|
|
We appreciate your help
in keeping this site going.
|
|
05-03-2016, 07:32 PM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
|
|
Nuclear Power Needs To Go
__________________
Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast.
|
05-04-2016, 05:43 AM
|
|
AKA Sister Mary JJ
|
|
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Upper East Tennessee
Posts: 5,897
|
|
Rob used to champion the CANDU power plants in Canada. Does anyone have any info on how they operate?
__________________
"Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please." (Mark Twain)
|
05-04-2016, 06:59 AM
|
|
Reformed Know-Nothing
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 25,919
|
|
The current lower price of natural gas will probably have more to do with nuclear energy's demise than anything in the OP's links. BTW, the Hanford Site's leaking tanks have nothing to do with commercial nuclear power.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.
|
05-04-2016, 07:44 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Edge of America
Posts: 1,509
|
|
To anyone interested, I recommend the documentary "Pandora's Promise," - clears away a lot of the hyperbole and provides a well done overview of nuclear energy options with some of the leading nuclear and environmental scientists/engineers.
__________________
Try to rely on yourself as much as possible - when things go to hell, you will know who to blame.
|
05-04-2016, 08:29 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow
The current lower price of natural gas will probably have more to do with nuclear energy's demise than anything in the OP's links. BTW, the Hanford Site's leaking tanks have nothing to do with commercial nuclear power.
|
A distinction without a difference, IMO. In any event, some of the waste stored at Hanford is waste from commercial reactors that was destined for Yucca Mtn.
__________________
Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast.
|
05-04-2016, 09:43 AM
|
|
Reformed Know-Nothing
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 25,919
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreas
A distinction without a difference, IMO. In any event, some of the waste stored at Hanford is waste from commercial reactors that was destined for Yucca Mtn.
|
While this may be true, it's certainly news to me, having been to Hanford bunches of times. Only the N Reactor was dual use (military/civilian), but I doubt that a small portion of the mixed waste in the underground tanks has been specifically deemed Yucca Mountain waste. Perhaps the spent fuel is, but the spent fuel has absolutely nothing to do with the leaky tanks.
In any event, using Hanford to make an argument against the use of modern nuclear reactor designs is silly. The use of single walls underground tanks to accommodate 100 million gallons of mixed waste was due to war time exigencies (beating Hitler to the bomb and keeping ahead of the Russians). These exigencies don't exist in the civilian nuclear power industry. If anything kills nuclear, it will be the price of natural gas lowered by virtue of fracking.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.
|
05-04-2016, 09:58 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow
While this may be true, it's certainly news to me, having been to Hanford bunches of times. Only the N Reactor was dual use (military/civilian), but I doubt that a small portion of the mixed waste in the underground tanks has been specifically deemed Yucca Mountain waste. Perhaps the spent fuel is, but the spent fuel has absolutely nothing to do with the leaky tanks.
In any event, using Hanford to make an argument against the use of modern nuclear reactor designs is silly. The use of single walls underground tanks to accommodate 100 million gallons of mixed waste was due to war time exigencies (beating Hitler to the bomb and keeping ahead of the Russians). These exigencies don't exist in the civilian nuclear power industry. If anything kills nuclear, it will be the price of natural gas lowered by virtue of fracking.
|
It is true. That's what happens when you retire. And pointing to the permanent risks associated with nuclear waste storage, however it was generated, is not "silly". Or do you maintain that this is a soluble problem?
And there are indications that there are now some double wall tanks, those not built under wartime exigencies, that are leaking. Tanks that are 400 yards from the second largest river in the US.
__________________
Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast.
Last edited by Boreas; 05-04-2016 at 10:01 AM.
|
05-04-2016, 10:19 AM
|
|
Reformed Know-Nothing
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: MoCo, MD
Posts: 25,919
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreas
It is true. That's what happens when you retire. And pointing to the permanent risks associated with nuclear waste storage, however it was generated, is not "silly". Or do you maintain that this is a soluble problem?
And there are indications that there are now some double wall tanks, those not built under wartime exigencies, that are leaking. Tanks that are 400 yards from the second largest river in the US.
|
Not all "nuclear waste storage" is the same. When one normally speaks of nuclear waste storage in the civilian nuclear industry, they're talking of spent fuel. The contents of Hanford's tanks isn't spent fuel. Conflating the two in making an argument against civilian nuclear reactors shows a lack of understanding of the nuclear fuel cycle and the nature of the mess at Hanford.
That said, cheap natural gas and existing regulatory burdens have pretty much killed the civilian nuclear industry. AFAIK, the V.C. Summer plant expansion in South Carolina is pretty much the only ongoing civilian reactor project and I'm sure its owner, SCE&G, would in retrospect much preferred to have built a natural gas plant considering costs that have skyrocketed to $12 billion.
http://www.thestate.com/news/busines...e41740257.html
The handwriting is pretty much on the wall already. The NRC, which was going great guns 20 years ago with the promise of a resurgent civilian nuclear industry, is downsizing dramatically in recognition of the dynamics noted above.
__________________
As long as the roots are not severed, all will be well in the garden.
|
05-04-2016, 10:40 AM
|
|
Senior Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 20,496
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by finnbow
Not all "nuclear waste storage" is the same. When one normally speaks of nuclear waste storage in the civilian nuclear industry, they're talking of spent fuel. The contents of Hanford's tanks isn't spent fuel. Conflating the two in making an argument against civilian nuclear reactors shows a lack of understanding of the nuclear fuel cycle and the nature of the mess at Hanford.
That said, cheap natural gas and existing regulatory burdens have pretty much killed the civilian nuclear industry. AFAIK, the V.C. Summer plant expansion in South Carolina is pretty much the only ongoing civilian reactor project and I'm sure its owner, SCE&G, would in retrospect much preferred to have built a natural gas plant considering costs that have skyrocketed to $12 billion.
http://www.thestate.com/news/busines...e41740257.html
The handwriting is pretty much on the wall already. The NRC, which was going great guns 20 years ago with the promise of a resurgent civilian nuclear industry, is downsizing dramatically in recognition of the dynamics noted above.
|
Yes, there's vitrification but the vitrified waste is still hot and the process results in an increased volume of waste, making storage even more problematic. And the risks associated with nuclear waste, however it was generated are both extreme and seemingly insoluble.
__________________
Smoke me a kipper. I'll be back for breakfast.
|
05-04-2016, 10:44 AM
|
|
Persona non grata
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 12,654
|
|
Part of this "Ask this old house" episode is on how Germany is moving toward energy independence. They also talk about how Germany has committed to move away from Nuclear, which they were once among the world's leaders in.
http://www.pbs.org/video/2365590403/
__________________
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend."
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:14 AM.
|