Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Nuclear Power  (Read 261694 times)

Ken Feldman

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1413
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 226
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1350 on: March 30, 2020, 07:28:46 PM »
Remember when the energy source that was too cheap too meter was a reliable source of baseload power?

https://www.powermag.com/covid-19-threatens-outages-scheduled-at-97-of-u-s-nuclear-plants-in-2020/

Quote
COVID-19 Threatens Outages Scheduled at 97% of U.S. Nuclear Plants in 2020

Challenged by the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. nuclear industry has asked the Trump administration to ensure nuclear workers, suppliers, and vendors will have access to nuclear plants and personal protective equipment (PPE) during the 2020 spring and fall refueling outage seasons and beyond. All but two of the nation’s nuclear plants had scheduled planned outages this year, work that the generators consider crucial to keep the lights on.

n a March 20 letter to Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette, Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) President and CEO Maria Korsnick noted nuclear reactors have a “unique requirement” to load a fresh batch of fuel once every 18 to 24 months. The event necessitates a shut down for two to four weeks during which intense work occurs, including critical maintenance.

“Each plant typically brings in several hundred specialized workers for this work over a typical period of 30-60 days, which includes activities in advance of and following the outage. These workers typically stay in hotels or board with local families, and eat in restaurants,” Korsnick wrote. In the course of performing outages and in routine operations, nuclear plant workers also use PPE and supplies for radiological protection. As the COVID-19 pandemic intensifies, the industry will also require medical PPE and supplies to minimize its spread, she said.

Quote
In 2020, 56 of the nation’s 58 nuclear reactors in 21 states—including several that have issued lockdown measures—planned to undergo refueling outages. At least 31 of the 58 plants had scheduled outages between mid-February and early May. The remaining 25 planned refueling outages between late August and late October.

Quote
Korsnick also urged the administration to allow “unfettered” travel to plants for the performance of essential outage activities. Noting that the workforce is sometimes sourced abroad, she also asked it to “permit international workers who perform highly specialized functions to travel into the U.S. and establish protocols immediately to enable their safe entry.”

To accommodate workers, she also urged the administration to keep open hotel and food services. Finally, she asked for priority for PPE, specifically asking for surgeons’ gloves, sanitized wipes, dust masks, and disposable thermometers—as well as COVID-19 testing kits, and necessary radiological and medical protective equipment and supplies for nuclear workers.

Ken Feldman

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1413
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 226
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1351 on: April 06, 2020, 07:03:34 PM »
What could possibly go wrong?

https://www.utilitydive.com/news/nuclear-regulators-ease-some-power-reactor-regs-in-response-to-covid-19/575000/

Quote
Nuclear regulators ease some power reactor regs in response to COVID-19
March 31, 2020

In order to avoid "worker fatigue," the NRC has a number of rules about the maximum length of plant employee shifts, as well as requirements for breaks workers must take between long shifts. For example, shift may not exceed 16 hours in a 24-hour period, 26 hours in a 48-hour period and 72 hours in a 7-day period.

But in light of the "unprecedented time for our country" created by the COVID-19 pandemic and in order to ensure that the regulations "do not unduly limit licensee flexibility in using personnel resources to most effectively manage the impacts" of the pandemic, the NRC is allowing plants who believe they cannot meet the work hour limits to apply for a 60-day exemption, according to the letter.

Quote
But the cuts in workforce present do create "limitations," True said, that could, depending on the specific circumstances at an individual plant, "impact the ability to conduct or complete certain testing or inspection."

An example, discussed at a public meeting held by the NRC on Thursday, would be inspections of the tubes in the steam generator for cracks and other defects, which takes place during outages.

Ken Feldman

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1413
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 226
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1352 on: April 08, 2020, 07:55:13 PM »
Nuclear loses to wind on price in Sweden.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-08/giant-wind-park-starting-up-is-another-blow-to-nuclear-industry

Quote
Giant Wind Park Starting Up Is Another Blow to Nuclear Industry

A surge in renewable energy output in the Nordic region has sent power prices below the level where some nuclear plants are profitable.
By Lars Paulsson
April 7, 2020

Sweden’s biggest wind farm began producing power this month, and the region’s nuclear reactors are feeling the heat.

Vasa Vind AB’s Askalen started commercial output on April 1, increasing supplies in a market already bloated by a massive surplus of water for power generation. A day later, two units at Vattenfall AB’s Forsmark nuclear plant north of Stockholm curbed output by about 50%. Two reactors at the utility’s Ringhals plant are halted because of low power prices.

Quote
“This could mean more frequent periods with rock bottom power prices, forcing conventional generators off the grid, especially when windy conditions coincide with high hydro output,” said Oliver Metcalfe, lead analyst for onshore wind research at BloombergNEF in London.

Quote
Sweden will install more than 4.2 gigawatts of new onshore wind this year and next, according to BNEF. The Nordic region’s biggest economy will rely heavily on wind to replace old nuclear reactors in the future. The Askalen park has installed 80 Vestas A/S’s V136 turbines, which are as high as 112 meters.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2457
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1174
  • Likes Given: 1020
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1353 on: April 08, 2020, 08:01:21 PM »
Good. Investing in nuclear will become very unappealing. Too bad we also have to clean up the old shit it left behind but hey extra jobs for the grandkids.  ::)
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

blumenkraft

  • Guest
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1354 on: April 08, 2020, 08:07:35 PM »
... and their grandkids. And theirs. And theirs. And theirs. ...

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4085
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2388
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1355 on: April 11, 2020, 12:03:54 AM »
Chernobyl Wildfires From Space
https://earther.gizmodo.com/this-is-what-the-chernobyl-wildfires-look-like-from-spa-1842793250

Chernobyl is still on fire. Satellite images captured Thursday by Planet Labs show wildfires inching closer to the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Ukraine.

The fires first started Saturday inside the 1,000-square mile exclusion zone centered around the plant, which suffered a massive explosion in 1986. Radiation levels spiked to 16 times higher than normal at the center of the fires, raising concerns for the health and safety of the fire crews tasked with battling the flames.

The satellite images show the fires are burning within roughly five miles southwest of the now-shuttered nuclear plant and the neighboring ghost city of Pripyat. It’s unclear if these are the same fires that started this weekend. The Ukrainian had said to NBC News Monday that the human-caused fires were out, yet the satellite images clearly show flames continuing to burn on Thursday.

“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4085
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2388
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1356 on: April 14, 2020, 09:58:56 AM »
Ukraine Wildfires Creep Closer to Chernobyl
https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-52274242

Wildfires in Ukraine reached an area less than a mile and a half from where some of the most dangerous waste from the Chernobyl nuclear disaster is stored, according to an environmental group and Monday media reports.

