Page images
PDF
EPUB

2.

You also expressed concern in your testimony about the process laid out in Title XII, in particular the concern that federal participation in a construction project would divert funds from other valuable R&D. The authority in Title XII is intended to be in addition to and independent of ongoing R&D programs.

a. Would your concerns about Title XII be diminished if it was clear that a demonstration project would not reduce the available funds for existing R&D programs?

Response:

b.

Response:

Yes, my concerns about the timeliness of Title XII would be diminished if it was made clear that no reduction of funding for existing ALWR research and development programs would occur. Nevertheless, I would still have some concern that any funding for a program under Title XII would inevitably result in reduction of much needed funding for other activities more likely to result in the re-emergence of the nuclear option since we cannot help but be aware of the enormous budgetary constraints under which the Congress must operate.

Would you then support a demonstration such as envisioned in Title XII?

If no funding reduction occurs in the ALWR programs and if the goals of Title XII were focused on advanced reactor design such as the MHTGR, then Southern Nuclear would support such a demonstration project.

C.

Response:

d.

Response:

Why wouldn't it be attractive to a utility to participate in a demonstration project that received 50% federal funds?

The initial, and natural, reaction to a federal cost-sharing program which provides 50% funding for an advanced reactor design demonstration project is favorable. Regretfully, however, the experience of the industry in the Clinch River project has left considerable concern about the viability of such a partnership. At Southern Nuclear, we believe that with successful completion of standardized design, NRC licensing reform and high-level waste storage progress, the ALWR program will not need governmental participation because of the wide acceptance this proven technology has enjoyed in the nuclear power industry. It may be attractive for a utility to participate in a demonstration project contemplated by Title XII, but to determine the attractiveness of this participation, and to gauge the willingness of a utility to invest in it, would require much more detailed evaluation of the project.

Similarly, why wouldn't it be attractive to a utility to participate in a project under Section 12005, the so-called institutional demonstration?

Problems of investment recovery through the ratemaking process, financing and joint operational responsibility between a utility and the United States Government discourage utility participation in the institutional demonstration described in Section 12005. As we have noted earlier, we

believe that the ALWR design is likely to be a better investment for base load capacity than other competing options available to a utility. In my opinion, the first several orders would be placed by groups of utilities that share both the financial burden and the energy output from such a plant.

UTILITY PARTICIPATION IN A DEMONSTRATION PROJECT

3.

Last year, DOE offered to assist a utility to obtain a license as part of a demonstration project, but got no volunteers. Why was there so little interest among the utilities in this program?

Response:

I believe that this question refers to the earlier site certification Request for Quotation that DOE promulgated last fall. There was a great deal of interest among utilities for this program and, currently, several utilities are undertaking to prepare a proposal that would be responsive to DOE's request. The DOE site proposal appeared to include immediate activity such as public hearings on proposed emergency plans at this early time when a responding utility would not know whether, in fact, an ALWR design would be available in 1995 or whether licensing reform would have taken place, and, yet, all the public problems with siting a new facility would be discussed prematurely and opposition generated well before the need for power or the opportunity to proceed arose. Nevertheless, work is currently underway on this effort to respond to the RFQ but would not involve

[blocks in formation]

committing a utility to a public announcement that it intends to order a new

nuclear plant.

FUTURE ORDERS OF NUCLEAR PLANTS

How much of the estimated 150 to 250 gigawatts of new electrical capacity needed over the next two decades do you expect will be supplied by nuclear power?

Response:

Any response to this question depends upon the resolution of identified problems with the re-emergence of the nuclear option such as the development of a standardized design, licensing reform and high level waste problems. If such problems are resolved, then an ALWR nuclear plant, probably a mid-sized one, will likely come on line in approximately 10-12 years. The current over-supply of baseload generation is ending and demand during the intervening period can be satisfied by short-term peaking and intermediate generation. However, beginning in the early part of the 21st Century, with the resolution of current nuclear energy problems, there exists a very real possibility that over 50% of new baseload generation ordered after the year 2000 will be nuclear. As a percent of total gigawatts of new capacity to be added from 1991 through 2011, in this country, this new nuclear capacity will probably only account for 5-10%. The size of this number reflects the large number of combustion turbines and other fossil

capacity that will come on line before it is possible to bring on nuclear units ordered after 1995.

5.

What portion of these orders do you expect to be -
1,300 megawatt so-called "evolutionary" LWRSS

600 megawatt so-called "advanced passive" LWRs?

[blocks in formation]

This answer does not reflect on the eventual bright future for advanced MHTGR and LMFBR technology but only on the time frame for commercialization. In addition, please see my answer to Question 1(b) above and the EPRI research project report on MHTGR attached to these answers.

QUALITY AND FOCUS OF DOE'S R&D PROGRAMS

6.

Do you believe that DOE's R&D programs have improved over the last couple of years?

Response:

Yes. DOE is becoming more responsive to the realities of the commercial marketplace and is supporting the kind of R&D programs that

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »