Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Dept of Environmental Protection
For Immediate Release
HARRISBURG -- The sun’s ability to produce clean electricity, create jobs, and reduce costs for families and businesses will be on full display this week as the Department of Environmental Protection sets out to showcase solar-powered facilities in south-central Pennsylvania.
“This is an opportunity for Pennsylvania to illustrate the benefits of solar energy, and how the commonwealth is a leader in developing and using this emerging technology,” said DEP Secretary John Hanger. “The companies we’re visiting this week are taking advantage of this technology, which will benefit their operations, their customers, and the environment for the foreseeable future.”
Hanger will visit the Foxchase Golf Club at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, Sept. 15. The club, located at 300 Stevens Road in Stevens, Lancaster County, installed a 303.6-kilowatt system that is expected to generate enough electricity to meet nearly 100 percent of the business’ electrical needs, saving nearly $37,000 each year. It will reduce carbon emissions by 7.2 million pounds per year, or the equivalent of removing more than 600 passenger vehicles from the roads.
At 11 a.m. on Thursday, Sept. 16, acting DEP Small Business Ombudsman Robert Taylor will visit the Littlestown Veterinary Hospital in Adams County. The hospital installed a 24.6-kilowatt solar array, which will produce half of the facility’s electricity demands, saving it about $3,400 annually. The hospital is located at 5010 Baltimore Pike, Littlestown.
Representatives of the companies responsible for installing the two systems—Advanced Solar Industries LLC for the Lancaster County project and Astrum Solar for the Adams County veterinary hospital—will be on hand to discuss each system and its benefits.
Each stop in the south-central region is part of a statewide tour of facilities that generate energy on site using solar technology.
According to Hanger, these projects illustrate the economic potential of solar energy and how it can be used as a driving economic force in the state if used more fully. The secretary stressed the need for Pennsylvania to increase the solar share of its portfolio standards act.
“Six years ago, we saw the need for an aggressive portfolio standard and after we enacted one, we led the way toward a more sustainable future,” said Hanger. “Unfortunately, other states have passed us by since then, leaving us vulnerable to losing the jobs and companies this industry has created here in Pennsylvania. We have an opportunity to again position ourselves as a national green energy leader, but we must act now.”
Hanger said it is important for the General Assembly to consider legislation that would increase the commonwealth’s solar energy requirement to 1.5 percent—up from its current 0.5 percent target. Doing so, he explained, would create more demand for the solar industry and would make Pennsylvania competitive with neighboring states like New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland, which have all enacted more ambitious standards.
Less than two years ago, Pennsylvania’s installed solar capacity was minimal, but more than 39 megawatts of capacity—or enough to power 5,900 homes—has been installed since then. The state is also home to more than 600 solar businesses.
For more information on clean, renewable energy, visit www.depweb.state.pa.us or call 717-783-8411.
Solar Projects Drive $1.4 Billion into PA’s Economy in 2009 Solar Share of Generation Market Increases 350 PercentSubmitted by webEditor on Thu, 09/23/2010 - 15:56
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Dept of Environmental Protection
For Immediate Release
HARRISBURG -- Sustained growth and declining costs are driving Pennsylvania's solar market to generate an ever-increasing amount of clean, renewable energy, which is saving consumers money, according to Department of Environmental Protection Secretary John Hanger.
The secretary said that in 2009, the share of solar energy generation among Pennsylvania's power pool increased by 350 percent, attracting $1.4 billion into state’s economy last year alone.
“The cost of solar power is plummeting, making solar power increasingly a sound alternative for businesses and families that seek to stabilize and control their electricity costs,” said Hanger. “Right now, thanks to sharply lower solar power prices, it is a great time to consider solar power for a home or business.”
The median installed costs for small business and residential photovoltaic (PV) projects in the state dropped from about $9 per watt in 2008 to as low as $6 per watt in August; the lowest-cost projects are as much as $1 per watt less than this most recent figure. Large solar projects of one megawatt or more now cost about $4.50 per watt.
The lower costs can be attributed in part to the PA Sunshine Solar Rebate Program, which reimburses up to 35 percent of the purchase and installation costs for residential and small business PV and solar hot water systems.
Since the program’s opening in May 2009, more than 2,000 projects have been installed, representing nearly 20 megawatts of new capacity. An additional 2,300 projects, representing 53 megawatts of capacity, have been applied for or are under construction.
“Since energy from the sun is free, lower equipment costs lead to lower electricity costs,” said Hanger. “The cost of electricity from the latest generation of projects in Pennsylvania is between 12 to 20 cents per kilowatt-hour, and that price is locked in for the 25-year life of the panels.
