Please support this Forum and Neven's Blog

Author Topic: Nuclear Power  (Read 61545 times)

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 765
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #350 on: April 18, 2017, 12:50:39 PM »
Scotland seems on track to be the main British Isle producer of clean energy.

It's going to be interesting watching how nuclear develops in the UK.  It's fairly likely that no new reactors will be built.  If someone would toss another HVDC line in the water and hook into Portuguese/Spanish solar that could be the end of nuclear.

The seek to connect to Iceland and Norway via high voltage interconnects. Based on their current path, there are going to be times that they import a lot of energy. They used to have 100% redundancy..
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

rboyd

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 224
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #351 on: April 18, 2017, 06:31:01 PM »
Bob Wallace: "Germany may miss the 2020 CO2 target they set several years ago due to their decision to speed up reactor closure.  But they won't miss it by much and they still expect to be fossil fuel free by 2050"

German emissions look like they have flatlined from 2009 to 2017, looks like they will miss their 40% target - closer to 32% (currently at 27.6%). Very little of that improvement will have happened after 2009. With possibly no reduction in electricity emissions through 2022 (as the remaining nuclear is shut down) and government reluctance to close down coal, the onus will be on transport and buildings. A lot of challenges there:

https://energytransition.org/2017/03/germany-to-miss-2020-carbon-reduction-targets-by-a-mile/

https://www.ft.com/content/7f2f199a-0a5f-11e7-97d1-5e720a26771b

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #352 on: April 18, 2017, 07:18:12 PM »
With possibly no reduction in electricity emissions through 2022 (as the remaining nuclear is shut down)

Look at the Energy Industry portion of the graph you posted.  CO2 emissions moved up a small amount in the two years post the Fukushima disaster as Germany sped up reactor closing.  And then they fell following two years.  Electricity related CO2 was apparently up about 1% in 2016 due to increased demand.

It will take about five more years to close the remaining nuclear plants and we shouldn't be surprised if that keeps electricity related CO2 from significant falls.  Renewable installations will be used to offset reactor losses.

But post 2022 Germany should have no more reactors to close and further renewable installations can be used to eliminate fossil fuel use.  That's the story behind somewhat missing the 2020 target but still hitting the 2050 target.

Remember, Fukushima was a major disrupting even for Germany.  As a country that had lived through a nuclear disaster in their neighborhood they decided that they wanted to reduce the risk of experiencing another.

Look closely at the bars in your graph.  Electricity generation CO2 emissions have dropped slightly from 2009 to 2015.  You cherry-picked the lowest pre-Fukushima year out of the record.  Use change over a decade and you see a 13% decrease.  Not an extraordinary rate, but we're only short years into very affordable wind and solar.

Then look at the other sources of CO2.  Look at the non-electricity sectors which have increased.


rboyd

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 224
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #353 on: April 18, 2017, 09:33:31 PM »
Germany's emissions are down less than 10% since 2005 (12 years ago), the big reductions were in the 1990's due to the meltdown of the East German economy and the closure of their highly inefficient coal plants.

Germany's current plan calls for energy sector emissions to halve between 2020 and 2030; given the probable undershoot of reductions prior to then it will have to more than halve. With nuclear gone in 2022, that needs to be done in 8 years. At the same time Germany will certainly be pushing the envelope for wind+solar penetration.

Germany may have a vague plan, but that doesn't mean that it will happen - as shown by the failure to make the 2020 targets. Going to 12% wind and 6% solar in 2016 was the easiest part. Ramping that to replace the 13% nuclear in 5 years (31% wind + solar) will be a challenge. After that, we will truly start testing the viability of a highly-intermittent charged grid. I predict that things will slow down as the inevitable unforeseen (including political, economic and financial) consequences have to be dealt with.

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-consumption-and-power-mix-charts

I wish I shared your optimism Bob, but I think that the transition will be considerably harder and longer than you think.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #354 on: April 18, 2017, 09:59:29 PM »
Germany may have a vague plan, but that doesn't mean that it will happen - as shown by the failure to make the 2020 targets.

Again, lay the problem with Germany hitting its 2020 target at the feet of the idiots who built the Fukushima reactors where they did.