Greenpeace Russia officials told Reuters that satellite images of wildfires blazing near the abandoned town of Pripyat show the burn areas to be much larger than Ukrainian officials have claimed publicly, and now sit 0.6 miles from the site of the disaster itself.

"According to satellite images taken on Monday, the area of the largest fire has reached 34,400 hectares," Greenpeace said.

Greenpeace officials added that a second wildfire much closer to the destroyed nuclear plan now sits at 12,600 hectares, according to Reuters

An official with the country's top agency in charge of the region surrounding the Chernobyl power plant added to the Associated Press, that officials "cannot say the fire is contained."

"We have been working all night, digging firebreaks around the plant to protect it from fire," the official said.

Video and images obtained by the news service shows large swaths of trees in the country's exclusion zone, largely uninhabited due to radiation, burning as firefighters work to control the blaze.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/video-forest-fires-rage-in-chernobyl-area-as-radiation-exceeds-norm/
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 18140
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 822
  • Likes Given: 318
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1357 on: May 05, 2020, 09:39:06 PM »
Sea level rise threatens UK nuclear reactor plans
April 28th, 2020
Quote
Sea level rise may consign the planned UK site for two large nuclear reactors to vanish beneath the waves.

LONDON, 28 April, 2020 – Controversial plans by the French nuclear giant EDF to build two of its massive new reactors on the low-lying east coast of England are causing alarm: the shore is eroding and local people fear sea level rise could maroon the station on an island.

A newly published paper adds weight to the objections of two local government bodies, East Suffolk Council and Suffolk County Council, which have already lodged objections to EDF’s plans because they fear the proposed sea defences for the new station, Sizewell C, will be inadequate.

EDF, which is currently expecting the go-ahead to start building the station from the British government, says it has done its own expert assessment, had its calculations independently checked, and is satisfied that the coast is stable and the planned concrete sea defences will be adequate.

The argument is whether the coastal banks which prevent storm waves hitting this part of the coast will remain intact for the next 150 years – roughly the life of the station, taking into account 20 years of construction, 60 years of operation and then the time needed to decommission it. ...
https://climatenewsnetwork.net/sea-level-rise-threatens-uk-nuclear-reactor-plans/
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6292
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2311
  • Likes Given: 1945
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1358 on: May 06, 2020, 12:13:39 AM »
I'm always shocked by the certainty exhibited by governments that build things requiring heavy maintenance over such long timeframes. They can barely deal with current problems in the UK, yet they expect no issues with a 70-year decommissioning job starting 80 years from now. Saddling future generations seems to be a hobby of politicians everywhere.

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4085
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2388
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1359 on: June 29, 2020, 06:56:38 AM »
Russia Denies Its Nuclear Plants Are Source of Radiation Leak
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-53214259

Russia has said a leak of nuclear material detected over Scandinavia did not come from one of its power plants.

Nuclear safety watchdogs in Finland, Norway and Sweden said last week they had found higher-than-usual amounts of radioactive isotopes in the atmosphere.

The Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment in the Netherlands said on Friday that it believed the material came "from the direction of western Russia" and that the composition of the nuclear material "may indicate damage to a fuel element in a nuclear power plant".

But in a statement, Russia's nuclear energy body said its two power stations in the north-west - the Leningrad NPP and the Kola NPP - were working normally and that no leaks had been reported.

... Lassina Zerbo, executive Secretary of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization (CTBTO) tweeted on Friday that its Stockholm monitoring station had detected three isotopes - Cs-134, Cs-137 and Ru-103 - at higher than usual levels but not harmful to human health. The particles were detected on 22-23 June, he said.


https://twitter.com/SinaZerbo/status/1276559857731153921?s=20

“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

longwalks1

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 136
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 48
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1360 on: June 30, 2020, 05:44:24 AM »
My 2 goto sites for pollution from Russia (and other sites) would be Bellona and The Barents Observer. 

https://bellona.org/news/nuclear-issues/2020-06-russia-denies-its-behind-minor-european-radiation-spike

Quote
Last week, industry watchdogs in Finland and Sweden reported increased levels of ruthenium 103, cesium 134 and cesium 137 during the month of June, numerous news outlets, including the Associated Press, reported. Individually, Norway recorded levels of iodine 131.

The countries did not accuse Russia directly,

https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/ecology/2020/06/various-reactor-related-isotopes-measured-over-scandinavia-and-svalbard

Quote
All these isotopes indicate that the release comes from a nuclear-reactor. Iodine-131 has a half-life of 8 days, and given the small amount measured in the north, this isotope could be gone before the radioactive cloud reached the southern parts of Finland and Sweden a week after the first measurements in the north. That be, if the release was somewhere in the Arctic or northwestern Russia and winds were blowing south or southwest.

Neither of the Scandinavian radiation agencies will speculate about the origin.


vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4085
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2388
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1361 on: July 16, 2020, 12:30:44 PM »
At 5:29 a.m. on July 16, 1945, 75 years ago, the first nuclear bomb was tested at Trinity Site, in a New Mexico desert valley called Jornada del Muerto, or Journey of the Dead.


16 milliseconds after the beginning of the Anthropocene: The Trinity nuclear test.

https://www.axios.com/75th-anniversary-trinity-nuclear-test-technology-2e1aaf28-6111-4774-ba3e-1253e0191a34.html

“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

NeilT

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1979
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 186
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1362 on: July 16, 2020, 05:36:12 PM »
A nuclear weapon, as opposed to Nuclear power, is engineered and designed specifically to explode.  The level of engineering required to compress a critical mass to the point where it fission into a chain reaction, as a weapon, is very high, requiring special switches and cables of exact length to detonate the explosive at an exact time.

A nuclear reactor, on the other hand, cannot explode in this way and is designed to deliver power, rather than to go bang.

The more relevant link, for this thread, would be the Chicago Pile-1.

Although I will grant that it was developed for the manhatton project and to create isotopes which could be used in a weapon.

Yes a reactor has exploded and the fissionable material escaped containment and melted down, but the explosion was a hydrogen combustion, not nuclear.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

Ken Feldman

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1413
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 226
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1363 on: July 16, 2020, 08:57:44 PM »
As NeilT mentioned, when nuclear reactors explode, it's usually from a hydrogen explosion.  Of course this still releases a lot of radiation and the area around the reactor needs to be evacuated for decades, but not as bad as a nuclear bomb. 

