One nuclear fuel pellet, roughly the size of a pencil eraser, provides as much energy as one ton of coal or nearly 150 gallons of oil.

Vogtle Receives First Shipment of Nuclear Fuel

The two-unit expansion of the Vogtle nuclear power plant in Georgia reached another milestone as Georgia Power received the first shipment of nuclear fuel for Unit 3 of the project.

The utility on Dec. 9 said receipt of the fuel follows completion and inspection of several construction areas at the site in Waynesboro, Georgia. Those areas included the fuel vault and spent fuel pool. The fuel handling area of Unit 3 has been turned over to the operations staff; Georgia Power said the Vogtle site has “implemented specific and comprehensive policies, procedures and security measures to safely receive, handle and store the nuclear fuel.”

The Vogtle expansion is adding two, 1,100-MW AP1000 reactors to the nuclear plant, where two other r… Continue Reading (5 minute read)

11 thoughts on “One nuclear fuel pellet, roughly the size of a pencil eraser, provides as much energy as one ton of coal or nearly 150 gallons of oil.”

  1. MaximumEffort433

    One of the other nice things about nuclear power is that *we don’t aerosolize the waste.*

    [Coal power plants actually put *more* radioactive material into the environment than nuclear power plants do,]( because there are minute traces of radioactive elements in the coal, and when we burn (gigatons of) it, that material is released into the air or trapped in the fly ash:

    >Scientific American: The waste produced by coal plants is actually more radioactive than that generated by their nuclear counterparts. In fact, **the fly ash emitted by a power plant—a by-product from burning coal for electricity—carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy.** * [See Editor’s Note at bottom]

    >Editor’s note: *As a general clarification, ounce for ounce, coal ash released from a power plant delivers more radiation than nuclear waste shielded via water or dry cask storage.*

    If radioactive waste is your personal pet issue, which is a completely reasonable stance to have, then shutting down coal and transitioning to nuclear power is, counter intuitive as it may seem, a step in the right direction.

    Nuclear power is clean, it’s safe, and it deserves a place along side renewable sources of power.

  2. losgatosguapos

    There are newer designs that are much safer. We will need nuclear power going forward, it’s effectively clean, obviously the most efficient, and truly safe with modern designs and non fissile reactors.

  3. ProfessorChaos112

    And yet people still whinge about nuclear power.

  4. BourbonH

    That pellet once used is then reprocessed to extract more fuel which is used in Gen 3 or higher stages of nuclear programmes. Hence, the fuel is never a “waste”, its just loosely described as “spent”.

  5. ElDoo74

    How much ore is processed to produce that pellet?

  6. sean488

    150 gallons isn’t very much. Are you sure you didn’t mean barrels?

  7. ObiMemeKenobi

    Unfortunately I think it’s a huge uphill battle for nuclear power. It’s pretty easy to scare the vast majority of the public with things like Chernobyl and Fukushima

  8. xpoc

    Uranium is ridiculously efficient by weight. 27 tonnes of refined uranium can power a 1000 MWe reactor for a year.

    For comparison, a fossil fuel power plant with the same energy output burns 100kg of coal per *second*.

  9. whammykerfuffle

    How would you describe the size of a pencil eraser?

  10. chrisbrock_nc

    Nuclear energy is Green energy.

Leave a Comment