I'm getting really fed up with pro-nuke advocates who try to use Germany's CO2 emissions as an attack on renewables.  German citizens don't want potential nuclear disaster in their yards.  I lived downwind and not very far from one of the worst run nuclear reactors in the US.  I now live just downwind of a US reactor (now closed) that was built on an active faultline and in a tsunami zone.  I was only a few hundred miles away when Fukushima went sour.  I can appreciate their attitude.

Let it be.  Germans are very capable people.  They will solve their problems.

The transition to renewables gets easier and cheaper every year.  Turbines and solar panels become more efficient and less expensive.  We figure out better and cheaper ways to install.  For example, we've brought down the cost of single axis trackers so that the fixed mount panels that were giving us capacity factor numbers around 20% are now returning 30%.  A 50% increase in electricity produced for a modest increase in cost.  And a longer solar day which lowers the need for storage.

Over the next few years Germany will have to start deciding how much local storage to build and how much to rely on dispatchable hydro and pump-up hydro in the Scandinavian countries and Switzerland.  The price of batteries will continue to fall.  More battery "gigafactories" will be built.  Germany will be able to order up as many containers of 'plug and go' storage as they want and transmission lines can be beefed up to carry more power to and from Germany and the more mountainous European countries.

The thing that needs to happen right now in Germany is to break the back of the coal industry.  Get it's political strength reduced so that it can't screw with renewable installation rates via legislative shenanigans.

rboyd

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 224
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #355 on: April 18, 2017, 10:42:26 PM »
No lover of nukes, but Germany has placed itself in a difficult place by shutting them down instead of coal/lignite. Given my admiration for German engineering and regulations I have to assume that they were probably some of the best run nukes in the world, and not near any major natural hazards.

I am not such an techno-optimist, so I see a lot of difficulties in ramping up their wind+solar past the still relatively small penetration levels. Time will tell ...

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #356 on: April 18, 2017, 11:25:05 PM »
Germany didn't place itself in a difficult position.  It just rearranged its priority list.

Worry about the countries that aren't really working on their fossil fuel problem.  Here's where Germany got its electricity in 2016.




11.9% from wind.
 5.9% from solar.
29% total from renewables.

See how many countries you can find that get more of their electricity from wind and solar.  The US just cracked the 1% threshold for solar and is about 5% for wind.

rboyd

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 224
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #357 on: April 19, 2017, 01:27:34 AM »
Going to keep any further comments on Germany on the Germany thread ....

Seumas

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 35
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #358 on: April 20, 2017, 03:33:36 PM »
The seek to connect to Iceland and Norway via high voltage interconnects. Based on their current path, there are going to be times that they import a lot of energy. They used to have 100% redundancy..

Will you please stop this ignorant crap about Scotland? We have gone from importing coal to run Longannet, to having the capability to import hydroelectric from Norway. I have no idea what bizarre mental contortions you're going through to make that sound like a bad thing.

When exactly are you predicting this doom and gloom for Scottish energy production will start? Because otherwise you're just spouting denier bollocks about how renewables can't *possibly* work, in direct contradiction to the reality of their use.

tombond

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 70
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #359 on: April 26, 2017, 07:44:34 AM »
Attached is a map of Europe with real time CO2 emissions and when ranked also includes other countries and states in the world.

https://www.electricitymap.org/?wind=false&solar=false&region=europe&page=highscore&countryCode=CH

Note that consistently the greenest countries, the ones with the lowest CO2 emissions (less than 100g/kWh) are Norway,  Sweden, Ontario (Canada), New Zealand and France.

All use nuclear or hydro or a combination of both.  (New Zealand also has thermal power).

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #360 on: April 26, 2017, 07:50:38 AM »
All use nuclear or hydro or a combination of both.

That's nice.  Now let's think a moment.  We've been using hydro to generate electricity since 1880.  And nuclear since 1957.

Wind and solar have become affordable enough to start making inroads for only a few years.  Wonder what things will look like in 20 years as the cost of renewables keep falling and our old reactors wear out?

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1497
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #361 on: April 26, 2017, 04:55:36 PM »
TomB
I couldn't find the North American breakdown by province or state. Did I simply miss something or is the data not there.


Thanks


One of the reasons for my curiosity is Trump's recent surprise tariff on Canadian softwood & his mutterings about the unfairness of Canadian energy sales to the US. While I doubt that Trump is concerned with CO2 density per KWh, the fact is that Quebec Hydro provides large amounts of clean electricity to New York State. Ontario also sells clean electricity to the south.
If high tariffs make these sales unprofitable Canada can run her grid east and west to help with her own carbon emissions and energy costs, but the States will be using dirtier, more expensive, power in the near future.