The Fukushima Daiichi disaster is a good example.

https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/fukushima-daiichi-accident.aspx

The article correctly notes that the reactors successfully withstood the seismic events and were scrammed in accordance with emergency procedures.  However, when the ensuing tsunami destroyed the backup power generators that kept the cooling systems going, the three reactors that had been operating melted down, which lead to hydrogen explosions and massive radiation leaks to the atmosphere, surrounding land, and ultimately the ocean.

Quote
When the power failed at 3.42 pm, about one hour after shutdown of the fission reactions, the reactor cores would still be producing about 1.5% of their nominal thermal power, from fission product decay – about 22 MW in unit 1 and 33 MW in units 2&3. Without heat removal by circulation to an outside heat exchanger, this produced a lot of steam in the reactor pressure vessels housing the cores, and this was released into the dry primary containment (PCV) through safety valves. Later this was accompanied by hydrogen, produced by the interaction of the fuel's very hot zirconium cladding with steam after the water level dropped.

Quote
As pressure rose, attempts were made to vent the containment, and when external power and compressed air sources were harnessed this was successful, by about 2.30 pm Saturday, though some manual venting was apparently achieved at about 10.17 am. The venting was designed to be through an external stack, but in the absence of power much of it apparently backflowed to the service floor at the top of the reactor building, representing a serious failure of this system (though another possibility is leakage from the drywell). The vented steam, noble gases and aerosols were accompanied by hydrogen. At 3.36 pm on Saturday 12th, there was a hydrogen explosion on the service floor of the building above unit 1 reactor containment, blowing off the roof and cladding on the top part of the building, after the hydrogen mixed with air and ignited. (Oxidation of the zirconium cladding at high temperatures in the presence of steam produces hydrogen exothermically, with this exacerbating the fuel decay heat problem.)

Quote
Much of the fuel in units 2&3 also apparently melted to some degree, but to a lesser extent than in unit 1, and a day or two later. In mid-May 2011 the unit 1 core would still be producing 1.8 MW of heat, and units 2&3 would be producing about 3.0 MW each.

Quote
In Unit 3, the main back-up water injection system failed at about 11 am on Saturday 12th and early on Sunday 13th, water injection using the high pressure system failed also and water levels dropped dramatically. RPV pressure was reduced by venting steam into the wetwell, allowing injection of seawater using a fire pump from just before noon. Early on Sunday venting the suppression chamber and containment was successfully undertaken. It is now understood that core damage started about 5:30 am and much or all of the fuel melted on the morning of Sunday 13th and fell into the bottom of the RPV, with some probably going through the bottom of the reactor pressure vessel and onto the concrete below.

Early on Monday 14th PCV venting was repeated, and this evidently backflowed to the service floor of the building, so that at 11 am a very large hydrogen explosion here above unit 3 reactor containment blew off much of the roof and walls and demolished the top part of the building. This explosion created a lot of debris, and some of that on the ground near unit 3 was very radioactive.

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3626
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 623
  • Likes Given: 309
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1364 on: July 17, 2020, 12:22:06 AM »
I think the logic of dating the Anthropocene from Trinity as opposed to the Chicago nuclear pile was that the environment was affected enormously more.
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

NeilT

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1979
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 186
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1365 on: July 17, 2020, 06:16:36 PM »
Hard to make that argument. If we go back to the industrial revolution and the Newcommen, then Watt steam engines, you could argue that our impact on the environment should be measured from them.

I'm pretty sure the sulphur and soot deposits from such a switch to coal power is visible in the strata all over the world.  Every bit as much as the atomic residue from some nuclear testing but with a far greater impact on the biosphere.

In fact one might argue that the splitting of the atom may have changed our drive to consume all the fossil fuels on the planet and driven us on a path towards nuclear fusion and eventual energy freedom.

I, personally, think that the pile equates to nuclear power but the bomb testing does not equate to biosphere degradation.

Sure there has been a few definite issues which have caused widespread misery, but on a scale of AGW??
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

kassy

  • Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2457
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1174
  • Likes Given: 1020
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1366 on: July 17, 2020, 06:38:16 PM »
There is a lot of polluted crap around that our children need to handle so there is a similarity.

Nuclear power is not a good marker for the Anthropocene. It was just an easy one early on.
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

NeilT

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1979
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 186
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1367 on: July 17, 2020, 07:34:29 PM »
No but it appeals to a certain segment of the environmental movement...
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

Ken Feldman

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1413
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 226
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1368 on: July 22, 2020, 12:05:02 AM »
Remember when Ohio passed a law to subsidize those two nuclear reactors that can't compete against cheap renewables?

https://www.npr.org/2020/07/21/893493224/ohio-house-speaker-arrested-in-connection-to-60-million-bribery-scheme

Quote
Ohio House Speaker Arrested In Connection With $60 Million Bribery Scheme

July 21, 2020

FBI agents arrested Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder on Tuesday morning at his rural farm. Householder was taken into custody in connection with a $60 million bribery scheme allegedly involving state officials and associates.

Four others were also arrested: former Ohio Republican Party Chairman Matt Borges, Householder adviser Jeffrey Longstreth and lobbyists Neil Clark and Juan Cespedes.

The charges are linked to a controversial law passed last year that bailed out two nuclear power plants in the state while gutting subsidies for renewable energy and energy efficiency.

Quote
Federal prosecutors say that between March 2017 and March 2020, entities related to an unnamed company — but that would appear to be nuclear power company FirstEnergy Solutions — paid approximately $60 million to Householder's Generation Now.

"Make no mistake, this is Larry Householder's 501 (c)(4)," U.S. Attorney David DeVillers told reporters on Tuesday. The money from the scheme was spent to the detriment of other political candidates and the people of Ohio, DeVillers said.

Members of Householder's enterprise used those payments for their own personal benefit and to gain support for Householder's bid to become speaker, prosecutors say.

Quote
In exchange for payments, prosecutors say, Householder and his associates helped pass House Bill 6, then worked to ensure it went into effect by defeating a ballot initiative.

The plan worked. The complaint says Householder-backed candidates that benefited from money from Generation Now helped to elect Householder as the Speaker. House Bill 6 was introduced three months into his term – legislation worth $1.3 billion to Company A.

Regular payments to Householder's secret company from Company A began in March 2017, a couple months after he took a trip on Company A's private jet, according to the federal complaint. But the payments got much bigger after the legislation was introduced: In May 2019, while the bill was pending before lawmakers, Company A allegedly wired $8 million to Generation Now.

Quote
In total, Company A allegedly paid the Householder enterprise $60 million over a three-year period, in exchange for the billion-dollar-bailout.

