Columbia Generating Station

Columbia Nuclear Generating Station
Columbia Generating Station
and low-draft cooling towers in 2015
Map
CountryUnited States
LocationBenton County, near Richland, Washington
Coordinates46°28′16″N 119°20′2″W / 46.47111°N 119.33389°W / 46.47111; -119.33389
StatusOperational
Construction beganAugust 1, 1972
Commission dateDecember 13, 1984
(39 years ago) (1984-12-13)
Construction cost$6.392 billion (2007 USD)[1]
($9.05 billion in 2023 dollars[2])
OwnerEnergy Northwest
OperatorEnergy Northwest
Nuclear power station
Reactor typeBWR
Reactor supplierGeneral Electric
Cooling towers6 × Mechanical Draft[a]
Cooling sourceColumbia River
Thermal capacity1 × 3544 MWth
Power generation
Units operational1 × 1216 MW
Make and modelBWR-5 (Mark 2)
Nameplate capacity1216 MW
Capacity factor83.14% (2017)
75.10% (lifetime)
Annual net output8128 GWh (2017)
External links
Website[1] Home Website
CommonsRelated media on Commons
[edit on Wikidata]

Columbia Generating Station is a nuclear commercial energy facility located on the Hanford Site, 10 miles (16 km) north of Richland, Washington. It is owned and operated by Energy Northwest, a Washington state, not-for-profit joint operating agency. Licensed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 1983, Columbia first produced electricity in May 1984, and entered commercial operation in December 1984.

Columbia produces 1,207 megawatts net of clean electricity.

Design and function

Columbia Generating Station is a BWR-5. It features a Mark II containment structure.

The reactor core holds up to 764 fuel assemblies, and 185 control rods, more technically known as control blades. The reactor is licensed for a power output of 3486 thermal megawatts (MWt). The gross electrical output of the plant is 1230 megawatts-electric (MWe).[3]

The Columbia Generating Station features six low-profile fan-driven cooling towers. Each tower cascades clean warmed water, a byproduct of water heat exchanging with steam after leaving a turbine, down itself and subsequently cools the warmed water via a combination of evaporation and heat exchange with the surrounding air. Some water droplets fall back to earth in the process, thereby creating a hoar frost in the winter. At times, the vapor cloud from the cooling towers can reach 10,000 feet (3,000 m) in height and can be seen at a great distance. Replacement water for the evaporated water is drawn from the nearby Columbia River.

History

Columbia was built by the former Washington Public Power Supply System, known since 1998 as Energy Northwest. Its construction permit was issued in March 1973, and construction began in late 1975 on the Hanford Site. Because of cost overruns and construction delays, the plant did not begin commercial operation until December 1984. Of the five commercial reactors originally planned by the Bonneville Power Administration and the Supply System in Washington, Columbia was the only one completed. The nuclear power plant was also known as Hanford Two, with Hanford One being the 800 MWe power generating plant connected to the N-Reactor (decommissioned in 1987), a dual purpose reactor operated by the Atomic Energy Commission: producing plutonium for the nuclear weapons stockpile, as well as generating electricity for the grid.[4]

When the Supply System changed its name to Energy Northwest, the plant's name went from WNP-2 (Washington Public Power Supply System Nuclear Project number 2) to Columbia Generating Station. In 2000, then-Executive Board Chairman Rudi Bertschi said the plant's former name referred "to an earlier era when the Washington Public Power Supply System was building five nuclear power plants. Those days are long gone," said Bertschi. "Our plant has made the transition, as has Energy Northwest, from being a marginal producer to being a key cog in the region's energy machine."

Extensive maintenance was completed during the planned refueling outage starting in early April 2011, including the replacement of the original condenser. At the time, the refueling outage marked the end of a record-setting 486 days of continuous operations.[5] The outage was planned for 80 days finishing in July; however, work was not completed until that September. The total cost of repairs and refueling was $170 million. Replacing the condenser allowed for better plant efficiency thus producing more electricity in the future, helping offset the cost of the project.[2]

Columbia's original NRC license to operate was scheduled to expire in December 2023. In January 2010, Energy Northwest filed an application with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a 20-year license renewal – through 2043. In May 2012, the NRC approved the 20-year license renewal.

In 2012, Energy Northwest entered into agreements with the Tennessee Valley Authority, the U.S. Enrichment Corporation (Centrus Energy) and the Department of Energy to turn depleted uranium (also called uranium tails) into low-cost enriched uranium product for further future processing into nuclear fuel. Buying under market value at a set price to obtain a nine-year fuel supply, the transaction is estimated to bring between $171 and $275 million in savings to the region through 2028.

