Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby pstarr » Sat 19 Nov 2016, 14:48:35

Sub, why a clip from Amy Goodman, the anti-nuke spokesperson? I didn't see how the clip or the short article supports your contention that Trump is pro-nuclear and intends to act on it? That would supposedly create a world-class nuclear power program here in the US or for export around the world.
There's nothing deeper than love. In fairy tales, the princesses kiss the frogs, and the frogs become princes. In real life,the princesses kiss princes, and the princes turn into frogs

“Bitterness is like cancer. It eats upon the host. But anger is like fire. It burns it all clean.”
― Maya Angelou
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 25028
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby Subjectivist » Sun 20 Nov 2016, 11:06:03

pstarr wrote:Sub, why a clip from Amy Goodman, the anti-nuke spokesperson? I didn't see how the clip or the short article supports your contention that Trump is pro-nuclear and intends to act on it? That would supposedly create a world-class nuclear power program here in the US or for export around the world.


If you read the link it is all about the hypocrisy of claiming to be worried about climate science denial while simultaneously engaging in nuclear science denial.
II Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
User avatar
Subjectivist
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3903
Joined: Sat 28 Aug 2010, 06:38:26
Location: Northwest Ohio

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby pstarr » Sun 20 Nov 2016, 12:19:46

Subjectivist wrote:
pstarr wrote:Sub, why a clip from Amy Goodman, the anti-nuke spokesperson? I didn't see how the clip or the short article supports your contention that Trump is pro-nuclear and intends to act on it? That would supposedly create a world-class nuclear power program here in the US or for export around the world.


If you read the link it is all about the hypocrisy of claiming to be worried about climate science denial while simultaneously engaging in nuclear science denial.
Huh? I don't worry about climate science denial, nor do I engage nuclear science denial. I accept that atoms have neutrons and the such.
There's nothing deeper than love. In fairy tales, the princesses kiss the frogs, and the frogs become princes. In real life,the princesses kiss princes, and the princes turn into frogs

“Bitterness is like cancer. It eats upon the host. But anger is like fire. It burns it all clean.”
― Maya Angelou
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 25028
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby StarvingLion » Sun 20 Nov 2016, 20:51:16

As the US succeeds as a nuclear technology and services developer,


"Department of Energy, do you have some energy?"

DOE: "No, we don't have any energy"

Hence, Department of No Energy, about to be abolished forever.

All those sodium and molten salt reactor scams aren't worth a dime. Pipes leak, and the whole shebang is a writeoff. There is no such thing as nuclear technology innovation. Its all from the 50's and 60's and nobody has ever improved upon it.
EV's are fuel-less automobiles and Thorium Reactors are fuel-less reactors. Perfect.
StarvingLion
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 851
Joined: Sat 03 Aug 2013, 17:59:17

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby Tanada » Mon 28 Nov 2016, 08:13:28

Switzerland votes overwhelmingly not to panic and close the nuclear power plants supplying 40 percent of their electricity. Seeing how Germany went for more coal after their vote a few years ago may have had a lot to do with it.

People in Switzerland voting in a referendum have rejected a proposal to introduce a strict timetable for phasing out nuclear power.

A projection for SRF public television showed the initiative failing by 55% to 45%.

A majority of cantons (Swiss states) voted against the initiative.

The plan, backed by the Green Party, would have meant closing three of Switzerland's five nuclear plants next year, with the last shutting in 2029.

The five plants currently generate almost 40% of Switzerland's electricity.

After the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, the Swiss government said it would gradually move the country towards renewable energy by 2050.

It said nuclear plants should continue to operate as long as they are deemed safe, but did not set a precise timetable.

Environmentalists have said no nuclear reactors should be allowed to operate for longer than 45 years - meaning that at least two would have had to close almost immediately.

But business leaders and the government said shutting them down too quickly could lead to power shortages and raise reliance on fossil fuels.


http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38120559
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13656
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby vox_mundi » Sat 03 Dec 2016, 13:37:26

Legislature passes ComEd rate hike to bail out Illinois nuclear power plants

... "What are we doing you guys? What are we doing listening to this bill? We don't have a budget and our so-called stopgap budget is just weeks away from expiring," said Rep. Sam Yingling, a Democrat from Grayslake who narrowly won re-election last month and has again been targeted for defeat by Republicans in 2018. "Instead, we are talking about a multibillion dollar corporate bailout for one of the most profitable energy companies in the state. And how are we going to finance this? This is going to be financed on the back of the rate payers."