Terry

tombond

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 70
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #362 on: April 30, 2017, 03:03:02 AM »
TomB
I couldn't find the North American breakdown by province or state. Did I simply miss something or is the data not there.

Thanks
Terry


Terry

There is an updated map now with just a few States from Canada and the USA as a whole, plus some States in Australia and New Zealand.

http://www.electricitymap.org/?wind=false&solar=false&page=map

This fantastic resource  shows which countries are successfully reducing emissions and exposes those which are just playing political games (like my country Australia).

The map is produced by Olivier Corradi who with the help of other contributors is adding more and more countries and States and says. "It is now used in class rooms, lectures and in many debates online. It is pushing Holland to open up its data, was mentioned by more than 50 news articles, and got attention from e.g. WWF, UNFCCC and Greenpeace".

https://blog.tmrow.co/a-world-map-to-understand-low-carbon-electricity-production-3f85f4684d39

I encourage all who are really concerned about climate change to publicize this map link widely as successful CO2 mitigation decision making must be made using scientific data and not political ideology.

rboyd

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 224
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #363 on: April 30, 2017, 08:01:20 PM »
Canadian net electricity exports to the U.S. are growing rapidly.



B.C. has had a positive trade revenue balance since 2011 due to its additions of generation over the last few years and its ability to buy electricity when prices are lower (during the night or during spring) and sell when prices are higher (during peak hours)

https://www.biv.com/article/2016/3/british-columbia-leads-charge-electricity-exports-/

Over the last decade, Ontario customers have paid $6.3 billion to cover the cost of selling high-priced electricity to customers outside of the province ... The province has turned the business of selling power into a money loser for Ontario electricity customers

https://ep.probeinternational.org/2016/09/20/ontario-electricity-customers-have-paid-more-than-6-billion-to-dump-surplus-high-priced-power-study/

Quebec's export price dropped from 6 cents to 4.8 cents, balanced by a record increase in export volume. Exports accounted for $803 million in profits. It built wind capacity expecting a growth in domestic electricity demand that did not happen

https://www.pressreader.com/canada/montreal-gazette/20170323/281689729637251

Ontario should be looking to Quebec for its power needs, rather than spending $10 billion's on refurbishing the aged and problematic Ontario nuclear plants. Then they probably would not have to spend $billions on subsidizing energy exports and pissing off Mr. Trump.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/ontario-set-to-unveil-12-8-billion-plan-to-refurbish-four-reactors-at-darlington-nuclear-plant

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/environmentalists-urge-ontario-to-abandon-13-billion-nuclear-rebuild/article27997773/

"[Wynne] needs to spend the $2 billion to upgrade transmission lines to Quebec that OPG says Ontario can’t afford,” said Gibbons, who believes the strategy would save the province billions.  “The solution to Premier Wynne’s expensive electricity problem is staring her in the face – and it’s saying ‘Bienvenue à Québec!"

http://globalnews.ca/news/3091882/ontario-hydro-rates-buying-quebec-power-cost/
« Last Edit: April 30, 2017, 08:09:16 PM by rboyd »

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1497
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #364 on: May 01, 2017, 03:49:30 AM »
rboyd
You'd think that Ontario could find some domestic use for the excess electricity. At one point in time IIRC their big expense was getting rid of short
spikes that were sold south at huge expense to Ontario, this was what I'd proposed a mega capacitor for.
The ongoing over generation that your link mentions is a tougher problem, especially if lines to Quebec are ruled out. Is there any manufacturing process that eats lots of energy, and that can be ramped up or shut down seasonally or diurnally?
Terry

rboyd

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 224
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #365 on: May 01, 2017, 04:41:32 AM »
David Suzuki has thought about this problem. The problem seems to be a combination of a 12% drop in electricity demand since 2005 and the inflexibility of the nuclear power stations (which provide 61% of the electricity, hydro is another 24%, wind 6%, gas/oil 9%). The result is selling electricity at a loss to the US and paying to curtail wind generated electricity.

2016 Ontario Fuel Mix



http://www.ieso.ca/en/power-data/supply-overview/transmission-connected-generation

Better to give people in Ontario cheap electricity to heat their homes (as they do in Quebec, replacing natural gas) or power electric vehicles. Too little imagination in the government.

