Nuclear Power Plants

[Townsend]

South Carolina regulators OK nuclear power project.

Another step closer and it moves them to the top of the list.  They schedule the 1st tower up and running by 2016.  

This seems the way to go over "Clean Coal"...but I'm no expert.

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE51B46920090212

[patric]

quote:Originally posted by Townsend

South Carolina regulators OK nuclear power project.

Another step closer and it moves them to the top of the list.  They schedule the 1st tower up and running by 2016.  

This seems the way to go over "Clean Coal"...but I'm no expert.

http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE51B46920090212

Our utility cant afford to make the system it's already got reliable by burying cables, so it's not likely we would be able to responsibly fund another reactor project.
And we havent yet solved the problem of having to refrigerate tons of nuclear waste on-site for all of perpetuity.

Id like to see us get serious about alternatives like wind.  Big utilities have been playing bait-and switch, saying they plan on building wind farms but ending up building coal plants in their place once they got the transmission lines in.

[Gold]

I'm not sure wind is a serious alternative.  It's a brick in the wall.

Nuclear energy needs to be part of our energy strategy.  The solution here isn't that complicated; we need diversification so that next time we have a price shock, it doesn't sting.  

There are a lot of reasons nuclear energy has struggled in the US.  Some of it is the start up cost, some of it is the opposition, and some of it is the general inability of our government to think long term.  We also have a bad habit of not making the plants uniform (the plants in France are generally uniform) and therefore more difficult to regulate.

I think it's a fair point that our "local" utility has issues.  Part of that, at least, goes back to why AEP was able to take over CSW/PSO a few years back and a lot of that goes back to the repeal of the Public Utilities Holding Company Act (PUHCA).  It shouldn't have happened.

[cannon_fodder]

Wind is not a viable alternative.  I've gone over this in detail but in summary:  1) It is not where the people are, 2) Transit costs are too high and bleed energy, 3) peak supply of wind is inverse to peak demand for electricity (hot summer days = no wind), and 4) the sporadic nature of wind energy means other plants would have to exist to handle the load anyway.  Since fixed costs extensive this is no small problem.  Likewise, start up costs for the most efficient plants (read: coal or nuclear) are significant and would be unable to cope with a sudden shift in wind supply.

Not saying it couldn't be done, just that it would require massive investment that might not be worth (actual cost of power is cheap, but transit is in the multiple billions and will entail power loss) it AND a rethinking of our power grid (storage capacity?  More auxiliary gas?).


Per nuclear:

+1 to Gold.

We currently store nuclear waste in the basement of each facility.  We spent over $1,000,000,000 building a secure and remote facility to house it all... but NIMBY has prevented the transport.

I briefly looked, but could not find a good source for cost per megawatt hour of production taking fuel and capital into account.

[grahambino]

i'd be for nuclear power if we built (as a world scope project) a giant magnetically propelled sled on Antarctica that shoots our spent waste fuel either into empty space or directly at the sun.

[Gold]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

Wind is not a viable alternative.  I've gone over this in detail but in summary:  1) It is not where the people are, 2) Transit costs are too high and bleed energy, 3) peak supply of wind is inverse to peak demand for electricity (hot summer days = no wind), and 4) the sporadic nature of wind energy means other plants would have to exist to handle the load anyway.  Since fixed costs extensive this is no small problem.  Likewise, start up costs for the most efficient plants (read: coal or nuclear) are significant and would be unable to cope with a sudden shift in wind supply.

Not saying it couldn't be done, just that it would require massive investment that might not be worth (actual cost of power is cheap, but transit is in the multiple billions and will entail power loss) it AND a rethinking of our power grid (storage capacity?  More auxiliary gas?).


Per nuclear:

+1 to Gold.

We currently store nuclear waste in the basement of each facility.  We spent over $1,000,000,000 building a secure and remote facility to house it all... but NIMBY has prevented the transport.