... The power bill is a stripped-down version of an earlier measure that at one time also included subsidies for Downstate coal plants. That was abandoned following opposition from Rauner, along with a controversial provision that would have changed how customers are charged for their monthly energy use. That plan would have allowed billing based on an average of a customer's top 30 minutes of usage on weekdays.


French nuclear power in 'worst situation ever', says former EDF director

... The closures have seen Britain this week exporting electricity to France for the first time in four years. An industry report on Tuesday also warned that the offline reactors could lead to a “tense situation” for energy supply in France, in the event of a cold snap this winter.

The situation is likely to be exacerbated by damage during Storm Angus to the main cable that carries electricity back and forth between the UK and France. It is believed a boat dropping anchor during the storm may have been responsible but National Grid is investigating the cause and working to repair the Interconnexion France-Angleterre, which is buried in the seabed and heavily armoured.

The operator said that four of the eight cables in the interconnector had been damaged, reducing its capacity from 2,000MW to 1,000MW until February next year. It added that due to the French reactor closures, it had already factored in a reduction in energy supplies from France this winter.

Magnin said that instead of backing new nuclear, the UK and France should capitalise on falling wind and solar power costs and help individuals and communities to build and run their own renewable energy projects.

The UK’s business department conceded in September that by the time UK’s Hinkley Point C nuclear power station is operational the price of electricity guaranteed to EDF will be above the comparable costs for large-scale solar and onshore windfarms.


France’s nuclear-energy champion is in turmoil

THESE are difficult times for Electricité de France (EDF), the country’s quasi-monopolistic electricity provider, serving 88% of homes. Outages at no fewer than 18 of the 58 EDF-owned nuclear reactors that provide three-quarters of France’s electricity have meant a slump in production: the company says annual nuclear output could fall to 378 terawatt hours (TWH), from 417 TWH last year. Eight reactors are currently lying idle and several may not restart for weeks or months. Power stations are burning coal at a rate not seen since the 1980s. As electricity imports and prices soar, officials are having to deny that a cold snap could bring blackouts.

... The sense of crisis looks likely to grow. Yves Marignac, a nuclear-energy expert in Paris, calls EDF “already financially crippled”. Only state backing prevents EDF’s credit rating falling steeply, analysts say. And it is not only the ASN that has EDF in its sights. On November 22nd French competition officials raided its offices, seeking evidence that its dominant position is squeezing rivals and sending prices higher than they should be (even though lower electricity prices in recent years have sapped its revenues). Its share price has halved in two years.

The future looks bleak. Some four-fifths of French nuclear plants were built in a decade from the late 1970s. The plants have a 40-year lifespan, meaning that several a year face retirement over the next decade. Energy planners have assumed there will be extensions to 50 years or more. But the ASN may hesitate after the forging problems, or impose higher costs. Cyrille Cormier, a nuclear engineer who is now at Greenpeace, a campaign group that opposes nuclear power, says a total refit could cost EDF an extra €60bn-200bn.

Closing plants permanently would be extremely costly, too. France has never closed a large one. EDF may be under-provisioning the costs of decommissioning plants. It has set aside €36bn, less than the €45bn that Germany has allowed, even though France’s neighbour has a smaller nuclear fleet. Then there is nuclear waste. The five pools storing spent fuel at La Hague, Areva’s central reprocessing plant, are nearly full, says Mr Marignac. When sorrows come, they come in battalions.
“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.
User avatar
vox_mundi
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3371
Joined: Wed 27 Sep 2006, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby vox_mundi » Fri 23 Dec 2016, 11:49:03

Japan cancels failed $9bn Monju 'fast' nuclear reactor

Japan is a scrapping an experimental 'fast' reactor which has worked for just 250 days of its 22-year lifespan and cost $9bn (£7.2bn).

The Monju reactor, in western Japan's Fukui city, was designed to burn most of its own spent fuel, eliminating the need to deal with the nuclear waste.

But it suffered its first problems months after it went live, and has not worked properly since.

It was supposed to be relatively eco-friendly, but it's mostly a boondoggle. It would be slower and more expensive to fully restart the reactor than to shut it down (the equivalent of $4.6 billion versus $3.2 billion)

The closure won't be speedy. Crews wouldn't finish removing used nuclear fuel from Monju until 2022, and it wouldn't be completely dismantled until 2047. That's 61 years after construction began.


https://www.engadget.com/2016/12/22/jap ... prototype/
“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.
User avatar
vox_mundi
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3371
Joined: Wed 27 Sep 2006, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby kiwichick » Wed 28 Dec 2016, 05:18:28

User avatar
kiwichick
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 2196
Joined: Sat 02 Aug 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Southland New Zealand

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby dissident » Thu 29 Dec 2016, 09:40:57

vox_mundi wrote:Japan cancels failed $9bn Monju 'fast' nuclear reactor

Japan is a scrapping an experimental 'fast' reactor which has worked for just 250 days of its 22-year lifespan and cost $9bn (£7.2bn).

