It is always satisfying to watch predictions one has made come to pass. I am on record (see link) as stating half of the US nuclear power plants (at least, those still operating) will close in 10 years, with the other half closing in another 10 years. That works out to roughly 5 reactors per year, on average. This article is about one that closed just two days ago, the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant in Plymouth, Massachusetts.
 |
| Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant, Plymouth, MA -- photo from NRC |
The current quote: "PLYMOUTH, Mass. (AP) — The Pilgrim nuclear power plant in Plymouth has permanently shut down after 47 years of generating electricity, bring to a close the era of nuclear power in Massachusetts. The final shutdown occurred at 5:28 p.m. Friday (31 May 2019)." see news article at this link.
My prediction from August 4, 2017: "The essential facts in the US are a great number of nuclear plants will retire; many coal-fired plants will retire, many natural gas plants will be built; and a great number of wind turbine generators will be built. Within 20 years, almost every one of the 98 nuclear plants in the US will retire. Half of those will be shut down within 10 years." (quoting the SLB article "Offshore Wind Turbine Project – Statoil’s Hywind Scotland; A Positive Viewpoint" see link)
So, what happened to cause the Pilgrim plant to shut down, nearly 13 years before its operating license expires? This plant was given the green light by the NRC to extend its operating life beyond the initial 40 years, with a 20 year extension. Nuclear cheerleaders often claim that nuclear plants run 60 years, yet we have never, ever, seen one operate that long. The usual circumstances occurred, the same ones that caused other plants to retire early. Those circumstances are an inability to operate profitably in the modern era with low natural gas prices, and very low renewable (wind especially) electricity. The news articles are filled with report after report of nuclear plants presenting their bid for future electricity to the grid, and not being competitive. The reasons, of course, are the high operating costs, even on a cash basis and not including capital charges.
The nuclear plant owners typically turn to the state governments to plead for yet more subsidies to keep their plants running, and sometimes, those pleas are successful. And then other times, they fail. Pilgrim Nuclear Power Plant failed to obtain taxpayer subsidies, and it is now closed.
So, what alternatives to nuclear plant owners have? Can they invest a few billion to reduce operating costs, perhaps increase power output and produce more income from the same asset? Those have been tried, sometimes with success and at least one notable and dismal fiasco: the SONGS (San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station near San Diego, CA). The fiasco involved lies to the NRC about the new steam generators (four of them), when the design was very different but the owner lied to the NRC that the design had only minor changes and no need for the costly and lengthy review and approval process. (The new steam generators, vertical U-tube heat exchangers, had more tubes, tubes with smaller diameters, and a different vibration suppression design).
The problem Pilgrim had, as I see it, is too few years remaining in which to recover the investment from any effort to increase revenues.
The same scenario is playing out at the aging, inefficient, high-cost nuclear plants in the US. Plant after plant is crying to the government for more subsidies (on top of the numerous other subsidies already in place). As governments see that shutting a nuclear plant has very little impact, if any, on the local economy, the pleas for bailouts will be refused.
As an aside, no one granted the oil refineries any extensions, no subsidies, no fiscal help at all when nearly half the refineries shut down in the 1980s. There were thousands and thousands of jobs at stake there, too, just like the nuclear cheerleaders are claiming today as their big reason for more subsidies. The refineries shut down, nearly 150 of them across the country. There was a temporary difficulty for the workers, the engineers, and management, but we all survived. That's the way it is supposed to work in a market economy. The more efficient weed out the lesser.
Nuclear plants have had their day in the sunshine. The sunset is here for many, many of them.
It is indeed, a happy day.
Roger E. Sowell, Esq.
Houston, Texas
copyright (c) 2019 by Roger Sowell - all rights reserved
Fresh Water......................here
Free Speech.................... here
Renewable Energy...........here 