Prosecutors say the payments were "akin to bags of cash – unlike campaign or PAC contributions, they were not regulated, not reported, not subject to public scrutiny—and the Enterprise freely spent the bribe payments to further the Enterprise's political interests and to enrich themselves."

Quote
Last year's nuclear bailout law tacked on a charge to residents' power bills, sending $150 million a year to the nuclear power plants. They are owned by the company Energy Harbor, which was previously known as FirstEnergy Solutions.

The law also included a subsidy for two coal plants.

NPR member station WOSU reported that FirstEnergy contributed more than $150,000 to Ohio House Republicans in the run-up to the 2018 election — including over $25,000 in donations to Householder's campaign.

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4085
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2388
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1369 on: July 22, 2020, 01:28:38 AM »
^ That sounds like it came straight out of the ALEC playbook.
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

kassy

  • Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2457
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1174
  • Likes Given: 1020
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1370 on: July 22, 2020, 02:05:11 PM »
Nice clear example of corruption.  :)
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Ken Feldman

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1413
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 226
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1371 on: July 31, 2020, 07:28:05 PM »
It looks like Ohio may repeal the law that was passed because of the corruption.  That's bad news for the nuclear reactors that are benefiting from the subsidies, but could be good news for renewables as they're the cheapest form of unsubsidized electrical generation now.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ohio-nuclearpower/ohio-governor-calls-for-repeal-of-state-nuclear-bailout-bill-under-probe-idUSKCN24O2WS

Quote
July 23, 2020
Ohio governor calls for repeal of state nuclear bailout bill under probe
Timothy Gardner


(Reuters) - Ohio Governor Mike DeWine on Thursday reversed course and called on the state’s legislature to repeal and replace a nuclear energy bailout bill at the center of a federal investigation into bribery.

Quote
DeVillers said the company, without identifying it, gave $60 million to Generation Now, a political nonprofit operated by the five men, funds used for lobbying that secured passage of a controversial $1.5 billion bill.

The bill, which passed mostly on a party-line vote with Republicans in the majority, also rolled back renewable energy standards, requiring utilities to get 8.5% of their power from renewable energy, down from 12.5%. DeWine said the legislature should debate whether to reinstate the measure.

kassy

  • Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2457
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1174
  • Likes Given: 1020
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1372 on: August 03, 2020, 10:22:27 AM »
The nuclear waste buried far beneath the earth will be toxic for thousands of years. How do you build a warning now that can be understood in the far future?

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200731-how-to-build-a-nuclear-warning-for-10000-years-time
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3626
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 623
  • Likes Given: 309
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1373 on: August 03, 2020, 12:23:57 PM »
Thanks, kassy. That reminds me of the Memory of Mankind time capsule I am promoting on this forum...a million year library.
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

NeilT

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1979
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 186
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1374 on: August 03, 2020, 01:07:26 PM »
Kassy, that was an interesting read. God knows we want to pass down clear and definite knowledge which does not change or vary over time.

Anyone who could suggest a religious cult as a way of preserving clear knowledge knows nothing about preserving fact.

I noted they missed the two most obvious things.

First that anyone in danger of the contents would have the technology to excavate it and anyone with the technology to excavate it will know the periodic table of elements.  Simply listing the full table with the elements highlighted would be a really good start.

Second, a picture speaks a thousand word.  A fresco depicting radiation poisoning with moon cycles and binary number notation for elapsed time would suffice.

Both cast in our most imperishable alloys then embedded. In crystal.

Of course this assumes that our society has fallen and others are trying to excavate our history.  In the digital age it is relatively simple to have infinite retention of knowledge, all we need to do is put the effort in.

Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3626
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 623
  • Likes Given: 309
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1375 on: August 03, 2020, 03:29:47 PM »
Quote
In the digital age it is relatively simple to have infinite retention of knowledge, all we need to do is put the effort in.
But how long will the digital age last?
And about those "ugly" monuments that are supposed to dissuade people from digging there...how sure are you that people won't get curious?
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3197
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 567
  • Likes Given: 386
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1376 on: August 03, 2020, 04:02:25 PM »
Hwaet. We Gardena  in geardagum
theodcyninga   thrym gefrunon
hu tha athelingas     ellen fremedon


This is English from about a thousand years ago (first lines of Beowulf), yet it is unintelligible to modern speakers unless they have made a special study of it (and this is with modernizing the script!).

So yeah, there's a lot of problems with trying to communicate with future generations just 1000 years out, let alone tens of or hundreds of thousands.

::::::::::::

This part from kassy's article struck me as rather...ironic

Quote
The initiative came up with a number of suggestions as how to help humans in the future make informed decisions, such as libraries, time capsules and physical markers

Human during our lifetimes have made multiple of what might be called the least well 'informed decisions' in the history of the planet. Deciding to trash the planet by leaving nuclear waste all over it being not the least of these ill informed decisions.
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

NeilT

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1979
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 186
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1377 on: August 03, 2020, 08:12:21 PM »
This article

http://www.englishproject.org/resources/first-kings-english-alfred-language-maker

Explains why trying to read "English" at the time of King Alfred, as a speaker of modern English, is virtually impossible.

Simply put, they are not the same language.  Whilst modern English retains some 30% as a root of old English, the rest is French and a mix of others.

Hence why I suggested the language of science with the periodic table.  Which would also allow the transfer of numbers; along with a fresco of images which uses the moon and numbers to show passage of time.

None of the above requires more than science at the level of the 19th century but would be understood by anyone of any language at that level of technology.

As for a digital world, it does require planning and protection of that level of technology.  But, assuming our technological level continues, there is no reason why we should not be able to retain the knowledge intact and in its original form, forever.  Something which was extremely difficult before the advent of the printing press and still not guaranteed after.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

morganism

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 242
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1378 on: August 09, 2020, 01:44:14 AM »
Extreme Chernobyl Fungus Could Protect Astronauts From Deadly Radiation

https://gizmodo.com/extreme-chernobyl-fungus-could-protect-astronauts-from-1844518002

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.16.205534v1

"Here, growth of Cladosporium sphaerospermum and its capability to attenuate ionizing radiation, was studied aboard the International Space Station (ISS) over a time of 30 days, as an analog to habitation on the surface of Mars. At full maturity, radiation beneath a ≈ 1.7 mm thick lawn of the melanized radiotrophic fungus (180° protection radius) was 2.17±0.35% lower as compared to the negative control. Estimations based on linear attenuation coefficients indicated that a ~ 21 cm thick layer of this fungus could largely negate the annual dose-equivalent of the radiation environment on the surface of Mars, whereas only ~ 9 cm would be required with an equimolar mixture of melanin and Martian regolith. Compatible with ISRU, such composites are promising as a means to increase radiation shielding while reducing overall up-mass, as is compulsory for future Mars-missions."