The Monju reactor, in western Japan's Fukui city, was designed to burn most of its own spent fuel, eliminating the need to deal with the nuclear waste.

But it suffered its first problems months after it went live, and has not worked properly since.

It was supposed to be relatively eco-friendly, but it's mostly a boondoggle. It would be slower and more expensive to fully restart the reactor than to shut it down (the equivalent of $4.6 billion versus $3.2 billion)

The closure won't be speedy. Crews wouldn't finish removing used nuclear fuel from Monju until 2022, and it wouldn't be completely dismantled until 2047. That's 61 years after construction began.


https://www.engadget.com/2016/12/22/jap ... prototype/


This reactor had one of the most uninspired designs in the world. It was basically a makeover a water-cooled design and not a design from scratch. France already developed the molten-metal, unpressurized vat design by the 1970s. But for some reason we have taxpayer milking operations such as the Monju that purport to "study" fast neutron reactors. Either come up with something better or refine a clearly superior existing design.

https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/file ... 782938.pdf

All the loop designs are plumbing nightmares and inherently less safe than pool designs:

Image

Clearly, with the loop design it is possible to lose the metal coolant which would result in a core meltdown. The pool design prevents this scenario and the amount of metal is large enough to provide passive cooling even if all the pumps fail.
User avatar
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4764
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby vox_mundi » Thu 29 Dec 2016, 12:36:28

“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.
User avatar
vox_mundi
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3371
Joined: Wed 27 Sep 2006, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby vox_mundi » Thu 05 Jan 2017, 19:44:22

U.S. plans to name nuclear reactors using potentially flawed Areva parts

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission told French nuclear power company Areva SA. it will publish as early as next week the names of U.S. reactors that contain components from its Le Creusot forge that is suspected of falsifying documents despite the company's claim that the information is proprietary.

The written notice, dated Dec. 30 and seen by Reuters on Thursday, underscores rising tension between the U.S. nuclear regulatory body and Areva after French authorities opened an investigation last month into decades of alleged forgery relating to the quality of parts produced at the forge and used in power plants around the world.

Areva sent the names of at least nine U.S. reactors with parts from Le Creusot on Dec. 15, but asked the agency not to name them due to proprietary business concerns.

Too late.

... Florida power company NextEra Energy Inc (NEE.N) said it had one reactor with one component from the Le Creusot forge but did not name the part or the reactor. NextEra owns eight reactors - four in Florida, two in Wisconsin, one in New Hampshire and one in Iowa.

Minnesota power company Xcel Energy Inc (XEL.N) said some components of the two reactor vessels at its Prairie Island plant were made at Le Creusot in the early 1970s.

In December, Dominion Resources Inc (D.N) said that its Millstone station in Connecticut has had a pressurizer from Le Creusot in service since 2006.

In addition, FirstEnergy Corp (FE.N) said its Beaver Valley reactor in Pennsylvania has steam generators and reactor vessel heads manufactured by Spain's Equipos Nucleares SA, or ENSA, which may contain some components from Le Creusot. The parts were installed in Unit 1 but will not be installed in Unit 2 for a few years.
“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.
User avatar
vox_mundi
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3371
Joined: Wed 27 Sep 2006, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby kublikhan » Thu 05 Jan 2017, 20:14:10

Sounds like the plot to The China Syndrome. Faulty metallurgy covered up by falsified evidence allows substandard parts into a nuclear power plant. Then the company responsible wants to hush up the whole thing.

During an inspection of the plant before it is brought back online, Godell discovers a puddle of radioactive water that has apparently leaked from a pump. Godell investigates further and finds that a series of radiographs supposedly taken to verify the integrity of welds on the leaking pump are identical - the contractor simply kept submitting the same picture.

He tries to bring the evidence to plant manager Herman DeYoung (Brady), who brushes off Godell as paranoid and states that new radiographs would cost at least $20 million. Godell confronts D.B. Royce, an employee of Foster-Sullivan, the construction company who built the plant, as it was Royce who signed off on the welding radiographs. Godell threatens to go to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but Royce threatens him; and later a pair of goons from Foster-Sullivan parks outside his house.
The China Syndrome
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3745
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Illinois

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby pstarr » Thu 05 Jan 2017, 20:33:13

Wasn't the so-called 'China Syndrome' merely a fictional movie theme? I didn't really happen, you know.
There's nothing deeper than love. In fairy tales, the princesses kiss the frogs, and the frogs become princes. In real life,the princesses kiss princes, and the princes turn into frogs

“Bitterness is like cancer. It eats upon the host. But anger is like fire. It burns it all clean.”
― Maya Angelou
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 25028
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby Subjectivist » Thu 05 Jan 2017, 21:05:29

pstarr wrote:Wasn't the so-called 'China Syndrome' merely a fictional movie theme? I didn't really happen, you know.