“Today the cost of electricity from a utility company to a small business or home ranges between 10 and 14 cents per kilowatt-hour. But how much will electricity cost two years from now? How about five, 10 or 25 years from now? For families and businesses using solar power, they know their electricity will not be more than what they are paying for solar today. For those businesses and families not using solar, most likely prices for electricity will go up and possibly by a substantial amount.”
Hanger also noted that solar power emits zero air pollution, which cuts soot, smog, mercury and heat-trapping pollution that can sicken and kill Pennsylvanians.
In addition, solar power helps to keep the power grid reliable by providing more power on the hottest days of the year when very high demand can cause brownouts and blackouts.
State of New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection
For Immediate Release
(10/P94) TRENTON - The first phase of a cleanup of radioactive tritium that leaked from the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant last year and into two aquifers below the facility will begin immediately, with a goal of pumping the tritium contaminated water out of the ground to avoid any potential contamination of potable water supplies, Commissioner Bob Martin announced today.
The Exelon Corp. has agreed to start pumping efforts this week on two monitoring wells which are in the Cape May and upper Cohansey aquifers, and also has agreed to expand that effort to a third contaminated location by early October.
"We have asked Exelon to expedite this effort, to clean up this radioactive material as quickly and efficiently as possible to ensure public health and the safety of our drinking water supplies,'' said Commissioner Martin. "Radioactivity has not been measured beyond the boundaries of the nuclear plant or anywhere near a potable water source. Our intention is to make sure that never happens.''
Commissioner Martin said he is encouraged by the Exelon's cooperation with the State in dealing with the tritium issue, especially their willingness to expedite the cleanup process and explore remediation alternatives. But he also pledged that the DEP will carefully monitor the work to make sure it is done properly.
In May, Commissioner Martin announced the launch of a State investigation into the 2009 leak of radioactive tritium into the aquifers below Oyster Creek, which is located in Ocean County. Toward that goal, the DEP issued a Spill Act directive to Exelon, requiring the plant owner to cooperate with the DEP's investigation and take action to prevent the radioactive substance from ever reaching the region's potable water supplies.
In June, Exelon documented levels of tritium in the monitoring wells located in the Cohansey aquifer that exceeded 1 million picuries per liter (pCi/L), as compared with an EPA health-based standard of 20,000 pCi/L. Those levels have since declined markedly, according to information provided Exelon, but are still above acceptable standards, including nearly 700,000 picuries at two locations in the Cohansey and Cape May aquifers.
At a meeting today in Trenton with Commissioner Martin, company officials outlined plans to immediately start pulling contaminated water from the ground below the nuclear generating station to control any further migration of the tritium plume which is currently flowing uncontrolled towards the plant's discharge canal.
That water will be pumped into drums and transferred to a large holding tank on site, eventually to be diluted into massive volumes of water used daily for cooling the power generating process. The mixing effort will bring the tritium levels below detectable standards. This will be confirmed with surface water monitoring in the discharge canal, with the results to be shared with the public.
The plan also calls for continued regular monitoring and analysis of the content of the water pulled from the ground, and careful observation of groundwater levels in the area near the nuclear plant. In addition, scientists are developing a backup plan, if needed, to supplement the work that is starting this week.
Preliminary results from groundwater monitoring wells so far indicate that tritium has not reached the clay bottom of the lower portion of the Cohansey aquifer and has not been detected in any of the wells in the even deeper Kirkwood aquifer. The tritium plume appears to be moving toward Oyster Creek's discharge canal, but no samples taken from the discharge canal have indicated the presence of tritium.
Tritium occurs as a by-product of nuclear power plant operations, and tritium leaks are not uncommon at nuclear power plants nationwide.
Exelon had taken some steps prior to the DEP's previous directive, including drilling additional monitoring wells to identify the extent of contamination. The company also committed to move all pipes containing radioactively contaminated water either above ground or into concrete vaults to avoid similar leaks by the end of 2010, and those upgrades are on track to be completed before the end of the year.
From the New York Times:
They risked their lives to capture on film hundreds of blinding flashes, rising fireballs and mushroom clouds.
The blast from one detonation hurled a man and his camera into a ditch. When he got up, a second wave knocked him down again.
Then there was radiation.
While many of the scientists who made atom bombs during the cold war became famous, the men who filmed what happened when those bombs were detonated made up a secret corps.
Their existence and the nature of their work has emerged from the shadows only since the federal government began a concerted effort to declassify their films about a dozen years ago. In all, the atomic moviemakers fashioned 6,500 secret films, according to federal officials.
Today, the result is a surge in fiery images on television and movie screens, as well as growing public knowledge about the atomic filmmakers.