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/blogs/climate-blog/2016/09/is-ontarios-surplus-electricity-a-problem/

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #366 on: May 01, 2017, 05:49:07 AM »
24% is a lot of hydro.  Pile on the wind and solar.  Use hydro as fill-in.  Get that 9% oil/gas down close to zero.

Build a basis for replacing nuclear plants with cheaper renewables as they age out.

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1497
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #367 on: May 01, 2017, 06:36:42 PM »
I've seen homes and businesses in Ontario utilizing electrical heating systems that have been illegal in California, Nevada, & Arizona, for decades. By not banning resistance heating, Ontario may already be encouraging excessive winter electrical consumption in an effort to balance seasonal loads.


If this is the energy sector that Trump has been complaining about, would even well targeted tariffs make any difference at all? The American distributors and end users might pay more, but Ontario would still need to dump her excess electricity.


I assume that some portion of the 9% oil/gas is the sole source for remote locales where building out the grid may never prove to be economically viable. Micro-hydro or micro-nuke might help to some extent under some conditions, but realistically, small LNG generators may prove to be the cleanest we can hope for in many remote northern communities.


Terry

rboyd

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 224
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #368 on: May 01, 2017, 08:08:20 PM »
Terry,

A lot of the oil is used in Northern Ontario, there has been talks for years to connect them up to Manitoba's grid right next door - which is predominantly hydro. I am sure that the wind resource and run-of-the-river resources up there must be pretty good too.

Quebec uses electric baseboards and heat pumps. If they have the latter, it does the work until the temperature drops to about -10, then the baseboards kick in. There is also use of gas and oil as the supplementary heat source. The heat pump also provides cooling. Quebec homes tend to be well insulated, and electricity is cheap. Quebec Hydro does charge more after the temperature goes below a certain level, basic demand management.

Ontario is predominantly natural gas for heating.

http://montrealgazette.com/life/homes/had-enough-with-the-cold-pump-up-your-homes-heating

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1497
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #369 on: May 01, 2017, 10:15:24 PM »
rboyd


In the Southwest gas is required on the coldest nights. Heat pumps are more efficient, as long as the ambient is >-10c. Resistance heaters (baseboards or strip heaters) are illegal unless as a supplement during defrost cycles within a heat pump system.


Evaporative cooling, evaporative pre-coolers, and cooling towers are efficient and effective, but most counties require recirculating water supplies which can raise health concerns, and most,(all) new homes have A/C & or Heat pumps.


Terry

rboyd

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 224
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #370 on: May 01, 2017, 10:22:09 PM »
Cold nights in the Southwest, that is an oxymoron to us Canadians!

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1497
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #371 on: May 01, 2017, 10:28:22 PM »
The problem I had was when fellow Ontarians were assuring me that we were in the midst of a drought. :)


Tery

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #372 on: May 01, 2017, 10:34:01 PM »
rboyd


In the Southwest gas is required on the coldest nights. Heat pumps are more efficient, as long as the ambient is >-10c. Resistance heaters (baseboards or strip heaters) are illegal unless as a supplement during defrost cycles within a heat pump system.


Evaporative cooling, evaporative pre-coolers, and cooling towers are efficient and effective, but most counties require recirculating water supplies which can raise health concerns, and most,(all) new homes have A/C & or Heat pumps.


Terry

The new mini-split heat pumps see to be very efficient.  And can be fitted with resistance heating for those times the external air temp drops too low.

Companies are already installing tanks of water/salt solution which can be cooled down with cheap, off-peak electricity and then used to boost AC performance and save electricity during high demand hours.

I wonder when we'll start seeing those systems also used for storing heat using off-peak power.  And why not incorporate rooftop solar water heaters as a cheap way to grab some heat?  Use a passive drain down design.  If the temperature in the heater is high compared to the storage tank then pump up some water and let the Sun heat it up.  Cold places with sunny days might make out like bandits.

Also, capture heat from shower/washer drains.  If the draining water is hotter than the stored water then feed it through a heat exchanger loop.  If not, bypass.

jai mitchell

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1552
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #373 on: May 01, 2017, 11:22:21 PM »
rboyd


In the Southwest gas is required on the coldest nights. Heat pumps are more efficient, as long as the ambient is >-10c.


