The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) is partnering with the energy production platform ENTRA1 Energy on an endeavor that will see the creation of six nuclear power plants that will provide up to 6 gigawatts (GW) of new power generation across TVA’s seven-state region.
The new collaboration is designed to provide enough energy to power the equivalent of approximately 4.5 million homes or 60 new data centers. ENTRA1 aims to develop and own a portfolio of power infrastructure assets and sell the output to TVA under future power purchase agreements. ENTRA1 focuses on the commercialization of small modular reactors as a bridge between technologies and end usage of power.
“TVA is leading the nation in pursuing new nuclear technologies, and no utility in the US is working harder or faster than TVA,” said Don Moul, president and CEO of TVA. “This agreement with ENTRA1 Energy highlights the vital role public-private partnerships play in advancing next-generation nuclear technologies that are essential to providing energy security – reliable, abundant American energy – and creating jobs and investment across the nation.”
This is one of the worst ideas I have heard in a while. Anybody old enough to remember Chernobyl, Three Mile Island and Fukushima would agree!!! Find another alternative!
What is wrong with renewable energies like solar and wind? And where will the nuclear waste be stored? How about near the billionaires mansions, or what the billionaires prefer: send it to poor countries?
Solar and wind are actually worse for the environment because of the materials that are used to make them and the amount of space needed to produce a remotely comparable amount of energy to what a single reactor can produce. Nuclear waste is recyclable and easy to contain whereas the fins from a wind farm cannot be recycled and must be buried.
Only a part of nuclear waste is recyclable. Since it is expensive, the good old US doesn’t do that. The use of solar and wind are our best alternatives.
I hope these will be the new generation of nuclear plants. I have just witnessed the fiasco here in Georgia at Plant Vogtle. It ran way over budget and took much longer than planned. When they broke ground many, many years ago someone said it would produce electricity so cheap that we could throw away the meters. Instead, we now pay higher rates plus a surcharge to pay for cost overruns.
On the whole I’m less optimistic on nuclear power mainly because we have no long term storage of spent nuclear rods or reprocessing of some of the spent nuclear fuel in a way that could be reused. The costs of these nuclear plants is humongous and there are more serious cost over runs that takes away much of the public’s support in the long run. Call me old fashioned but I’m not sure why the best coal burning technology called “Clean Coal Technology” along with carbon capture as an option is not being promoted in a bigger way. I’m an environmentalist to a degree but also a realist on the cost and need of energy for our country. Solar & Wind energy has a role in the USA energy needs but they have their downsides in large land use, depreciation and recycling of its components. The untold story about renewables becoming the predominate energy sources in the next 25 years is that most homes in the USA would have to have their own solar panels on their homes in order to meet these lofty goals. Maybe solar shingles that don’t look ugly like roof mounted panels could be something that could be a game changer. Those costs however are still too expensive for most consumers at this time but time will tell.