The images are getting “seared into people’s imaginations,” said Robert S. Norris, author of “Racing for the Bomb” and an atomic historian. They bear witness, he added, “to extraordinary and terrifying power.”
From Greentech Media:
Accident at Russia’s Kursk Nuclear Power Plant reveals blatant disregard of safety standards: Is the Russian nuclear industry headed for a meltdown?Submitted by webEditor on Thu, 09/23/2010 - 15:37
Incidents of various degrees of severity are not uncommon at Russian nuclear power plants (NPPs), but when repairs take longer than a month – as was the case with Reactor 1 of Kursk NPP, which was scrammed on July 22 and only went online on August 31 – concerns arise that serious damage must have occurred. A scrutiny of what happened at Kursk NPP seems to indicate the frightening possibility that a malfunction involving any RBMK reactor may turn out to be as devastating as the 1986 Chernobyl disaster.
Kursk NPP: How extensive was the damage?
Kursk NPP is located in Kurchatov – a town bearing the name of the prominent Soviet nuclear physicist, and the man behind the Soviets’ A-bomb, Igor Kurchatov. It stands 40 kilometers southwest of Kursk, a large city in Central European Russia, and operates four power units with pressurized-tube reactors with a total capacity of 4 million kilowatts. Last July 22, an incident took place at the plant that put Reactor 1, an RBMK-1000 installation, out of commission and led to what later turned out to be five weeks of ongoing repairs. Even more disturbing, what information was finally made available about the incident did not come through the official channels from the state nuclear corporation Rosatom or Kursk NPP’s head company, the nuclear power plant operator Rosenergoatom, but from Kursk employees.
From the Rutland Herald:
The issue of federal preemption at the Vermont Yankee nuclear reactor over last winter’s radioactive tritium leak continues to simmer.
In a filing Friday with the Vermont Public Service Board, the New England Coalition, a nonprofit anti-nuclear organization, said that Entergy Nuclear’s attempt to re-examine the issue of preemption is unnecessary and the company has failed to offer any valid reasons for another bite at the legal apple.
Vermont has every right to investigate and protect its groundwater, the coalition argued, and there is well-established evidence that such radiological leaks ultimately increase the costs of decommissioning.
The Vermont Public Service Board opened an investigation into the tritium leak at Vermont Yankee in February, to determine whether the leak had environmental or economic ramifications, particularly in the area of the ultimate decommissioning of the power facility and the contamination of groundwater.
From the New Jersey Newsroom:
A series of unexplained mechanical failures — including a large hot water leak and the activation of a fire suppression system — triggered an emergency shut down of Indian Point 3 late Thursday night. It is the seventh unplanned shut down between the twin Indian Point reactors in the past two years. The facility is located less than 20 miles from the New Jersey border in New York.
The latest mishap comes just one week after failures in the steam generation system forced the shut down of the companion nuclear reactor at Indian Point 2. That reactor is still off line while engineers at Entergy Nuclear Northeast, owners of the Indian Point site, try to find what caused rising water levels in its massive steam generators, and triggered an automatic shut down.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission admits it is still learning how cracks form and spread in crucial reactor parts, such as those that kept the Davis-Besse nuclear power plant shut down for more than three months this year and for two years earlier in the decade.
But the NRC insists the knowledge it has gained in recent years, along with stepped-up inspections, make it a safe bet that Davis-Besse near Toledo can operate for another year before the plant is outfitted with a new reactor lid.
An NRC special inspection team gave a public report of its findings Thursday in Oak Harbor. The final, formal report will be issued in 45 days.
From the Daily Herald:
Exelon Corp. Chief Executive Officer John Rowe said he expects natural-gas prices to remain low, pushing back the construction of new U.S. nuclear power plants by a "decade, maybe two."
"We think natural gas will stay cheap for a very long time," Rowe said in an interview today at Bloomberg's headquarters in New York. "As long as natural gas is anywhere near current price forecasts, you can't economically build a merchant nuclear plant."
Rowe said that the price of natural gas would have to rise to $8 per million British thermal units and permits for emitting a ton of carbon dioxide would have to be $25 to make the power prices from new merchant reactors competitive with gas-fueled plants. Merchant plants sell their power on wholesale markets without the income assurance that utilities with regulated electricity rates get.
Natural gas for October delivery fell 4 cents, or 1 percent, to $3.774 at 2:36 p.m. on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Prices have fallen 33 percent this year and are down 76 percent from the 2005 high of 15.378.
Gas was used to generate 21 percent of U.S. electricity in 2008, according to the Energy Information Administration. It's the second-biggest fuel source for U.S. power generation behind coal and drives electricity prices in parts of the country such as Texas.