Even in that stupid movie the safeties kicked in and prevented a meltdown.
II Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
User avatar
Subjectivist
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3903
Joined: Sat 28 Aug 2010, 06:38:26
Location: Northwest Ohio

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby vox_mundi » Fri 06 Jan 2017, 15:07:08

Indian Point Nuclear Power Plant to Close by 2021

The Indian Point nuclear plant will shut down by April 2021 under an agreement New York State reached this week with Entergy, the utility company that owns the facility in Westchester County, according to a person with direct knowledge of the deal.

Under the terms of the agreement, one of the two nuclear reactors at Indian Point will permanently cease operations by April 2020, while the other must be closed by April 2021. The shutdown has long been a priority for Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, who — though supportive of upstate nuclear plants — has repeatedly called for shutting down Indian Point, which he says poses too great a risk to New York City, less than 30 miles to the south.

“Why you would allow Indian Point to continue to operate defies common sense, planning and basic sanity,” Mr. Cuomo told reporters in June.

Entergy has agreed to make repairs and safety upgrades, including transferring spent fuel to what the state says is a safer storage system.

From the Executive Summary: Review of Emergency Preparedness of Areas Adjacent to Indian Point and Millstone
1 - The plans are built on compliance with regulations, rather than a strategy that leads to structures and systems to protect from radiation exposure.

2 - The plans appear based on the premise that people will comply with official government directions rather than acting in accordance with what they perceive to be their best interests.

3 - The plans do not consider the possible additional ramifications of a terrorist caused event.

4 - The plans do not consider the reality and impacts of spontaneous evacuation.

5 – Response exercises designed to test the plans are of limited use in identifying inadequacies and improving subsequent responses.


These planning problems are more serious because of the large population concentrations near the Indian Point plant, and when the effectiveness of the plan requires a degree of public and responder confidence that is largely absent.

... it is our conclusion that the current radiological response system and capabilities are not adequate to overcome their combined weight and protect the people from an unacceptable dose of radiation in the event of a release from Indian Point. We believe this is especially true if the release is faster or larger than the typical exercise scenario.

Plume information is currently not available through operable automation systems that can show the State and counties the precise areas that are at risk.

Image

298,013 residents live in the 10-mile plume emergency planning zone.
972,748 residents live in the 20-mile plume emergency planning zone.
2,819,946 residents live in the 30-mile plume emergency planning zone.
7,150,492 residents live in the 40-mile plume emergency planning zone
11,782,401 residents live in the 50-mile plume emergency planning zone.
“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.
User avatar
vox_mundi
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 3371
Joined: Wed 27 Sep 2006, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby wineberry » Sun 08 Jan 2017, 09:17:55

What will replace Indian Point's energy, natural gas? Are we still using belchers in the NE and getting nat gas from abroad?
wineberry
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun 09 Mar 2014, 20:13:28

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby Tanada » Fri 20 Jan 2017, 05:20:12

Governor Cuomo of New York is making a lot of enemies in Westchester County with his unilateral anti-nuclear stance on Indian Point power plant.

5 minute press conference,

https://vimeo.com/198407931
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13656
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sat 21 Jan 2017, 11:49:02

wineberry - Some details on the NY situation: they may already be working on a replacement for that nuke power: take it away from other consumers. And NY doesn't even has to buy any of the infrastructure: it could sign long term supply contracts.

{Revi: take note}

Currently about as much NY electricity comes from nukes as NG. Hydro delivers about 60% of those amounts. If I were the NY gov I would look closely at TransCanada's planned sale of $10 BILLION of electricity generating infrastructure with much of it from hydro, wind and solar. And thanks to the Quebec Interconnection Grid the state of New York has access to alt energy produced in Canada. Consider what's happening already:

"Hertel–New York Interconnection: The project comprises the construction of a 58-km long, 320-kV underground direct-current (DC) line between Hertel substation in La Prairie and the Canada-United States border. The project also includes the installation of a converter at Hertel substation, which will convert alternating current to direct current to supply the new interconnection.

