(snip)

According to Reuters survey today of nuclear plant operators, total nuclear generating capacity off line for refueling and/or extended maintenance climbed to 57 percent over the same year-ago period.

(snip)

http://biz.yahoo.com/rf/000314/0g.html

-- - (x@xxx.com), March 14, 2000

Answers

Nuclear plant status report

Arkansas 1 - hot shutdown

-- - (x@xxx.com), March 14, 2000.

I wonder how these numbers compare to a year or two before that when the plants would not have been undergoing y2k testing and remedation.

-- Brooks (brooksbie@hotmail.com), March 14, 2000.

It's not like there is some uncountable number of nuclear plants, forcing us to look at statistical samples and debate over randomness, sample sizes, or what perceived general trends (if any) might mean.

We might be looking at a grand total of 20 (twenty) plants currently out of operation for one reason or another. That's not too difficult. Just ask each of them WHY they're currently down. You don't even need to summarize and categorize the results. Interested people can read 20 reasons quite quickly.

So why survey the operators? Aren't these things a matter of public record?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), March 14, 2000.

Here's the data from the NRC

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/DAILY/990312pr.htm

22 outages for refueling Mar 12, 1999

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/DAILY/000313pr.htm

22 outages for refueling March 13, 2000

So where does this 57% increase figure come from? As Flint says, this is all public information and I see absolutley nothing out of the ordinary on year to year comparision.

-- Jim Cooke (JJCooke@yahoo.com), March 14, 2000.

The statistic is generating capacity offline, not # of plants.

-- - (x@xxx.com), March 14, 2000.

x:

Isn't the generating capacity provided by plants? If they are offline, why? The capacity of each plant is ALSO a matter of public record. This "survey" still makes no sense.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), March 14, 2000.

These nuclear generating capacity stats are given almost daily in Reuters natural gas reports. The significance of this is that the downtime on nukes puts demand pressure on natural gas. Currently natural gas is trading at all time highs in spite of the fact that we have had the mildest winter ever recorded according to NOAA.

April natural gas

-- - (x@xxx.com), March 14, 2000.

You don't need Reuters. Go to www.nrc.gov. Its got daily reports going back to 1/1/97.

-- John (littmannj@aol.com), March 14, 2000.

x:

If the statistic reflects total nuclear capacity offline, why does the headline read "Nuclear plants offline up 57% from same time last year"? This is misleading at best, especially since you obviously knew the meaning to the Reuters statistic when asked.

One large plant offline can change the total capacity offline stats by 50%. The important thing is the total number of plants offline if you're looking for some indication of Y2K problems. These things do not affect large plants more than smaller plants.

-- Jim Cooke (JJCooke@yahoo.com), March 15, 2000.

I would say this is a good thing that nuclear plants are down for refueling now.

Given US Sec Energy's concern over effects of deregulation on grid stability during peak demand this summer and the potential for shortages or higher cost nat gas, or fuel oil; refueling the nuke plants now so that they can be online this summer to pickup peak demand is a wise move.

-- Bill P (porterwn@one.net), March 15, 2000.