Energy Northwest announced in January 2024 that they plan to expand the station with 12 small modular reactors (SMRs).[6]

Economics

In late 2012, the Bonneville Power Administration and Energy Northwest came together to analyze the financial value of Columbia in light of low energy prices in the wholesale electricity market and historic low fuel costs for natural gas-fired power plants. The agencies studied three scenarios and concluded, in April 2013, that Columbia's continued operation was the most cost-effective option for consumers.

In April 2013, Energy Northwest commissioned a third-party study by IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates, a firm with a 75-year reputation for independent expertise in the fields of energy, economics, market conditions and business risk. IHS CERA came to the same conclusion as the April 2013 joint BPA-EN study.

In 2013, the Columbia Generating Station set a record for electricity generation during a refueling outage year – 8.4 million megawatt hours of electricity sent to the regional power grid. In 2012 – a non-refueling outage year – Columbia generated a record 9.3 million megawatt hours of electricity for the regional power grid (95% capacity factor).

In January 2014, the Public Power Council, representing Northwest consumer-owned utilities, examined the competing market assessments and said they found no compelling evidence that ceasing operation of Columbia is economically advisable for the region. The PPC assessment supported public statements by BPA affirming Columbia's provision of unique, firm, baseload, non-carbon emitting generation with predictable costs for the region's ratepayers.[7]

The Public Power Council observed in February 2014 that the variable cost of Columbia operations in recent years were slightly above spot market energy prices. However, the council stated that a single unanticipated shift in the markets "can easily wipe out years of anticipated benefits" gained from replacement power.

The council referenced the Western Energy Crisis of 2000-2001. During that relatively short energy crisis, according to the council, the cost benefit of Columbia's power "dwarf[ed] the modest benefits that would have been achieved" through replacement power. "In 2001 alone the operation of Columbia Generating Station compared to the market saved Bonneville Power Administration ratepayers $1.4 billion," according to the council.

Electricity Production

Generation (MWh) of Columbia Generating Station[8]
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual (Total)
2001 842,334 758,058 831,472 751,937 389,614 -7,286 595,523 785,605 805,414 841,249 814,440 842,069 8,250,429
2002 842,886 471,815 831,207 803,086 808,114 551,646 694,707 809,137 761,289 830,425 806,991 837,172 9,048,475
2003 830,827 718,423 451,885 793,479 70,591 11,567 666,947 819,854 796,028 817,158 806,785 831,164 7,614,708
2004 798,707 780,106 830,737 798,993 786,513 770,478 771,274 206,315 791,277 821,930 796,763 828,490 8,981,583
2005 829,313 736,839 816,109 782,298 142,600 76,023 769,051 826,390 801,911 835,588 781,728 844,423 8,242,273
2006 806,571 721,682 810,623 801,217 787,703 747,664 793,942 814,262 803,113 815,969 594,308 831,223 9,328,277
2007 838,202 758,783 811,071 619,520 254,847 42,400 768,651 764,693 783,552 831,062 795,942 839,837 8,108,560
2008 822,189 781,476 805,559 802,816 751,934 712,652 802,249 718,798 789,085 821,604 632,563 828,714 9,269,639
2009 804,901 593,407 821,820 709,683 167,382 19,858 695,488 105,617 547,254 721,340 612,921 834,343 6,634,014
2010 807,674 742,828 782,193 782,654 806,010 567,612 765,215 770,477 791,481 819,251 797,673 808,065 9,241,133
2011 822,817 745,596 814,989 22,512 0 0 0 0 13,801 805,467 748,464 832,632 4,806,278
2012 843,673 785,874 826,000 785,739 500,353 715,548 772,557 826,197 798,766 833,315 810,062 835,625 9,333,709
2013 839,101 757,369 820,505 801,738 254,663 78,260 806,046 821,066 792,921 836,946 813,660 838,615 8,460,890
2014 840,118 745,364 835,874 811,566 777,212 799,534 820,147 598,232 800,601 828,060 804,052 836,561 9,497,321
2015 836,137 754,720 822,761 783,078 185,997 20,075 581,011 836,585 823,629 853,373 803,927 859,619 8,160,912
2016 860,813 795,433 744,868 814,036 829,788 814,125 830,056 822,608 801,132 841,002 819,180 652,581 9,625,622
2017 840,627 756,843 791,639 551,250 223,028 269,717 855,834 537,019 735,650 858,052 841,597 867,003 8,128,259
2018 862,328 787,939 866,437 822,479 602,753 723,960 848,521 849,255 829,277 862,462 840,361 812,669 9,708,441
2019 849,557 779,746 861,349 816,440 243,895 244,696 838,342 848,354 822,885 861,659 839,295 860,281 8,866,499
2020 861,324 724,803 853,818 835,101 788,141 420,416 765,921 848,524 817,086 858,556 795,088 858,272 9,427,050
2021 865,094 768,461 849,781 746,667 150,615 304,057 845,579 849,376 815,383 848,536 836,592 631,147 8,511,288
2022 867,584 755,900 853,749 827,383 847,700 650,116 840,895 837,443 820,076 854,566 8,155,412
2023