> - 26C

http://www.fujitsu-general.com/us/residential/technology/xlth-low-temp-heating.html

Series features outdoor condensing units engineered to operate in temperatures down to -15ºF, lower than any other mini-split available today.
Haiku of Past Futures
My "burning embers"
are not tri-color bar graphs
+3C today

ghoti

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 466
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #374 on: May 02, 2017, 12:51:18 AM »
New cold climate heat pumps operate down to -15F but still with much much lower COP as the temperature drops. (I received quotes on heat pumps for my house and even the newest cold climate heat pumps required back up heat)

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1497
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #375 on: May 02, 2017, 06:00:55 AM »

The new mini-split heat pumps see to be very efficient.  And can be fitted with resistance heating for those times the external air temp drops too low.
All heat pumps require resistance heating to cover the defrost cycle. When the unit requires too much time, (or too many BTU's), to defrost it simply becomes so inefficient that resistance heating is simpler and more efficient. Bearing in mind the fact that resistance heating is so inefficient that it's illegal in many jurisdictions.

Companies are already installing tanks of water/salt solution which can be cooled down with cheap, off-peak electricity and then used to boost AC performance and save electricity during high demand hours.
[/size]

Most operate using the huge change of phase energy as water passes from liquid to gas. Precooling the water, even when electricity is cheap is far too expensive & unnecessarily complicated.
[/size]
I wonder when we'll start seeing those systems also used for storing heat using off-peak power.  And why not incorporate rooftop solar water heaters as a cheap way to grab some heat?  Use a passive drain down design.  If the temperature in the heater is high compared to the storage tank then pump up some water and let the Sun heat it up.  Cold places with sunny days might make out like bandits.
[/size]

The systems you describe, with minor modifications are in use in the southwest/
[/size]
Also, capture heat from shower/washer drains.  If the draining water is hotter than the stored water then feed it through a heat exchanger loop.  If not, bypass.
All modern laundromats use these techniques and more. My personal favorite is dumping heat, or pulling heat from a residential swimming pool. Toasty pool during the months you need cooling & a chilly pool with less evaporation when it's too cold outside to use it anyway.
A septic tank works almost as well to cut heating and cooling costs, but no bathing benefits :<}


Terry

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #376 on: May 02, 2017, 06:45:08 AM »
Precooling the water, even when electricity is cheap is far too expensive & unnecessarily complicated.



Ice Bear

www.ice-energy.com/

TerryM

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1497
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #377 on: May 02, 2017, 08:32:54 AM »

Ice Bear

www.ice-energy.com/



using liquid/solid phase change - I've never seen one
liquid/gas is far more powerful - ubiquitous, proven tech.


Your choice
Terry

longwalks1

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 47
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #378 on: May 02, 2017, 02:47:40 PM »
It seems a bit of a stray lately in this topic.  Living next to Ontario (70 km), etc. I have liked the postings, but maybe elsewhere.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2017/05/02/hidden-radiation-secrets-of-the-world-health-organization/

The mission of Independent WHO is to expose WHO’s failings whilst calling for WHO independence away from influence by the worldwide nuclear syndicate: According to WHO Independence’s Web Site: “The World Health Organization (WHO) is failing in its duty to protect those populations who are victims of radioactive contamination.”

Ms Katz worked inside the WHO for 18 years. She insists that WHO, in cahoots with IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency), dangerously misrepresents the inherent dangers of ionizing radiation, an insinuation that smacks in the face with egregiousness galore.

Ms Katz’s April 2017 interview, which this article is based upon, can be heard in its entirety.


For the record, I have known John LaForge for years and read the Yaboklov book  where he resides in the woods off grid.  He is my friend.

 

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 269
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #379 on: May 02, 2017, 03:51:34 PM »
It seems to me that nuclear technology is proven and is safe and is reliable , BUT

Humans are not. Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, Fukushima,  the accidents at Sellafield, all from human error and sometimes utter stupidity.

As a species we are not reliable enough to prevent screw-ups. Complacency, greed, hubris, stupidity. We cannot be trusted with this stuff.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #380 on: May 02, 2017, 06:00:00 PM »
It seems to me that nuclear technology is proven and is safe and is reliable , BUT

Humans are not. Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, Fukushima,  the accidents at Sellafield, all from human error and sometimes utter stupidity.

