Sign up for daily news updates from CleanTechnica on email. Or follow us on Google News!
Despite being pretty similar in size, becoming states within weeks of each other, and being located right next to each other, Arizona and New Mexico are vastly different in population. While New Mexico remains mired in poverty and missing opportunities for real jobs, Arizona has been a growth powerhouse, attracting people for jobs, good weather for retirement, and more.
One thing both states have in common are vast tracts of dry basin and range land. Small islands of green or dry craggy desert peaks are surrounded by flat lands that get plentiful sunshine, and this geography stretches across most of both states.
As average temperatures continues to rise and the days spent over 100 degrees continue to stretch into more of the year, there’s a strain on the power grid that hurts Arizona more. After all, more people means more air conditioners running. Plus, the hotter parts of Arizona are about ten degrees warmer than the higher deserts in New Mexico, where many people still use less consumptive but less effective evaporative coolers (or “swamp” coolers).
This leaves Arizona’s leaders and media looking for options, including the possibility of getting more power from the Palo Verde nuclear plant.
Population growth and rising temperatures are starting to not be the only thing upping power demand. Large manufacturing companies are looking to build or expand in the state, and large data centers are also considering the Phoenix metro area. So, finding more kilowatt-hours is key.
The video does a good job of giving an overview of the situation. The Palo Verde Generating Station is already the most powerful nuclear plant in the United States, and when it was built, it was the cleanest source of power. This was before solar or wind had developed to the point where much energy could be produced economically. This power serves not only people in Phoenix and Arizona, but also parts of California, Nevada, New Mexico, and Texas. Almost half of my power in southern New Mexico comes from the place, and it has helped my local utility to completely ditch coal.
The idea of adding more generating capacity sounds enticing, despite disadvantages like spent fuel management and water usage (this actually comes from Phoenix wastewater in Palo Verde’s case). But, even the pro-nuclear head of the company that runs the plant (APS) knows that this isn’t a quick fix to Arizona’s near-term power needs. Even if efforts to expand the plant started today, it wouldn’t generate any more power until the mid-to-late 2030s.
Plant expansion would be a huge chore that would take decades, so alternative nuclear generating ideas, like small modular reactors are also being considered. Factory-built reactors that generate smaller amounts of power are being considered for big data centers and other large incoming users. Shuttered coal plants are being considered for these, as those sites are already connected to the power grid and would be ready to receive more power with minimum hassle.
Even then, small reactors are still at least a decade away, so they’re not a solution for near-term growth.
The Problem With Nuclear: Delays
While nuclear could be a good option for low carbon power, the time it takes to get a nuclear plant or even future small reactors online becomes a big problem.
The delay itself isn’t the biggest issue; investment is. When money is diverted to nuclear power plants that won’t produce any power for at least a decade, faster options don’t get that funding. No solution, be it gas, solar, wind, hydro, or anything else is immediate, but if that same money were invested in building solar and wind, each project would help solve problems (both power demand and ditching high-carbon power) as each project opens up.
By the time a nuclear plant would have opened, renewable projects and storage would have been providing for our needs for years if not decades already. This opportunity cost, not considered by nuclear advocates, ends up being a real problem.
That having been said, closing existing plants is a bad option. Building new ones isn’t a good choice due to tied up investment, but existing plants don’t require that much money to keep running. So, it doesn’t make any sense to prematurely close any nuclear plants so long as the plant can be operated safely.
Arizona Is The Best Place For Solar
The question of whether to build renewables or a nuclear plant would be a real debate in a place like Alaska or Washington. Whether it’s rainy/cloudy seasons, short winter days, or less solar power generally available, those disadvantages make it harder for solar to actually compete and contribute to problem solving.
The very thing that challenges the power grid in the hotter parts of the desert southwest creates great opportunities for solar power generation. Not only is there lots of direct sunlight the further south you go, but the dry weather in the Southwest means less humidity, fewer cloudy and rainy days, and generally better solar power generation for each buck spent on it.
On top of the abundant solar energy available to tap into, southern Arizona has vast areas of public land that could be responsibly used to host solar power, energy storage, and associated transmission infrastructure. There are also lot of opportunities that could be made available on reservation lands, opening up more income to tribes that could really use the dough to improve lives.
Given the ideal situation for solar power in the region and the costly (both in terms of money and opportunity costs) delays that plague nuclear power, it makes sense to keep Palo Verde as it is and run it for as long as safely possible but without expanding it.
It also makes sense to keep building solar power closer to where it’s consumed. With Palo Verde power users spread all over the southwest, it would be less costly to build new generating capacity on public lands closer to where the power’s needed. This could also come in the form of being as close as possible: right on the user’s rooftop.
Featured image by NREL (Public Domain).
Chip in a few dollars a month to help support independent cleantech coverage that helps to accelerate the cleantech revolution!
Have a tip for CleanTechnica? Want to advertise? Want to suggest a guest for our CleanTech Talk podcast? Contact us here.
Sign up for our daily newsletter for 15 new cleantech stories a day. Or sign up for our weekly one if daily is too frequent.
CleanTechnica uses affiliate links. See our policy here.
CleanTechnica’s Comment Policy