I briefly looked, but could not find a good source for cost per megawatt hour of production taking fuel and capital into account.

I left out Harry Reid's blockade of Yucca Mountain.  I'm a registered Democrat, but can't stand Reid and his "service" to his nation on this matter is on top of my list of complaints.  We have a safe place to store the waste.  Reid just won't let us use it.

[TheArtist]

I remembered reading this article just a while back about a new type of reactor that sounds interesting...

"The process would ultimately reduce the transuranic waste from the original fission reactors by up to 99 percent. Burning that waste also produces energy."


http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090127131654.htm

[sgrizzle]

I've got a black fox bumper sticker I was thinking of putting on the back of my car...

[sauerkraut]

I favor using all forms of fuel. Let's be open to everything. But right now what we need is oil and coal for the most part, so let's focus on that to get us to the future. Meanwhile we can work to get other forms of fuel on line. A guy in the 1800's invented a wind sail "car" and he called it a "Prairie Sail Wagon" not much is talked about it the history books, but it's intresting to learn about. I believe the old TV show "Death Valley Days" did a story about that "Prairie Sail Wagon". The idea is not really practical but it's the thinking outside of the box that really counts.[xx(]

[Townsend]

quote:Originally posted by sauerkraut

A guy in the 1800's invented a wind sail "car" and he called it a "Prairie Sail Wagon" not much is talked about it the history books, but it's intresting to learn about. I believe the old TV show "Death Valley Days" did a story about that "Prairie Sail Wagon". The idea is not really practical but it's the thinking outside of the box that really counts.

[godboko71]

(Note: Can we not resize images so we don't have to scroll to read the thread?)

Anyway lets also not forget there is more then one type of reactor, the Pebble bed reactor for instance might be a good alternative to the traditional reactors.

[Townsend]

quote:Originally posted by godboko71

(Note: Can we not resize images so we don't have to scroll to read the thread?)

Sorry.  Hit refresh and the image will resize to fit.

[godboko71]

quote:Originally posted by Townsend

quote:Originally posted by godboko71

(Note: Can we not resize images so we don't have to scroll to read the thread?)

Sorry.  Hit refresh and the image will resize to fit.

No need to be sorry, and thats odd having to refresh for it to resize.

Anyway thanks for the heads up, normally I just use the zoom out feature on Firefox.

[patric]

It's going to be a while before someone proposes reactors again in our back yard.  It's unfortunate, because a lot was riding on the technology maturing.


Japan races to prevent nuke reactor meltdowns

KORIYAMA, Japan — Japan's nuclear crisis intensified Sunday as authorities raced to combat the threat of multiple reactor meltdowns and more than 180,000 people evacuated the quake- and tsunami-savaged northeastern coast where fears spread over possible radioactive contamination.

Nuclear plant operators were frantically trying to keep temperatures down in a series of nuclear reactors — including one where officials feared a partial meltdown could be happening Sunday — to prevent the disaster from growing worse.

But hours after officials announced the latest dangers to face the troubled Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear complex, including the possibility of a second explosion in two days, there were few details about what was being done to bring the situation under control.

Officials, though, have declared states of emergency at six reactors — three at Dai-ichi and three at another nearby complex — after operators lost the ability to cool the reactors.
Hidehiko Nishiyama, a senior official of the Economy, Trade and Industry Ministry, indicated the reactor core in Unit 3 had melted partially, telling a news conference, "I don't think the fuel rods themselves have been spared damage."

Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=337&articleid=20110313_337_0_KORIYA881738

[Teatownclown]

OMG. Why in the hell does ANYONE think that a nuclear power plant is EVER a good idea? I'm surprised that Japan, after having us blow them to hell and back during WWII, would have ever even considered the idea at all. I hope this is a wake up call. Oh yeah, I forgot, BP gets to drill again so how bad could a nuclear power plant in a earthquake zone be?

It would be refreshing to hear from someone who can state accurately what's happening there with the nukes.

What are there? Six out of control reactors?