As a species we are not reliable enough to prevent screw-ups. Complacency, greed, hubris, stupidity. We cannot be trusted with this stuff.

Let me rewrite your last sentence.

"We are fallible humans. If we screw up, nuclear can be dangerous.  Since we have very much safer and much cheaper options why put ourselves in unnecessary danger?"

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 269
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #381 on: May 02, 2017, 06:08:33 PM »
It seems to me that nuclear technology is proven and is safe and is reliable , BUT

Humans are not. Chernobyl, Three Mile Island, Fukushima,  the accidents at Sellafield, all from human error and sometimes utter stupidity.

As a species we are not reliable enough to prevent screw-ups. Complacency, greed, hubris, stupidity. We cannot be trusted with this stuff.

Let me rewrite your last sentence.

"We are fallible humans. If we screw up, nuclear can be dangerous.  Since we have very much safer and much cheaper options why put ourselves in unnecessary danger?"

Hullo Bob.
For many years I worked in places where Toujours Politesse was necessary. But now my guiding spirit is the poem "when I am old".  The politesse bit sort of got redundant.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #382 on: May 02, 2017, 06:26:05 PM »
I'm old.  And politeness was never my strong suit.   ;)

My point is that we deflate the desire to build more nuclear and bring more danger into our lives by educating people that we have much cheaper options.  Electricity generation options which create essentially no dangers for us or the generations which follow.



sidd

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1190
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #383 on: May 02, 2017, 06:36:51 PM »
Re: Phase change and heat storage

I have used Glauber's salt solution in this application also.

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 269
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #384 on: May 02, 2017, 07:17:44 PM »
I'm old.  And politeness was never my strong suit.   ;)

My point is that we deflate the desire to build more nuclear and bring more danger into our lives by educating people that we have much cheaper options.  Electricity generation options which create essentially no dangers for us or the generations which follow.
Too right, Bob. And yet we have to watch the lunacy of Hinckley C  while the UK Govt  stuffs our renewables industry. How to be polite ?

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #385 on: May 02, 2017, 07:32:42 PM »
It appears to me, sitting on the outside looking in, as if the current UK government is planning on turning England into a backwaters island, sort of a living museum of the times when gentlemen rode to the hounds.

Cut the isle off from Europe and watch England's strong suit, financial services, migrate to Europe.  Crank up the cost of energy and make what England does manufacture more expensive.

I think that were I in Ireland, Northern Island, or Scotland government I'd be talking to Elon about a Hyperlink to Europe.  Bypass having to go through immigration twice in order to pass through England.

Sigmetnow

  • ASIF Royalty
  • Posts: 7692
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #386 on: May 10, 2017, 01:22:30 AM »
I'm guessing no one saw this coming....

Hanford Nuclear Site Evacuated After Tunnel Collapses
Tunnel Collapse at Nuke Site Prompts Emergency

A tunnel collapsed at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington state, with rail cars full of nuclear waste inside. ...

The tunnel was reportedly full of train carrying radio active waste material.

Officials said no release of radiation was detected and no workers were injured.

An emergency evacuation was ordered Tuesday at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington state after a storage tunnel at the plutonium finishing plant collapsed.

According to an emergency report from Hanford, the alert was triggered after a routine inspection detected that soil had caved into a tunnel over an area of about 20 feet by 20 feet next to the Plutonium Uranium Extraction Facility, also known as the PUREX.

The cave-in occurred at the junction of two tunnels to the east of the facility. The tunnels were used beginning in the 1950s to store contaminated equipment.
...
https://weather.com/news/news/hanford-washington-nuclear-power-plant-evacuated
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 269
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #387 on: May 10, 2017, 12:39:50 PM »
I'm guessing no one saw this coming....

Hanford Nuclear Site Evacuated After Tunnel Collapses
Tunnel Collapse at Nuke Site Prompts Emergency

A tunnel collapsed at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington state, with rail cars full of nuclear waste inside. ...

The tunnel was reportedly full of train carrying radio active waste material.

Officials said no release of radiation was detected and no workers were injured.

An emergency evacuation was ordered Tuesday at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington state after a storage tunnel at the plutonium finishing plant collapsed.

According to an emergency report from Hanford, the alert was triggered after a routine inspection detected that soil had caved into a tunnel over an area of about 20 feet by 20 feet next to the Plutonium Uranium Extraction Facility, also known as the PUREX.

