampshire plant—had been expected on April 9.

NextEra Energy announced on February 11 that its bid to buy South Carolina’s public utility, Santee Cooper, is the “recommended purchase proposal” following a formal bid invitation called for by the state’s General Assembly in May 2019 (NN, June 2019, p. 9). Competing with NextEra’s purchase offer is a reform plan put forward by Santee Cooper in an attempt to avoid a sale as the utility continues to grapple with the failed Summer-­2 and -­3 nuclear construction project and the $3.6 billion in debt incurred before the project was halted in July 2017.

A report from the South Carolina Department of Administration published on February 11 outlined the competing plans and factors that the General Assembly may want to take into consideration as it mulls the plans. A third option, a proposal by Dominion Energy to take over the management, but not the ownership, of Santee Cooper was also evaluated.