The Investigating Benefits and Challenges of Converting Retiring Coal Plants into Nuclear Plants report analyzed a hypothetical but representative coal power plant site and the surrounding region to investigate the detailed impacts and potential outcomes of a C2N transition.

After screening recently retired and active coal plant sites, the study team, comprised of multiple DOE national labs, identified 157 retired coal plant sites and 237 operating coal plants sites as potential candidates for a C2N transition.

The team further evaluated the potential coal power plant sites based on a set of ten parameters, including population density, distance from seismic fault lines, flooding potential, and nearby wetlands, to determine if they could safely host a nuclear power plant.

The team found that 80% of the potential sites, with over 250 GW of generating capacity, are suitable for hosting advanced nuclear power plants. These nuclear power plants vary in size and type and could be deployed to match the size of the site being converted.

While these coal power plant sites possess the basic characteristics needed, further investigation is required before a C2N transition can occur.

This includes an investigation into ownership of the plant, an in-depth evaluation of the remaining coal power plant infrastructure, and a consideration of other factors that could pose siting challenges.

After identifying a study site, the team examined how a C2N transition would bring significant financial, economic and environmental benefits to energy communities.

JOBS

According to the study, if a large coal plant site is replaced by a nuclear power plant of equivalent size, jobs in the region could increase by more than 650 permanent jobs for the NuScale design example in the case study.

These jobs are spread across the plant, the supply chain supporting the plant, and the community surrounding the plant and most typically come with wages that are about 25% higher than any other energy technology.

The occupations that would see the largest gains include nuclear engineers, security guards, and nuclear technicians.

Nuclear power plant projects could also benefit from preserving the existing experienced workforce in communities around retiring coal plants sites. Many of these workers already possess the necessary skills and knowledge requirements needed to help transition their skills to work at a nuclear power plant.

ECONOMIC BENEFITS

The study also indicates that as new jobs increase economic output and improve wages across the community, the economic well-being of community members in the region will improve.

Based on the case study, long-term job impacts could lead to additional annual economic activity of $275 million. This includes an increase of 92% tax revenue from the nuclear plant for the local county when compared to the tax revenue from the coal plant prior to its closure.

These tax payments would also increase the amount of money given to improve local schools, infrastructure projects, and public services.

ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS

As economic factors improve for communities, so will environmental indicators.  
Based on the case study, greenhouse gas emissions in the region would fall by 86% when nuclear power plants replace coal. This reduction is equivalent to taking more than 500,000 gasoline-powered passenger vehicles off the roads.

The improved air quality could lead to lower incidence of health issues associated with air pollution such as asthma, lung cancer, and heart disease.

The study did note that while replacing coal plants with nuclear would be a major step forward in improving air quality for the community, pollution caused by increased population and economic activity would still need to be addressed.

COST SAVINGS

High construction costs have consistently plagued the nuclear energy industry for years, but a C2N transition can help lower these costs—especially for first-of-a-kind development projects.

The study shows that reusing coal infrastructure for new, advanced nuclear reactors can save around 15-35% in construction costs.

C2N projects could use the existing land, connection to the grid, and office buildings. Reusing the coal plant’s electrical equipment (transmission connection, switchyard, etc.) and civil infrastructure (roads, buildings, etc.) would also save millions of dollars upfront.

NEXT STEPS

Argonne National Laboratory, Idaho National Laboratory, and Oak Ridge National Laboratory conducted the study, which was sponsored by the Office of Nuclear Energy.

Other analyses can use this study’s methods to set up a site analysis based on a specific coal plant site and a specific type of nuclear reactor.

Conducting parts of this study for different sites would determine more accurate estimates of the environmental and economic impacts of the C2N transition on the region.

These new analyses would also determine how specific nuclear plants could use certain infrastructure at the coal plant sites, resulting in more accurate estimates of savings associated with avoided construction costs.

When does the agency expect recipients will have access to these funds, and when might the funds be spent?

DOE officials expect recipients to have access to these funds within 120 days of a completed application, assuming the Office of Management and Budget has approved apportionment of the funds. The process begins when DOE sends a letter to a designated recipient detailing the requirements for receiving the funds. From there, DOE officials said it usually takes one to three months to complete the application.

DOE officials expect most of the funds to be awarded within the calendar year of when appropriations were enacted. Funding for all of the provisions is no-year and is therefore available to DOE until fully expended.

How does the agency intend to ensure these funds are spent properly?

DOE program offices plan to use their regular processes for monitoring projects funded through Community Project Funding/Congressionally Directed Spending provisions to ensure that funds are properly spent and to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. In particular, according to DOE officials, all applicable regulations and DOE guidance for financial assistance apply to these funds.

DOE officials said that they will also use the Department of the Treasury’s Do Not Pay working system to help ensure payments are made properly to recipients. The Office of Inspector General may also decide to review these funds as part of its oversight responsibilities. Further, DOE plans to use quarterly assessments, as well as progress and financial reports, to monitor the projects once funds are awarded and to ensure funds are spent properly.

What risks and challenges may the agency face distributing and monitoring these funds?

DOE officials anticipate potential challenges in some areas in absorbing the increased workload for distributing and monitoring these funds. Officials noted that distributing and monitoring these new funds would increase the workload of existing staff. In addition, some recipients of these funds are new to federal assistance, which could increase the administrative costs. DOE officials also stated that they face resource constraints in hiring additional staff.

GAO previously identified technical and financial risks associated with prior DOE efforts to expedite certain financial assistance. In December 2021, GAO reported that when DOE expedited time frames for contract negotiations from up to one year to less than three months for carbon capture and storage demonstration projects at coal-powered electric generation facilities, it reduced DOE’s ability to identify and mitigate technical and financial risks. If DOE were to expedite negotiating the terms of the contracts for the Fiscal Year 2022 Community Project Funding/Congressionally Directed Spending, it could increase the technical and financial risks of the projects.

To read the full report, please click here.

POLICY & LEGISLATIVE

Fri, Sept 16 at 2:00 PM ET - Nuclear Energy Provisions in the Inflation Reduction Act Webinar

The recently enacted Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is expected to have significant impacts on the power grid. The law includes approximately $369 billion in incentives for clean energy and climate-related program spending, including several provisions aimed at increasing nuclear power generation: Production Tax Credits for existing nuclear plants and new advanced nuclear reactors; an Investment Tax Credit for clean electricity technologies; loan guarantees; and funding for research, development and production of domestic High Assay Low Enrichment Uranium (HALEU) fuel. This webinar will feature an expert panel to discuss the IRA’s nuclear programs and share their opinions on how the law will impact nuclear power. Time will be available for Q&A.

To register for the webinar, click here.