Copper Basin Energy: The Nuclear Option
Keenan James Britt and Allison Sayer - CRR Staff
At a time when high energy costs are a factor for many in Valdez and the Copper Basin, the Valdez City Council heard a presentation on a potential “micro modular” nuclear reactor (MMR) to be built in the vicinity of Valdez. Travis Million, CEO of the Copper ValleyElectricAssociation (CVEA), and Christian Rabiti, director of Technology Strategy for Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation (USNC), presented this during a work session on February 17.
Million opened his presentation by addressing the community’s rising energy costs: “Wintertime rates in our area can get astronomical. This year we’ve almost doubled our summertime rate...Just between December and January alone we saw a 44% increase in our diesel fuel costs that we use to produce electricity out of our diesel fuel plants, and unfortunately that passes right on to all of our members and it’s tough.”
While CVEA is able to generate ample power for Valdez in the summer through hydroelectric operations at Solomon Gulch and Allison Creek, the winter freeze-up necessitates the use of more expensive diesel fuel for the rest of the year.
Million explained that CVEA had been looking for other options for wintertime energy production for decades. Most renewable energy technologies were not an option for Valdez, according to Million.
Million said wind energy is not feasible as Valdez has “the worst turbulence you can possibly have, which would destroy a turbine in no time.” Tidal energy is not an option either as “the tidal speeds of water coming through Prince William Sound and the Narrows would actually destroy a lot of equipment.” While solar energy production would be feasible in the summer under the long Alaskan days, the need is for wintertime energy.
Ultimately, Million explained, CVEA had come to consider nuclear energy as an option for wintertime energy needs. During 2021, CVEA began communicating with Seattle-based Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporation (USNC) about the possibility of building a smallscale “microreactor” in the Valdez area.
CVEA began a feasibility study for the project in December 2021. USNC is currently in the process of developing microreactors at Chalk River, Ontario and at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, both projected to come online in 2026. If approved, the Valdez microreactor would be USNC’s third microreactor project.
Dr. Rabiti next addressed the council to explain the technology behind USNC’s patented Micro Modular Reactor. Rabiti, who joined the work session virtually, holds a Master’s degree in Nuclear Engineering from the Università di Bologna and a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from Stuttgart University.
In USNC’s microreactor design, millimeter-wide particles of uranium fuel would be contained inside pellets made of silicon carbide, which would in turn be contained in walnut-sized shells made of a silicon carbide matrix inside the reactor.
According to the design, the microreactor would be built underground and would not need to use water as coolant, eliminating the problem of water discharge. After the life of the reactor (estimated at 20 years) USNC would be responsible for removing the spent nuclear fuel and disposing it at a designated site under regulations by the Nuclear Regulatory Committee.
Both Million and Dr. Rabiti expressed high confidence in the safety of the reactor design.
After the presentation, council members had the opportunity to ask questions and voice their opinions. Councilmember Dawson Moore stated he still wanted CVEA to consider options for tidal or solar energy but noted that “nuclear power survived that horrible reputation it had in the ‘70s and ‘80s because it is a very effective form of fuel... It seems we’re at the right stage. We want to begin planning and see about it now.”
Councilmember James Devens also voiced his support for the project: “I’m glad to see that we’re yet again taking the cutting edge on a very important issue for the state of Alaska. Availability, affordability and sustainability are all major concerns for electric production in remote areas. I think it’s going to take a plethora of solutions and novelty technologies. I think this seems like a highly opportunistic technology for our area if the studies and the numbers work out.”
Others expressed caution. Councilmember Susan Love had concerns about the costs and safety of handling spent nuclear fuel: “That’s the big forever concern when you build something like this.”
Mayor Pro Tempore Alan Sorum had concerns about locating a reactor close to where people live in Valdez. “Why wouldn’t you just put it somewhere 20 miles away from where anyone lives and where it’s just under your transmission lines?” Sorum asked.
Million explained that the reactor would need to be located close to town if it were to provide heat for the community in addition to electricity. However, Million stated this issue is something that would be examined in the feasibility study.
The statement that USNC would have the responsibility for handling spent fuel at the end of life of the reactor spurred the question: What happens if USNC does not exist as a company in twenty years? Keenan Britt followed up with USNC to ask about that possibility.
A USNC representative replied via email: “USNC would support the licensee and contractors with fuel handling. The responsibility for fuel handling and retrieval lies with the licensed owner and/or operator of the plant. These services are routinely performed by a reactor services contractor, subject to inspections and oversight by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). We have started discussions with a major cask vendor for cask design, fuel transfer and handling, which is a routine service they provide.”
According to the “FAQ” information on the CVEA website, “the financial framework for the operation and ownership of the plant” would be negotiated after the feasibility study is completed. Therefore it is uncertain whether the responsibility for waste disposal would lie with USNC, CVEA, or even possibly another entity.
As far as the possibility of USNC not being a company anymore by the time of the decommission, the representative stated, “The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will require financial assurance instruments to be in place to ensure the safe management of all nuclear material at the site, including its removal to another location.”
CVEA’s current feasibility study on this project is expected to last for the next four to six months. More information about the project is available on the homepage of CVEA’s website, www.CVEA.org.
Editor’s Note: Many aspects of this project such as cost and location have still not been publicly discussed, and are likely to require more research before information can be released. We hope to continue to deliver information to the public as it becomes available. At this time the paper does not have a position either endorsing or opposing this project.
We’d also like to point out that this meeting, and councilmembers’ comments, occurred prior to recent nuclear security related events. At press time, we had not yet discussed these developments with relevant parties.
Disclosure: CVEA is a CRR advertiser.
