Surry Nuclear Reactors To Extend Lifespan To 80 Years (richmond.com)

QuantumPion writes: Dominion Virginia Power today will formally seek a second license extension for its Surry nuclear power plant, becoming the first utility in the U.S. to try to push the operating range for nuclear reactors to 80 years. If successful, the utility's pair of reactors in Surry County would be eligible to operate past 2050. The Surry plant, along with its North Anna sister site in Louisa County, were initially granted 40-year permits and operate today on 20-year renewals. Those two plants provide about 40 percent of Virginia's electricity.

Comments

Re:Thanks anti-nuke extremists!

[HornWumpus]

To make plutonium for weapons you have to run the reactor is a completely uneconomic way (balls out for a very short time). Otherwise you just get a mix of plutonium isotopes and you are back to running ultracenterfuges to get your weapons grade.

So aside from being completely wrong, you have a point.

Re:Thanks anti-nuke extremists!

[CajunArson]

Wrong. The light-water reactors used in the U.S. are not particularly useful at making weapons grade plutonium. If they were so wonderful at churning out nukes, then places like Hanford Washington would never have existed.

You seem to be confusing the safe light-water commercial reactors used in the U.S. with the RBMK reactors that were used in the Soviet Union. They really were designed for dual-use operation and are inherently less safe than U.S. commercial reactors.

Building new reactors

[Firethorn]

no permitting has been allowed out of the NRC since 3 mile island happened in the late 70s,

Actually it has, it's just that we were just getting around to it - some new reactors are coming online this year. However, they were made at already existing plants, IE adding another reactor to an already existing nuclear power plant, and worse, it's the old design - they finished up a reactor that had construction suspended back in the '80s.

That being said, in order to keep nuclear power plant ages 'reasonable', you're looking at that we should be completing 4-8 reactors/plants a year. 200 reactors for current power needs, 400 to 'green up' our power by eliminating coal. Estimates, which is why I'm only being single digit specific. 200 plants, 4 built a year, gives you an average lifespan of 50 years. Probably means that you'd have a few shut down at 10,20, and 30, such that the maximum age at plants without earlier problems discovered would be around 60 years, in order to compensate for the 'lemon' reactors that have to be shut down early.