New Poll: What future would you choose for TVA’s cancelled Bellefonte nuclear site?

The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) made a huge announcement last week when they definitively abandoned their plans to pursue building any new nuclear reactors at their Bellefonte site near Hollywood, Alabama. TVA had proposed having up to four reactors on the site: completing the long-idled, antiquated reactor designs at Units 1 & 2 (which many referred to as the “zombie reactors”) and building two new Toshiba-Westinghouse AP1000 reactors, Units 3 & 4. But that all ended with successive announcements of cancellations by the utility, dealing yet another blow to the never-realized, so-called “nuclear renaissance.”

This exciting news now gives northeastern Alabama a chance at a future not plagued by the threats posed by an operational nuclear plant — no highly radioactive nuclear waste to worry about, no water-guzzling power plant threatening local water resources, no long and cumbersome decommissioning to deal with, no skyrocketing utility bills and no more concerns about what happens to the community if a serious accident were to occur. HOORAY!

In celebration of TVA’s smart decision to save billions and billions of dollars by stopping their pursuit of nuclear power at Bellefonte and instead considering the possible sale of the site to outside parties, we developed a poll to offer YOU a chance to decide what should be done with the site. Options include whimsical choices like an amusement park, as well as practical choices like a solar farm.

Click here to access the poll!

And also feel free to send your thoughts on TVA’s proposal to the utility by March 18 – find more details here.

Tags: , , , , ,


rssComments RSS

How about giving it to a competent nuclear utility that knows what they are doing?

Comment by Joe Jones on February 25, 2016 8:36 am

You can vote however you choose. We don’t support TVA selling the site to be used for completing the reactors or pursuing other nuclear power applications. No criticality ever occurred here, no nuclear fuel was ever on site — it is essentially a developed, but “clean” site and ideally it should be left that way. For anyone thinking about completing these antiquated reactors, we urge you to read our report: “TVA’s Bad Bet: Betting Billions on Bellefonte Reactors” at

Comment by Sara Barczak on February 25, 2016 9:13 am

Congratulations Sara!!
What we need is more efficiency in our usage, not more generation!

Comment by Bruce Kitchell on March 10, 2016 3:44 pm

Thanks Bruce — great to hear from you! I agree, less usage should be the key goal — making our economy more efficient in all possible ways while protecting human health and the environment.

Comment by Sara Barczak on March 10, 2016 4:02 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.