"As an added benefit, the fungus is a self-sustaining, self-replicative substrate capable of living off even the smallest doses of radiation and biomass. It can also be grown on many different carbon sources, such as organic waste.

“This significantly reduces the amount of shielding material that one would have to bring to Mars, which is maybe what makes it most exciting, as the up-mass is very restrictive in any Mars-mission scenario,” explained Averesch."

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4085
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2388
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1379 on: August 09, 2020, 05:01:02 PM »
Nuclear Fusion: No Tokamak Required
https://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/energy/nuclear/nuclear-fusiontokamak-not-included

Researchers at NASA’s Glenn Research Center have now demonstrated a method of inducing nuclear fusion without building a massive stellarator or tokamak. In fact, all they needed was a bit of metal, some hydrogen, and an electron accelerator.

The team believes that their method, called lattice confinement fusion, could be a potential new power source for deep space missions. They have published their results in two papers in Physical Review C.

https://journals.aps.org/prc/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevC.101.044610

https://journals.aps.org/prc/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevC.101.044609

... Aside from deuteron-deuteron fusion, the NASA group found evidence of what are known as Oppenheimer-Phillips stripping reactions. Sometimes, rather than fusing with another deuteron, the energetic deuteron would collide with one of lattice’s metal atoms, either creating an isotope or converting the atom to a new element. The team found that both fusion and stripping reactions produced useable energy.

“What we did was not cold fusion,” says Lawrence Forsley, a senior lead experimental physicist for the project.

There’s still plenty of research to be done by the NASA team. Now they’ve demonstrated nuclear fusion, the next step is to create reactions that are more efficient and more numerous. When two deuterons fuse, they create either a proton and tritium (a hydrogen atom with two neutrons), or helium-3 and a neutron. In the latter case, that extra neutron can start the process over again, allowing two more deuterons to fuse. The team plans to experiment with ways to coax more consistent and sustained reactions in the metal.
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4085
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2388
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1380 on: August 09, 2020, 06:25:23 PM »
From the Folks Who Brought Us 9/11: Saudi Goes Nuclear
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/05/us/politics/us-examines-saudi-nuclear-program.html

U.S. Examines Whether Saudi Nuclear Program Could Lead to Bomb Effort

Intelligence agencies are scrutinizing whether the kingdom’s work with China to develop nuclear expertise is cover to process uranium and move toward development of a weapon.

The Chinese helped the Saudis build a uranium refinement facility as part of the Kingdom’s quest (Saudi, that is; not the Middle Kingdom) “to master nuclear technology,” as the Wall Street Journal described it Tuesday. “The facility, which hasn’t been publicly disclosed, is in a sparsely populated area in Saudi Arabia’s northwest and has raised concern among U.S. and allied officials that the kingdom’s nascent nuclear program is moving ahead and that Riyadh is keeping open the option of developing nuclear weapons.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/saudi-arabia-with-chinas-help-expands-its-nuclear-program-11596575671

One big concern: “Saudi Arabia only has the most limited safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency. The country was among the last to sign the old version of a so-called Small Quantities Protocol in the 2000s, which doesn’t oblige it to disclose the yellowcake site to the agency.”

An entirely different Saudi facility is deeply concerning to spy agencies around the world, the New York Times reported Wednesday. That would be “a newly completed structure near a solar-panel production area near Riyadh, the Saudi capital, that some government analysts and outside experts suspect could be one of a number of undeclared nuclear sites.”

... A satellite image taken in 2014, before the structure had a roof, revealed the installation of four large yellow cranes for lifting and moving heavy equipment across sprawling high-bay areas. Mr. Albright added that each building also had adjoining two-story offices and areas for support personnel.

In his report, Mr. Albright found the appearance of the Saudi buildings to be roughly comparable to that of Iran’s uranium conversion facility, a plant that was designed by China in the city of Isfahan. It is central to Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

One reason this matters: It would seem to put the U.S. “in the uncomfortable position of declaring it could not tolerate any nuclear production ability in Iran, while seeming to remain silent about its close allies, the Saudis, for whom it has forgiven human rights abuses and military adventurism.”

At the White House, Trump administration officials seem relatively unperturbed by the Saudi effort.
(... as they were with the Khashoggi murder)

In the 1990s, the Saudis helped bankroll Pakistan’s successful effort to produce a bomb. But it has never been clear whether Riyadh has a claim on a Pakistani weapon, or its technology.

« Last Edit: August 09, 2020, 06:38:25 PM by vox_mundi »
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

Tom_Mazanec

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3626
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 623
  • Likes Given: 309
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1381 on: August 13, 2020, 01:18:59 PM »
From the Most Trustworthy News Source :‑J

Nuclear to Replace Wind and Solar
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/08/nuclear_to_replace_wind_and_solar.html
Quote
Wind and solar are not remotely competitive with coal or natural gas for generating electricity. The promoters of wind and solar lie about this constantly, claiming that they are close to competitive. The lies have two major components. They ignore or misrepresent the massive subsidies that wind and solar get, amounting to 75% of the cost. Then they compare the subsidized cost of wind or solar with the total cost of gas or coal. But wind or solar can’t replace existing fossil fuel infrastructure because they are erratic sources of electricity. The existing infrastructure has to be retained when you add wind or solar, because sometimes the wind doesn’t blow or the sun doesn’t shine. The only fair comparison to the compare to total cost of wind or solar per kilowatt hour (kWh) with the marginal cost of gas or coal electricity. That marginal cost is essentially the cost of the fuel. The only economic benefit of wind or solar is reducing fuel consumption in existing fossil fuel plants. It is hard to build wind or solar installations that generate electricity for less than 8-cents per kWh, but the cost of the fuel, for either gas or coal, is about 2-cents per kWh. Wind and solar cost four times too much to be competitive.
Any factcheck on those prices?
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

NeilT

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1979
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 186
  • Likes Given: 11
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1382 on: August 13, 2020, 01:33:27 PM »
It looks pretty incorrect. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#United_States

The only way of looking at that is by factoring in the cost of retaining traditional infrastructure into the wind/solar cost so that it always carries an extra cost.  Offshore wind looks more expensive than coal in all scenario's though.

It depends where you stand.  I've said, for a long time now, that Nuclear is the most viable baseload pillar of the energy infrastructure if we want to talk about CO2 emissions at point of use.  The UK mid term strategy was thirds.  1/3 Nuclear, 1/3 renewable, 1/3 fast reacting gas.  Size it correctly and the last third is only being used in exceptional circumstances (wind drought at night for instance).

