91ÊÓƵ

The recent earthquake in Japan and subsequent nuclear plant crisis has come at a time when, for the first time since Three Mile Island in 1979, companies are proposing construction of new nuclear power reactors in the U.S. While the hazards of nuclear power play out in Japan, researchers at Oregon State University say that new reactor designs could provide safer, simpler and cheaper ways to harness nuclear energy.

Kathryn Higley, professor and head of the Department of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Health Physics at Oregon State University, is one of the researchers looking into a new reactor design called Westinghouse AP1000. Higley’s group conducted the integral system testing on the AP1000, which demonstrates a large shift from the types of designs used throughout the world since the beginning of the nuclear power industry.

The AP1000 uses “passive cooling,” in which a water tank is positioned above the core of the reactor, allowing gravity to do the heavy lifting in the cooling of the reactor’s core. This means that the reactor is able to function without power – even without staff – for several days.

“In Japan, that would have made all the difference,” Higley said.

OSU has a one-quarter-scale test facility that includes all of the AP1000’s design features, with the exception of nuclear fuel; electric heater rods are used instead.

Higley believes the AP1000 design is 100 to 1,000 times safer than those in place at current facilities in the U.S. It is one of five advanced designs recently certified or pending certification from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The AP1000 was approved in 2006, but certification for design amendments is still pending.

One hiccup in the verification process was a recent letter that U.S. Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Markey raised concerns about the AP1000’s shield building – the outer protective shell over the reactor. Because this building must support the weight of the water tanks, Markey was concerned that the structure may be too brittle to withstand a large earthquake or aircraft strike, according to his letter.

Higley said Monday that she had not yet seen the letter, but she predicted that, in view of Japan, concerns about earthquake safety would be given extra attention.

“You can bet that people are really taking a hard look at how the lessons from Japan apply to the United States,” Higley said.

Recent power reactor designs, however, reflect decades of research into safety and efficiency. But the industry, at least in the U.S., isn’t yet reaping such benefits.

“A lot of this hasn’t been able to be put into practice because there haven’t been new plants built,” Higley said.

The last nuclear power reactor to go online in the U.S. was the Watts Bar nuclear plant in Spring City, Tenn., in 1996. That plant was already in the works before the partial core meltdown at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania in 1979.

In other parts of the world, newer nuclear reactors are already being constructed. China is in the process of installing new reactors, including some featuring the AP1000 design.

As a result, Higley said, “the Chinese will have a fleet of extraordinarily safe nuclear facilities.”

In the U.S., 16 applications have been submitted for licenses to construct and operate new reactors, many at existing plant sites.

Melanie Lyons, a spokesperson for the Nuclear Energy Institute, said her organization was encouraged by remarks made by President Obama last week. Obama announced that he had asked the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to perform a comprehensive review of the safety of U.S. nuclear plants. He said that U.S. nuclear plants were safe, however, and that nuclear energy would be a continued part of the country’s energy future.

“Here at home, nuclear power is also an important part of our own energy future, along with renewable sources like wind, solar, natural gas and clean coal. Our nuclear power plants have undergone exhaustive study, and have been declared safe for any number of extreme contingencies.”

Earlier, the NEI had released a statement saying all U.S. plants will verify that they meet safety requirements, including the ability to function without power and to withstand flood conditions.

This safety verification harkens back to 2001, when the country’s nuclear plants were all required to institute new safety measures after 9/11. All of the country’s 104 nuclear plants had to demonstrate that they could exist safely without any power, from external, backup or even backup-backup generators, said Rochelle Olson, a spokesperson for Energy Northwest, which operates the only nuclear power plant in the Pacific Northwest, near Richland, Wash.

Higley expects the upcoming conversation in the industry to not be about whether nuclear power is safe, but whether companies will choose to keep updating the safety features on existing reactors, or expend capital to build new ones. Such discussion, however, will have to wait until the dust settles overseas.

“Right now, people are very concerned about what’s going on in Japan. Once the situation there is brought more under control … I think people will come back to talking about nuclear as a viable option,” Higley said.