The cave-in occurred at the junction of two tunnels to the east of the facility. The tunnels were used beginning in the 1950s to store contaminated equipment.
...
https://weather.com/news/news/hanford-washington-nuclear-power-plant-evacuated
An old tunnel more or less forgotten about?  Human error ? Lack of maintenance and inspections ?

Humans cannot be trusted with this stuff, especially given the immensely long time-frames involved.


Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #388 on: May 10, 2017, 06:38:34 PM »
Hanford is a huge mess on which billions of dollars has been spent and many billions more will need to be spent.  It's not clear that the site can be cleaned up and radiation contained.  Right now an underground plume of radioactivity is slowly moving toward a major aquifer.

I don't think the train was in a tunnel, per se.  From the picture I saw the track had been covered with a structure and dirt piled over that.  Over the years the supporting structure probably weakened and some construction work nearby caused enough shaking to cause a piece of the roof to collapse.

It doesn't seem like this is a major issue.  Just more fun and games with our friend, the Atom, and messes he leave behind.

tombond

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 70
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #389 on: May 12, 2017, 01:29:51 AM »
This article from Energy Matters calculates the size of the task to reduce annual global carbon emissions from 10GtC to 6GtC by 2050.

http://euanmearns.com/what-does-it-take-to-substitute-4-gtc-using-low-c-electricity/

A summary of the findings are.

Business as usual (BAU) will result in about 500 ppm CO2 by 2050.

A cut of 4GtC per annum by 2050 will reduce CO2 by about 30 ppm relative to BAU.

To achieve 4 GtC cuts by deploying wind turbines ,will require about 3 million 3 MW turbines deployed at a rate of 156,000 a year by 2050 compared with 21,000 in 2015 or a 7.5 fold increase in production.

To achieve 4 GtC cuts by deploying nuclear fission reactors will require a total fleet of about 2 thousand 1.4 GW reactors deployed at a rate of 60 new reactors per year, also a 7.5 fold increase in production. 

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #390 on: May 12, 2017, 08:57:52 AM »
It is not wise to accept numbers from Means  without checking their accuracy. 

"2 thousand 1.4 GW reactors"  let's assume this is correct.  2,000 reactors * 1.4 GW nameplate * 0.85 (CF) = 2,380 GW.

3 MW turbines at 45% CF (that might be a bit low) = 1.35/MW/turbine. 

2,380 GW / 1.35 MW =  1,762,963 turbines.  My guess is that Means used a low CF number.  Probably did not use current performance numbers but averaged in much older technology, much lower hub heights.  That's something pro-nuclear advocates often do.

OK.  Now, so what?  Either way we have a lot of building to do in order to replace fossil fuel plants.  But we'd have to do that even if we were going to continue to use fossil fuels.  Stuff wears out when it get old.  The average lifespan for US coal and nuclear plants is about 40 years.  Replacement is an ongoing process.  The only question is what do we use as our replacement technology?

US onshore wind is on its way to under $0.02/kWh.  European offshore wind should hit $0.03/kWh by 2025.  (PV solar is on its way to $0.02/kWh, just in case you were wondering.)

The current nuclear plants being built in the US will produce electricity priced at $0.13/kWh or higher.  The turnkey bid for two new reactors at North Anna (Virginia) came in at $0.19/kWh. 

Do we want to pay under 5 cents or well over 10 cents for our electricity?  That seems an easy question to answer.

Then there are those other inconvenient facts about nuclear reactors.  They have been known to go lopsided and spill radiation.  Plus we have no acceptable solution for the radioactive waste we have today.  Just imagine what it would be like if we had two thousand reactors pooping on us.

There are some other little problems as well.  Where would we find acceptable sites for 2,000 reactors?  Many countries will not accept reactors inside their borders.  And remember, reactors need access to cooling water.  Can't put them where they would overheat streams.  Need to install them out of 500 yeaf, if not 1,000 year flood plains, above the rising seas and storm surges.

How would we train the thousands and thousands of nuclear engineers we'd need to build that many reactors a year and operate them?  It takes only a few months to train a high school graduate to be a functioning wind technician.

There's a reason that the CEOs of the US corporations that own and operate the largest numbers of reactors have stated that they don't see any more reactors built in the US barring some sort of incredible price breakthrough.