This thinking is changing.  Other possibilities are coming forward.  Massive deployments of flow batteries, V2G with a very large number of EV vehicles balancing things out, etc.

But the case for some kind of baseload on which wind and solar stands has not gone away.  Whether it is Nuclear or something else.
Being right too soon is socially unacceptable.

Robert A. Heinlein

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9311
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3715
  • Likes Given: 28
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1383 on: August 13, 2020, 03:06:34 PM »
From the Most Trustworthy News Source :‑J

Nuclear to Replace Wind and Solar
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/08/nuclear_to_replace_wind_and_solar.html

Any factcheck?
Not from me. Life's too short. That website seems to have a mission to prove that American Thinker is an oxymoron.

And the USA is in the process of ridding itself of Nuclear power stations - at least where bribery and corruption have not prevailed.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

oren

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6292
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2311
  • Likes Given: 1945
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1384 on: August 13, 2020, 03:25:04 PM »
These prices are absolute nonsense. The Saudis had bids for solar of around 2 cents per kilowatt hour, if I am not mistaken. Unsubsidized. In general I've seen on this forum prices of less than 3 cents, IIRC.
In addition marginal costs for fossil fuel plants are not just the cost of the fuel, but also the cost of usage-based maintenance and part of the payroll. According to calculations I've seen here, it is now cheaper to build new solar and wind capacity than continue operations of existing coal plants.
When one reads denier blogs, one should not be surprised when the numbers they present are false.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Thinker

interstitial

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 598
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 209
  • Likes Given: 76
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1385 on: August 13, 2020, 03:31:20 PM »
Those prices for renewables are inflated. In the US utility sized solar is largely unsubsidized. China has stopped subsidizing solar because it is still cheaper than even without subsidies.  Fossil fuel subsidies far exceed renewable subsidies. As prices have dropped many subsidies for residential solar are being phased out. They are just trying to confuse the issue. Renewables are pushing out even gas as the cheapest source of power. In a recent bid one utility found that it was cheaper to buy and operate batteries than peaking turbines. Utilities are starting to build power plant sized batteries. Nuclear is the most expensive source of power out there. The only reason to build nuclear now is as a cover for/or a part of a weapons program. 

blumenkraft

  • Guest
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1386 on: August 13, 2020, 04:24:53 PM »
Any factcheck on those prices?

Well, if you include the trillions and trillions it costs to store and protect nuclear waste over generations, these calculations (however (in)accurate they are - i didn't even check) are just ridiculous.

interstitial

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 598
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 209
  • Likes Given: 76
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1387 on: August 13, 2020, 05:01:28 PM »
Cost wise nuclear is dead.

The Walrus

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 685
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 97
  • Likes Given: 43
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1388 on: August 13, 2020, 05:34:44 PM »
Cost wise nuclear is dead.

That may by true for uranium reactors, but not for thorium reactors.

https://www.power-eng.com/2019/08/13/is-thorium-the-fuel-of-the-future-to-revitalize-nuclear/#gref

<Its cheaper then the traditional version of nuclear but the article it does not actually give any prizes we can use to compare. kassy>
« Last Edit: August 13, 2020, 06:10:09 PM by kassy »

kassy

  • Moderator
  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2457
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1174
  • Likes Given: 1020
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1389 on: August 13, 2020, 06:18:00 PM »
The one sensible reactor is the one which can burn up radioactive waste we already have. There is such a type but i am not sure if it is the general Thorium reactor, or a specialized version or something else.

Those should be built near the waste piles and then deplete them slowly. I bet it would cost more then wind or solar then but the clean up service is more important.

Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

KiwiGriff

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 832
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 417
  • Likes Given: 147
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1390 on: August 13, 2020, 08:13:11 PM »
Quote
Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no." It is named after Ian Betteridge, a British technology journalist who wrote about it in 2009, although the principle is much older.

Thorium solves none of the problems with nuclear power .
Animals can be driven crazy by placing too many in too small a pen. Homo sapiens is the only animal that voluntarily does this to himself.
Notebooks of Lazarus Long.
Robert Heinlein.

interstitial

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 598
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 209
  • Likes Given: 76
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1391 on: August 14, 2020, 06:16:13 AM »
Kassy: A significant portion of uranium is unused during the first pass through a reactor. This fuel can be reprocessed and reused. The major advantage of this is the elements with the longest half lives are removed leaving elements with half lives in the hundreds of years instead of thousands. The French are the only ones who currently do this. There is enough spent fuel to supply current reactors for their expected lifetime. Reprocessing fuel is a weapons proliferation concern. Thoriums major advantage is the reaction is hard to make self sustaining. Mechanical failures will lead to the reaction shutting down.


all:
It may be cheaper than other reactors but costs are more speculative than nailed down. In July the only US nuclear plant under construction announced another billion in cost overruns. This happened even though costs were already several billion more than originally budgeted for. They also had to redo the completion schedule. Outside analysts suggest this new schedule is unlikely to be met. Missing the fuel loading deadline would require permitting changes that are far from automatic. Originally they were supposed to be in operation in the spring of 2016 and 2017.  Pulling out now would mean a multi billion dollar loss and local ratepayers will get hosed either way. I know this was not a thorium reactor but the billions of dollars in cost overruns are not related to the type of nuclear reactor. They had political and financial support from both the Obama administration and Trump with multi billion dollar loan guarantees from the US government designed in an attempt to revive the nuclear industry. After Fukoshima? and the extreme failure of the Vogtle reactors other US utilities have shelved their nuclear plans. Suggesting a U.S. utility build any nuclear reactors would likely but shut down at the first sentence. A thorium design would being different from what is currently being used would be an even harder sell.



last four completed US reactors.
2 in 1990
1 in 1993
1 in 2016

morganism

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 242
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 46
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1392 on: August 23, 2020, 08:02:45 AM »
classified documentary video of Tsar Bomba nuke test

https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/security/2020/08/rosatom-releases-previously-classified-documentary-video-50-mt-novaya-zemlya-test

:Photos and short video clips have previously been available, but this unseen 40 minutes declassified footage of the Soviet Union’s monster nuclear bomb give a whole new insight into what happened on Novaya Zemlya on October 30, 1961."

"The bomb was detonated 4,000 meters above the ground. As seen in the film, the fireball flash lasted far longer than seen on any other nuclear weapon test videos. The flash dome itself reached 20 km, while the ring of absolute destruction had a radius of 35 kilometers

After 40 seconds, the dome of the fire reached 30 km and thereafter developed into a mushroom cloud which soared to a height of 60-65 kilometers with a diameter of 90 km. In the military town Severny, center for the nuclear weapons test around the Matochkin Strait, most buildings were destroyed. The town was 55 kilometers from ground zero."




gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9311
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3715
  • Likes Given: 28
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1393 on: August 28, 2020, 07:35:29 PM »
Another nuclear power station to close dowm early - this time in Scotlnd.