Spent fuel

Columbia Generating Station's spent fuel pool is able to accommodate 2,658 fuel assemblies. It was designed as a short-term storage option until a national repository could be built. Since there is no projected start date for the stalled national long-term nuclear waste storage facility at Yucca Mountain Repository in Nevada, the station obtained approval for dry cask storage to avoid exceeding the pool's licensed capacity. The Columbia Generating Station has an on-site installation, which allows for storage of spent fuel rods in specially designed and manufactured casks. As of 2021, 45 casks have been loaded and stored in the installation, making room in the spent fuel pool.[9]

Surrounding population

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission defines two emergency planning zones around nuclear power plants: a plume exposure pathway zone with a radius of 10 miles (16 km), concerned primarily with exposure to, and inhalation of, airborne radioactive contamination, and an ingestion pathway zone of about 50 miles (80 km), concerned primarily with ingestion of food and liquid contaminated by radioactive materials.[10]

The 2010 population within 10 miles (16 km) of Columbia was 10,055, an increase of 10.4 percent in a decade.[11] The 2010 population within 50 miles (80 km) was 445,416, an increase of 23.4 percent since 2000. Cities within 50 miles include Richland (12 miles (19 km) to city center) and Pasco (18 miles (29 km) to city center).[11]

Potential risks

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission's estimate of the risk each year of an earthquake intense enough to cause core damage to the reactor at Columbia was 1 in 47,619, according to an NRC study published in August 2010.[12] The Department of Energy is planning a new earthquake assessment that will update the last comprehensive one conducted in 1996.[13] The U.S. Geological Survey has shown that the active faults of the Puget Sound Region are connected to ridges in the Mid-Columbia by faults that cross the Cascades (see Yakima Fold Belt § Geology).

According to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the Columbia Generating Station site is a "Dry Site" since the plant is above the Design Basis Flood Line.[14]

See also

Notes

  1. ^ 6 × concentric low-profile precast concrete cooling towers, each with 6 × individual induced-draft cooling cells, for a total of 36 induced-draft cooling cells.

References

  1. ^ "EIA - State Nuclear Profiles". www.eia.gov. Retrieved 3 October 2017.
  2. ^ Johnston, Louis; Williamson, Samuel H. (2023). "What Was the U.S. GDP Then?". MeasuringWorth. Retrieved November 30, 2023. United States Gross Domestic Product deflator figures follow the MeasuringWorth series.
  3. ^ "Columbia Generating Station - License Renewal Application". Reactor License Renewal. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). May 22, 2012. Retrieved May 29, 2012.
  4. ^ "Hanford One". www.ans.org. Retrieved 2024-08-16.
  5. ^ "Long outage scheduled at Hanford nuclear plant". The Seattle Times. 2011-03-15. Retrieved 2023-01-03.
  6. ^ "Small nuclear reactors could be on their way to Central WA".
  7. ^ "Economic Analysis of Columbia Generating Station" (PDF). Retrieved September 23, 2020.
  8. ^ "Electricity Data Browser". www.eia.gov. Retrieved 2023-01-03.
  9. ^ "Used Fuel". Energy Northwest. Archived from the original on November 5, 2013. Retrieved Sep 15, 2013.
  10. ^ "Backgrounder on Emergency Preparedness at Nuclear Power Plants". Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Retrieved February 28, 2018.
  11. ^ a b "Nuclear neighbors: Population rises near US reactors". NBC News. 2011-04-14. Retrieved 2024-08-16.
  12. ^ "What are the odds? US nuke plants ranked by quake risk". NBC News. 2011-03-16. Retrieved 2024-08-16.
  13. ^ "DOE plans seismic analysis at Hanford". Tri-City Herald. April 12, 2012. Archived from the original on May 7, 2012. Retrieved Sep 17, 2013.
  14. ^ "Columbia Generating Station Flood Protection Final Report" (PDF). Nuclear Regulatory Commission. October 25, 2012. Retrieved September 17, 2012.
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Columbia Generating Station.