BenB

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #391 on: May 12, 2017, 09:35:56 AM »
See: http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/facts-and-figures/world-nuclear-power-reactors-and-uranium-requireme.aspx

Particularly: 'New plants coming on line are largely balanced by old plants being retired. Over 1996-2013, 66 reactors were retired as 71 started operation. There are no firm projections for retirements over the period covered by this Table, but we estimate that at least 60 of those now operating will close by 2030, most being small plants.'

Really, net additions will have to rise far more than Mearns implies in the case of nuclear. It's not impossible, and net additions will probably increase, but I'm not holding my breath.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #392 on: May 12, 2017, 07:08:31 PM »
It's looking like closures over the next ~15 years will exceed new plants by about 20. 

That's assuming that no more old plants get bailed out via subsidies and all the under construction/expected plants are completed.

The next few months are going to be very interesting for nuclear in the US.  It's not clear that the two partially built reactors at Summer and the two at Vogtle will be completed.

rboyd

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 224
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #393 on: May 12, 2017, 07:28:49 PM »
New plants built in China, India and Russia will be more than offset by those closing in North America and Europe puts things more accurately.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #394 on: May 12, 2017, 08:05:40 PM »
In 2012 the World Nuclear Association listed 1 reactor closure in Russia by 2015, 23 by 2025 and 4 more by 2040.

And next door in the Ukraine 2 closures by 2015, 10 more by 2025 and 3 more by 2040.


Neven

  • Administrator
  • ASIF Governor
  • *****
  • Posts: 3591
    • View Profile
    • Arctic Sea Ice Blog
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #395 on: May 12, 2017, 10:38:24 PM »
This article from Energy Matters calculates the size of the task to reduce annual global carbon emissions from 10GtC to 6GtC by 2050.

http://euanmearns.com/what-does-it-take-to-substitute-4-gtc-using-low-c-electricity/

Shouldn't a climate risk denier like Eaun Mearns be promoting fossil fuels? What does he care about 500 ppm of CO2?
Il faut cultiver notre jardin

oren

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1163
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #396 on: May 13, 2017, 01:23:26 AM »
This article from Energy Matters calculates the size of the task to reduce annual global carbon emissions from 10GtC to 6GtC by 2050.

http://euanmearns.com/what-does-it-take-to-substitute-4-gtc-using-low-c-electricity/

Shouldn't a climate risk denier like Eaun Mearns be promoting fossil fuels? What does he care about 500 ppm of CO2?

But he IS promoting fossil fuels while appearing to care for the climate. He makes the claim that an insurmountable number of wind turbines is needed, growth rates are unfeasible, while natural gas doing the same growth is easy and nice. So he assumes bad things about wind, totally ignores solar PV, and ignores expected acceleration thanks to dropping prices.
I might even agree with him that at current global rates of renewable installation vs. energy demand growth the world will not be saved, but his post is not proof for that. And building natural gas plants is definitely not a proper solution.

Bob Wallace

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1487
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #397 on: May 13, 2017, 02:59:13 AM »
I've not read much of what Means has written because what I have read shows him setting up flawed arguments designed to "prove" that renewables won't work.

I agree with you that at current global rates of renewable installation vs. energy demand growth the world will not be saved.  But then I look at how rapidly wind, solar and storage prices are falling and how rapidly installations are accelerating.

We're some distance from the bear that's coming at us.  We've only taken our first or second step and are not yet into a full run, but you know we'll pick up speed....

rboyd

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 224
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #398 on: May 14, 2017, 07:05:11 AM »
Mearns is a climate denier who blocks anyone who calls him out on it on his blog. Shame, as he does have some good analysis of the current energy systems. Amazing how such intelligent people (in one area) can be out and out climate deniers.

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 269
    • View Profile
Re: James Hansen loves nuclear power
« Reply #399 on: May 17, 2017, 02:06:24 PM »
I am sure most people noticed the little incident a few days ago at Hanford Nuclear Waste Site in Washington State.

Eventually the penny dropped - and I remembered that I had done some research on the sorry history of that place after British Nuclear Fuels gave up their contract to fix the problems there and a contract manager for Halliburton said it wasn't fixable. I have lost all that research, but here is a 2015 article from Time magazine.

http://time.com/3672177/hanford-radioactive-waste-history/

I wonder if anything has changed.  Nuclear is dangerous because humans are looking after it. I do not love nuclear power, Mr. Hansen.