Washington State: Nuclear Boondoogle

With the end of the hydro era (due to environmental concerns, federal licensing problems, and high initial capital costs) Washington state now needs to turn towards another source of electricity generation. This period starts in the mid-1970s and, at that time, the only viable large scale power generation technology was nuclear. Wind and Solar were not feasible at that time. Indeed, this is the time where most of the rest of the country started their deployment of nuclear power plants.

In the mid 1970's the Washingtion Public Power Supply System (WPPSS - or WHOOPS) proposed to build 5 nuclear power plants (each at about 1200 MWs). This 6000 MW, equivalent to constructing 3 new dams on the Columbia River, of proposed new power would satisfy increasing state demand for the about the next 25 years so it seemed like a good idea at the time. Three of these nuclear power plants were to be built on the Hanford Reservation (since handling facilities are already in place) and 2 of them were to be built at Satsop, in Western Washington. (Satsop is in the middle of nowhere, about 30 miles east of Aberdeen Washington). Source google maps - Drive there - get out of your carbon footprint vehicle - look around - proclaim This is the middle of nowhere and continue your journey.

To make a long story short:

• Only 1 reactor was built at Hanford. This one alone costs $3.2 billion! (or 3.2 million dollars per megawatt).

• That reactor was 7 years behind schedule

• The entire project was grossly mismanaged and over budget. The end result is that two more reactors got partially built at hanford.

• Nothing was ever built at the Satsop site except for some cooling towers.

Not only did this Nuclear plan fail to pan out, it also used up limited resources which could have been directed towards a more sensible project. This is one of the main problems associated with stupid decision making. Yeah, the initial decision was stupid, but allocating resources to stupidity greatly lowers your ability to implement something sensible later on. We really need to get these projects right, the first time.

Currently, Washington state, with its reduced snowpack, is in danger of having insufficient power production year round which means they would have to import electricity at rather large prices. As a result, WA is aggressively building its wind capacity:

• end of 2007: 1163 MW
• end of 2008: 1375 MW
• end of 2009: 1849 MW
• end of 2010: 2356 MW
• end of 2011: 2573 MW
• end of 2012: ~2800 MW

As of Mid 2013 combined wind power for WA and OR stood at 6000 MW (now equivalent to grand coulee dam). This is second highest in the nation, outside of Texas (12,000 MW) which is also undergoing an aggressive build out.

As wind power continues to grow, the use of dams for the production of electricity may become less thus allowing some dams to be removed from the Columnbia river system. That day is not imminent but 10-20 years from now it may well be.



Wind power in Washington State

In sum WA state is a good case study in the history of regional power development> Use what you got. Originally, WA had coal and used that up mostly as export to California. Then it used its free flowing rivers before eventually, as part of the Federal Works Projects in the 1930s, building large scale (2000 MW) projects on the Columbia river. That activity extended to the Lower Snake River and by 1975, WA was producing 25,000 MW of hydropower - more than it needed - so there was no pressure to continue building more dams. By then, dams have become evil and so WA, in a great feat of enlightenment, decided to build something less evil - Nuclear.

Now WA is one of the most forward looking states in the country in terms of utilizing wind power to eventually become a prime electricity generator which then may obviate the need for some of the existing dams.

But maybe to you wind is also evil which brings up the main predicament that your generation seems to be in. Everything is perceived as evil, yet consumption continues to climb.