Water’s Rising – Thank God we have Reliable Baseload Power. OOOPS. “We don’t have any idea when we’ll be able to start again.”
June 18, 2011
(Reuters) – The Fort Calhoun nuclear power station in Nebraska remains shut down due to Missouri River flooding, but the plant itself has not flooded and is expected to remain safe, the federal government said Friday.
The rising river “has certainly affected the site, but the plant itself, the actual reactor is still dry,” said Scott Burnell, Nuclear Regulatory Commission spokesman.
The 478-megawatt plant north of Omaha shut April 9 to refuel, and has remained shut because of the flooding, said Omaha Public Power District spokesman Jeff Hanson.
“When the river reaches 1,004 feet above mean sea level, we shut down,” said Hanson. “We don’t have any idea when we’ll be able to start again.”
US Global Change Research Program – Great Plains:
Projected changes in long-term climate and more frequent extreme events such as heat waves, droughts, and heavy rainfall will affect many aspects of life in the Great Plains. These include the region’s already threatened water resources, essential agricultural and ranching activities, unique natural and protected areas, and the health and prosperity of its inhabitants.
US Global Change Research Program – Midwest:
Heavy downpours are now twice as frequent as they were a century ago. Both summer and winter precipitation have been above average for the last three decades, the wettest period in a century. The Midwest has experienced two record-breaking floods in the past 15 years.
Anyone know how the Midwest’s wind farms are doing? I’m guessing still churning away…
Climate Denial Crock of the Week 
June 18, 2011 at 7:40 am
All energy sources have trouble. Building an energy grid on a source of energy that only works a third of the time compared to nuclear power stations that are reliable 90% of the time (and MOST of the 10% down time is predictable) is a totally different ballgame.
I for one welcome our waste-burning GenIV overlords! Abundant, clean, concentrated nuclear power. Just 40 to 50 could get Australia off coal and gas, and go a good way towards getting us off oil.
Also consider this: What about cyclones / hurricanes / typhoons? How are massive and expensive windfarms going to cope with those?
Nukes are in a concrete bunker and last 60 years or so. Wind farms only last about a third of that, only produce power a third of the time, and can’t survive a good cyclone.
June 18, 2011 at 12:25 pm
seems to me the North Sea is a pretty good testing ground for how well wind turbines survive a harsh environment. So far, they seem to be holding up.
Make no mistake, – this Calhoun event is the kind of thing that drives utility purchasing decisions, much more so than bloviating bloggers.
June 21, 2011 at 1:25 am
would be nice if we could have a couple of main strem media pundits blowing this horn about how resilient wind is in this new more extreme eaarth….
June 22, 2011 at 12:22 am
[…] Peter Sinclair, the source of (most of) the headline and links, points out in his ClimateCrocks post: […]
June 23, 2011 at 6:04 pm
[…] what I gather.Some useful US Global Change Research Program excerpts from Peter Sinclair over on Climate Denial Crock of the Week:US Global Change Research Program – Great Plains:Projected changes in long-term climate and more […]
June 23, 2011 at 7:11 pm
[…] useful US Global Change Research Program excerpts from Peter Sinclair over on Climate Denial Crock of the Week: US Global Change Research Program – Great […]
June 24, 2011 at 4:22 am
[…] useful US Global Change Research Program excerpts from Peter Sinclair over on Climate Denial Crock of the Week: US Global Change Research Program – Great […]
June 30, 2011 at 2:55 pm
[…] increase, the stability of a power supply based on highly centralized and intricate systems like large nuclear plants becomes more problematic, pesky earthquakes and tidal waves […]
January 30, 2015 at 7:40 am
[…] Peter Sinclair, the source of (most of) the links, points out in his ClimateCrocks post: […]