New US reactor, first in decades, powering up

Nuclear industry’s future remains cloudy

SPRING CITY, Tenn. — In an immaculate control room at the Watts Bar nuclear plant, green bars flash on a large screen, signaling something that has not happened in the United States in two decades.

As control rods lift from the water in the core, and neutrons go about the business of splitting uranium atoms, life comes to a new nuclear reactor — the first in the country since its sister reactor here was licensed in 1996.

By summer’s end, authorities expect the new reactor at this complex along the Chickamauga Reservoir, a dammed section of the Tennessee River extending northward from Chattanooga, to steadily generate enough electricity to power 650,000 homes. Although the opening of a new nuclear facility used to draw protesters and angry rhetoric, Watts Bar has been mostly welcomed by local residents — and even some advocates concerned about climate change.

“It’s a big step forward for clean energy, and we really have to be pushing that as hard as we can for the sake of the climate — all sources of clean energy, which includes nuclear,” MIT atmospheric scientist Kerry Emanuel said.

He and a group of influential climate scientists, led by former NASA researcher James Hansen, have recently made a strong push for nuclear, arguing that the energy source “will make the difference between the world missing crucial climate targets or achieving them.”

But while nuclear reactors account for much of the carbon-free electricity generated in the United States, the industry faces this new set of circumstances in a state of near-crisis. A combination of cheap natural gas and deregulated energy markets in some states has led to a growing number of plant closures in recent years.

Even as Watts Bar engineers and planners busily tested their new reactor, Exelon, the nation’s biggest utility for nuclear, with 23 reactors, announced that it would be closing two plants in Illinois, citing financial losses and the state’s failure to pass energy legislation that would help support nuclear plants.

“We are supposed to be adding zero-carbon sources, not subtracting, or simply replacing, to just kind of tread water,” said U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz recently — before the Exelon news drove the point further home.

The turn for the industry could represent bad news for U.S. carbon emissions: As more plants shut down, and with wind and solar not yet able to offset the electricity-generating capacity of nuclear, emissions could increase in certain regions.

Yet even if the country decided tomorrow to recommit to nuclear power plants in the name of climate change, it would still take many years to build more of them. They also would be difficult to finance in many electricity markets. Watts Bar 2, the plant’s second reactor, is nothing if not a symbol of the travails involved in getting massive nuclear plants running: It was originally permitted in the 1970s, but construction halted in 1985.

That matters because the extent to which adding nuclear energy helps battle climate change depends not only on the nature of the electricity generation itself but also on the time frame. To not miss international targets, which seek to keep global warming below 2 degrees or even 1.5 degrees Celsius above late-19th-century levels, emissions cuts have to happen fast. But as Watts Bar itself demonstrates, new nuclear can take a long time to build.

“Nuclear cannot provide a shortterm solution to climate change because it takes so long to bring new plants online,” said Allison Macfarlane, a professor at George Washington University and a former chair of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The siting here of the country’s first new reactor in decades is no doubt in part because of the unique nature of Tennessee Valley Authority, a New Deal-era government-controlled corporation with a vast base of municipal utilities and other large customers that buy its power.

“At a time when other regions of the country are relying on less-reliable sources of energy, our region is fortunate that TVA opened the last nuclear reactor of the 20th century and is opening the first reactor of the 21st century,” said Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., a major supporter of nuclear energy.

In the environmental community, reaction to the new reactor appears fairly muted. “From a safety standpoint, which is our focus, the plant seems in good condition,” said David Lochbaum, head of the Nuclear Safety Project at the Union of Concerned Scientists. Lochbaum also praised TVA’s openness in its engagement with the public over the new reactor, a process in which he participated.

“Watts Bar 2 is going to be one of the last nuclear power plants built in the United States,” added Jonathan Levenshus, a representative of the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign in Tennessee. “Right now, wind power and solar energy are so much cheaper than new nuclear plants.”