I wonder who will pay for decommissioning?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/27/hunterston-scottish-nuclear-power-station-to-shut-down-early-after-reactor-problems
Scottish nuclear power station to shut down early after reactor problems

Exclusive: EDF Energy to close Hunterston next year after spending £200m on repairs
Quote
Hunterston nuclear power station, one of the UK’s oldest remaining nuclear plants, is to close down next year, earlier than expected, after encountering a series of safety-critical problems in its reactors.

Industry sources told the Guardian that EDF Energy, the state-owned French operator of Hunterston, decided at a board meeting on Thursday afternoon that the plant would stop generating electricity in late 2021, at least two years earlier than planned.

The energy company had hoped to keep generating electricity from the 44-year-old nuclear plant on the Firth of Clyde until 2023, after ploughing more than £200m into repairing the reactor.

Hunterston, which first began generating electricity in 1976, has been offline since 2018 after inspectors discovered 350 microscopic cracks in the reactor’s graphite core.

In October last year the Ferret, an investigative website, reported that at least 58 fragments and pieces of debris had fallen off the graphite blocks as the cracks worsened. It quoted the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) as saying this had created “significant uncertainty” about the risks of debris blocking channels for cooling the reactor and causing fuel cladding to melt.

After a two-year investigation, the ONR said on Thursday that reactor 3 at Hunterston would be allowed to restart as planned, but it would only be allowed to generate electricity for approximately six months.

EDF then plans to apply next spring to extend its life for one final six-month run. EDF said it would begin the process of decommissioning Hunterston no later than the first week of 2022.

EDF also operates Scotland’s second nuclear power station, Torness, on the east coast south of Edinburgh. Running since 1988, its two reactors can produce up to 1.2GW of electricity. It is due to remain operational until 2030 at the earliest.

Hunterston’s closure has reignited concern over energy policy. Both the UK and Scottish governments aim to increase low-carbon energy supplies to help meet climate goals.

The Scottish National party government in Edinburgh has an anti-nuclear policy but has backed efforts to extend the life of Hunterston and Torness, while phasing out coal-fired power stations and building up renewable sources in Scotland.

In 2016 Scotland’s two nuclear stations produced 43% of its electricity. In 2018, the year Hunterston went offline after the reactor cracks were uncovered, that fell to 28%.
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4085
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2388
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1394 on: September 01, 2020, 11:54:58 PM »
Study: Cancer Cases Likely In Those Exposed to Atomic Test
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-09-cancer-cases-exposed-atomic.html

After decades of study, the National Cancer Institute said Tuesday that some people probably got cancer from the radioactive fallout that wafted across New Mexico after the U.S. government detonated the first atomic bomb in 1945. However, the exact number is unknown.

The institute disclosed its conclusions in a series of scientific papers on radiation doses and cancer risks resulting from the Trinity Test, which marked a key point in the once-secret Manhattan Project. The Congress considers legislation that would include the downwinders in New Mexico in a federal compensation program for people exposed to radiation released during atmospheric tests or employees in the uranium industry.

"Too many of these unwilling participants in our country's national security strategy are still struggling with illness or have lost loved ones to radiation exposure," U.S. Rep. Ben Ray Lujan, a sponsor of the legislation, said after organizing a meeting in August with lawmakers, former miners, survivor groups from New Mexico, Idaho and Guam and others.

Downwinders have said their communities have been plagued by cancer, birth defects and stillbirths.

They pointed to research published in 2019 in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists on data that showed a spike in infant mortality with no known cause other than it began after the Trinity Test. She said the increase followed what had been a steady decline in infant mortality in New Mexico up until August 1945.

They estimated that the largest doses would have occurred in Torrance and Guadalupe counties based on the fallout pattern. All of the state's counties were included in the analysis.



Study to Estimate Radiation Doses and Cancer Risks Resulting from Exposure to Radioactive Fallout from the Trinity Nuclear Test
https://dceg.cancer.gov/research/how-we-study/exposure-assessment/trinity
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4085
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2388
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1395 on: September 02, 2020, 01:27:17 AM »
NuScale’s Small Nuclear Reactor Is First to Get US Safety Approval
https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/09/first-modular-nuclear-reactor-design-certified-in-the-us/

On Friday, the first small modular reactor received a design certification from the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, meaning that it meets safety requirements and could be chosen by future projects seeking licensing and approval.

The design comes from NuScale, a company birthed from research at Oregon State University that has received some substantial Department of Energy funding. It’s a 76-foot-tall, 15-foot-wide steel cylinder (23 meters by 5 meters) capable of producing 50 megawatts of electricity. (The company also has a 60-megawatt iteration teed up.) They envision a plant employing up to 12 of these reactors in a large pool like those used in current nuclear plants.

The basic design is conventional, using uranium fuel rods to heat water in an internal, pressurized loop. That water hands off its high temperature to an external steam loop through a heat exchange coil. Inside the plant, the resulting steam would run to a generating turbine, cool off, and circulate back to the reactors.

The design also uses a passive cooling system, so no pumps or moving parts are required to keep the reactor operating safely. The pressurized internal loop is arranged so that it allows hot water to rise through the heat exchange coils and sink back down toward the fuel rods after it cools.

“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4085
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2388
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1396 on: September 21, 2020, 02:48:44 AM »
September 17, 1955 the first flight of the NB-36H bomber - an experimental aircraft that carried a nuclear reactor.



https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_NB-36H

... The original crew and avionics cabin was replaced by a massive lead- and rubber-lined 11 ton crew section for a pilot, copilot, flight engineer and two nuclear engineers. Even the small windows had 25–30 centimetres (10–12 in) thick lead glass.[1][7][8][9] The aircraft was fitted with a 1-megawatt air-cooled reactor, with a weight of 35,000 pounds (16,000 kg).[10] This was hung on a hook in the middle bomb bay to allow for easy loading and unloading, so that the radioactive source could be kept safely underground between the test flights.[6] A monitoring system dubbed "Project Halitosis" measured radioactive gases from the reactor.[11]

In March 1961, shortly after he took office, President John F. Kennedy canceled the program.[15] In his statement, Kennedy commented that the prospect of nuclear-powered planes was still very remote, despite 15 years of development and expenditure of around $1 billion.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-95LAL
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4085
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2388
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1397 on: September 21, 2020, 04:54:44 PM »
Nuclear Plants In Arabian Sea Face Tsunami Risk
https://phys.org/news/2020-09-nuclear-arabian-sea-tsunami.html

A major tsunami in the northern Arabian Sea could severely impact the coastlines of India and Pakistan, which are studded with sensitive installations including several nuclear plants, says the author of a new study.

