published Wednesday, December 9th, 2009

Bellefonte’s future spurs nuclear debate

Coming Sunday

An inside look at the Bellefonte Nuclear Plant

SCOTTSBORO, Ala. —Twenty-one years after TVA halted work on Alabama’s biggest construction project, Jackson County officials say they want the federal utility to restart the nuclear plant work to help power the local economy and the Tennessee Valley electricity grid.

Ron Bailey, 61 and a former mayor of Scottsboro, said community leaders continue to support plans for a new reactor at Bellefonte — either by finishing the old or building new.

“As a taxpayer and ratepayer, I can’t help think what a waste of money it is to see that plant sitting there idle,” Mr. Bailey said of the unfinished $4 billion complex in Hollywood, Ala. “But as an elected official and Chamber of Commerce supporter, I also see the plant as a tremendous opportunity for our future for both jobs and energy.”

Rick Roden, president of the Jackson County Chamber of Commerce, said he believes more than 95 percent of the people in the Scottsboro area want to see TVA build or finish a nuclear reactor at Bellefonte.

“The question of whether to build a nuclear plant here or not was settled a long time ago, and we know that we are going to need the power that this plant can produce,” Mr. Roden said.

But during a public hearing here Tuesday night, anti-nuclear activists said they want the Tennessee Valley Authority finally to give up on its 35-year-old design for the Bellefonte site.

“Nuclear power is simply too dangerous and too unreliable,” said Gary Morgan, a Scottsboro resident active in the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League.

Mr. Morgan said TVA should convert the plant to a combined-cycle natural gas plant, which he said would be less expensive to build and not generate as much radioactive waste.

Lou Zeller, senior scientist for the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League and a member of the Bellefonte Efficiency and Sustainability Team, said TVA shouldn’t put any nuclear reactor at Bellefonte.

  • photo
    Staff file photo: Supporters and critics of nuclear power squared off Tuesday night at a public hearing about the future of the Bellefonte Nuclear Plant.

“In addition to being a public health hazard, nuclear power is expensive,” he said.

TVA officials are considering whether to finish the two incomplete reactors at the Bellefonte plant in Hollywood or build an entirely new next-generation reactor designed by Westinghouse Corp. at the site. Jack Bailey, TVA’s vice president for new nuclear generation, estimates it will cost about $3.5 billion to $4 billion to finish the Unit 1 reactor at Bellefonte, where construction was begun in 1974 and halted in 1988. The utility estimates that building one of the new Westinghouse AP1000 reactors also proposed for the site would cost $4 billion to $5 billion.

TVA’s draft environmental impact statement concludes it would be cheaper now for TVA to complete the Unit 1 reactor at Bellefonte rather than to erect one of the new AP1000 reactors. But engineers still are assessing both the current condition of the plant and the cost estimates for the Westinghouse design, Mr. Bailey said.

In its newest supplement to its environmental analysis of the 1,600-acre Bellefonte site, TVA aquatic biologists identified an endangered species — the pink mucket mussel — in the Tennessee River near the plant. TVA has requested a permit to build the plant despite the presence of the mussel, which the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service still is reviewing, according to project director Ruth Horton.

TVA will accept comments about the Bellefonte plant through Dec. 28 and will publish by February its final environmental assessment on any new reactor at Bellefonte. The TVA board is scheduled to decide in April whether to finish one of the existing reactors, build one of the new AP1000 reactors or do neither.

Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
TamiFreedman said...

With Natural Gas, Solar, Energy Conservation, Slow River Technology, and Algae ALL far superior to nuclear - cost much less, clean renewal energy - why would anyone even consider nuclear - unless they weren't fully informed. Nuclear waste increases deaths of children under 5 within a 5-mile range around the plant in study after study. The nuclear waste is radioactive for 30,000 years and is a massive health and terrorist threat.

December 9, 2009 at 10:04 a.m.
redbearded said...

Tammi, you're all wet. None of the technologies you mention are viable as of yet, none are capable of generating the power it would take to meet future demands, and I doubt very much your claim of all those being cleaner. I also doubt that nuclear waste, if stored properly, increase all those deaths, or is any more of a terrost threat than a hydroelectric facility. Please do your research.

December 9, 2009 at 11:16 a.m.
jhv1 said...

Tammy, you sure talk about being informed but, evidentally, you are not. That crud coming from your misinformed statement is not true at all. It seems the anti's are alive and well, trying to scare the general public with lies and deciet. Nuclear power has proved it is safe, reliable and efficient....I think the days of the 70's scare tactics may not work any longer.

December 14, 2009 at 3:50 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.