"A magnitude 9 earthquake is a possibility in the Makran subduction zone and consequent high tsunami waves," says C.P. Rajendran, lead author of the study, which was published this September in Pure and Applied Geophysics. "The entire northern Arabian Sea region, with its critical facilities, including nuclear power stations, needs to take this danger into consideration in hazard perceptions."

Atomic power stations functioning along the Arabian Sea include Tarapur (1,400 megawatts) in India's Maharashtra state, Kaiga (being expanded to 2,200 megawatts) in Karnataka state and Karachi in Pakistan (also being expanded to 2,200 megawatts). A mega nuclear power plant coming up at Jaitapur, Maharashtra will generate 9,900 megawatts, while another project at Mithi Virdi in Gujarat may be shelved because of public opposition.

... "In principle, one could add safety systems to lower the risk of accidents—a very high sea wall, for instance. Such safety systems, however, add to the cost of nuclear plants and make them even more uncompetitive when compared with other ways of generating electricity." [...like renewables]

Rajendran and his team embarked on the study after noticing that, compared to peninsular India's eastern coast, tsunami hazards on the west coast were under-recognized. This despite the 8.1 magnitude earthquake that occurred in the Makran subduction zone in 1945.

Earlier studies, such as the one published in 2013 in Geophysical Research Letters, have indicated that tsunamis, similar in magnitude to the one caused by the 2004 Sumatra earthquake, could occur at the Makran subduction zone where the Arabian plate is subducting beneath the Eurasian plate by about 1.5 inches per year.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/grl.50374

According to the 2013 study, the Makran is a wide-potential seismogenic zone that may be capable of generating a very significant (greater than 8.5 in magnitude) tsunamigenic earthquake that poses risks to the coastlines of Pakistan, Iran, Oman, and India. ...

C. P. Rajendran et al. The Orphan Tsunami of 1524 on the Konkan Coast, Western India, and Its Implications, Pure and Applied Geophysics (2020).
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00024-020-02575-0
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

Ken Feldman

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1413
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 226
  • Likes Given: 139
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1398 on: September 28, 2020, 06:08:28 PM »
The linked article explores why nuclear is on the decline.  TL:DR it's the cost.

https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Why-Is-Nuclear-Energy-So-Expensive.html

Quote
Why Is Nuclear Energy So Expensive?
By Haley Zaremba - Sep 27, 2020

We all knew that 2020 would be an incredibly tough year for nuclear energy. In the United States, the sector has been on the decline for years, saddled with hazardously aging infrastructure and a flood of cheap natural gas thanks to the West Texas shale revolution that the nuclear sector simply can’t compete with. As such, the domestic nuclear sector has become increasingly dependent on government handouts to stay afloat and has saddled the taxpayer with the staggeringly high cost of maintaining radioactive nuclear waste in the form of spent nuclear fuel.  COVID-19 only exacerbated the situation, by causing the bottom to fall out of energy demand and placing nuclear energy, which has largely fallen out of favor in the U.S., near the bottom of a long list of energy industries and industrial and economic sectors in general waiting for government bailouts. During the lockdown phase of the pandemic, “renewables have taken a bigger slice of the market because many nations had decided to give new green technologies priority into the grid” reported Bloomberg Green in a May article titled “Nuclear Is Getting Hammered by Green Power and the Pandemic.”

Quote
Just this week, the World Nuclear Industry Status Report summed up the state of the global nuclear industry, and it ain’t pretty. The report shows that the sector continues to stagnate while renewables are going gangbusters. “Just 2.4 GW of new nuclear generation capacity came online last year, compared to 98 GW of solar. The world’s operational nuclear power capacity had declined by 2.1%, to 362 GW, at the end of June,” PV Magazine paraphrased the report’s findings.

And, in what is perhaps the nail in nuclear’s coffin, the report shows that nuclear is now the most expensive form of power generation in the world, with the exception of gas peaking plants. $65 million dollars from the government can’t fix that in a time frame that will save the industry, no matter how innovative the researchers get. The levelized cost of energy of nuclear power production is now $155 per megawatt-hour, as compared to $49/MWh for solar power and $41 for wind. What’s more, nuclear’s increased since the last report, while solar and wind both decreased in cost.

vox_mundi

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 4085
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2388
  • Likes Given: 316
Re: Nuclear Power
« Reply #1399 on: September 29, 2020, 07:31:42 PM »
Trump: Ready the Nuclear Bombs.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/28/trump-russia-nuclear-deal-talks-422736

“The Trump administration has asked the military to assess how quickly it could pull nuclear weapons out of storage and load them onto bombers and submarines if an arms control treaty with Russia is allowed to expire in February, according to three people familiar with the discussions.

The request to U.S. Strategic Command in Nebraska is part of a strategy to pressure Moscow into renegotiating the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty before the U.S. presidential election, the people said.

The assessment will determine how long it would take to load nuclear weapons now in reserve onto long-range bombers, ballistic missile submarines and land-based silos to beef up the U.S. nuclear force in the event Russia increases its arsenal.

It comes as Billingslea has publicly raised the possibility of putting more weapons on bombers and submarines if New START lapses and has sharpened his rhetoric in recent days to try to secure more concessions from the Russians.

... “It’s very stupid,” added a former GOP arms control official who declined to be identified because he still advises the government. “It makes absolutely no sense to threaten to upload. It becomes a valid leveraging point only if the other side can’t do it. The Russians can do it, too.”

“But more importantly,” this person added, “the systems we have deployed today are the ones we believe are necessary to provide an adequate deterrent. There is no obvious reason and every reason not to in the absence of a change in the threat. It’s not going to scare the Russians. The likelihood of success with the Russians is about nil."

... “This is delusion and bluff,” argues Steven Pifer, a William Perry Fellow at Stanford. “If the administration does not change course, New START will lapse and, for the first time in decades, U.S. and Russian nuclear forces will be under no constraints.”

The pact is set to expire on Feb. 5 unless both sides agree to an extension for up to five years. Russia has already agreed to an extension of the existing treaty.

https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2020/09/washingtons-arms-control-delusions-and-bluffs/168817/

----------------------------------

Trump has also requested preparations for the resumption of underground testing.

----------------------------------

... Unclear on the concept of MAD - Mutually Assured Destruction

----------------------------------

“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late