The new line will connect to the Champlain Hudson Power Express (CHPE) project, which is currently under study in the United States. The project proponent is Transmission Developers Inc. and the aim of CHPE is to supply power to New York City. The project includes plans to build an underground and underwater DC line between the Canada–United States border and New York City, spanning over 330 miles."
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 9945
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby Tanada » Sun 29 Jan 2017, 16:04:33

Here is an issue I first argued on this website in 2005. Time to adapt to reality and move forward. When even a place like CleanTechnica is getting aboard progress may soon be made. I find it interesting they refer to American Navy Submarines and Russian Icebreakers while completely ignoring all the Russian nee USSR Submarines, UK submarines, French submarines and American surface ships like the Aircraft Carriers and the dozen small nuclear US Navy ships that were in the fleet until the Clinton Administration scrapped them all in the late 1990's as part of their anti-nuclear navy program that also scrapped dozens of submarines. People don't realize Boll Clinton shrank the navy substantially in the process scrapping all the nuclear powered surface ships that were not Aircraft Carriers and about 40 percent of the Nuclear Submarines right along with them.

Where Nuclear Could Compete: Cargo Shipping

In cargo shipping, nuclear power could be the winner, according to a research paper, Considerations on the potential use of Nuclear Small Modular Reactor (SMR) technology for merchant marine propulsion.

We have already been using small nuclear power plants on board more than 140 submarines and some icebreakers since the 1950s. These have been quietly plying the oceans for a good 65 years with no accidents.

But even more effective greenhouse gas reductions are possible with commercial cargo shipping simply because we have a lot more cargo ships than US military submarines. Cargo ships move over 90% of global trade on the high seas. These are now running on fossil fumes.

Not only do these emit 1.12 billion tonnes (British count) of CO2, according to CleanShipping.org‘s 2008 report, but they also add a layer of about 133,000 metric tons of black carbon each year to the atmosphere. When black carbon falls on snow it decreases its albedo, the reflectivity of snow, so it adds to climate destruction in both ways.
(And if you have ever been on a ship, you know that these nasty diesel oil fumes really stink, too!)

But the most typical fossil fuel is diesel. It is going to take some effort to displace diesel oil for cargo shipping, among them familiarity, expertise, easy access to spare parts, and a global distribution network of diesel oil, according to a Marine Study looking at various clean options for shipping.

Advantages
1. Diesel engine technology is a well understood and reliable form of marine propulsion and auxiliary power generation technology.
2. The training of engineers to operate diesel machinery is well known and facilities exist for the appropriate levels of education.
3. Engine manufacturers have well established repair and spare part networks around the world.
4. Diesel fuel in all grades has a worldwide distribution network and is easily obtainable.


All of these home team advantages would need to be overcome for nuclear to displace diesel oil.

How Big a Power Plant Would a Nuclear Ship Need?

The nuclear power stations used in submarines are physically very small: under six feet wide by 15 feet tall. And at between 10 and 40 megawatts (MW), they are also smaller in capacity than what would be needed for a cargo ship.

It takes about 150 MW to power a typical cargo ship, using diesel generators.

Of course, 150 MW is a much smaller capacity than a land-based nuclear plant at typically at least 1,000 MW (1 GW) or more. It would take only 10% of a land-based nuclear plant to move a cargo ship.

Submarines and ice breakers have long used these small nuclear power plants on board. According to World Nuclear (which just updated its website in January, as the new administration came in):

“They deliver a lot of power from a very small volume and run on highly-enriched uranium (actually a uranium-zirconium or uranium-aluminum alloy). They need refueling only once every ten years, due to long core lives. Newer cores are now capable of going 30-50 years between refueling.”

Why Now?

There will be zero support for the renewable solutions to climate ruin for the next four years. The Trump administration will incentivize either fossil energy or nuclear. Better that they focus on nuclear from a climate point of view, but a nuclear application that might make a difference.

Nuclear for land-based electricity no longer makes sense in the US. No amount of support is going to bring down those costs.

Even wind and solar’s more expensive cousins, offshore wind and dispatchable thermal solar, are already much cheaper than nuclear, and they have only begun generating at utility scale in the last few years, unlike nuclear electricity.

A lot of price reduction comes from scale.

On land, mass-produced small nuclear plants, where most modern nuclear innovation is, will never gain acceptance as small plants only make sense close to load. And load is where all the people are. And all the people distrust nuclear. So, land-based nuclear is out.

But with thousands of cargo ships now plying the seas, small nuclear could provide the mass market that could drive down manufacturing costs, and make nuclear cargo shipping cost effective compared to diesel-fueled shipping.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13656
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 8 (merged)

Unread postby Synapsid » Sun 29 Jan 2017, 19:56:19

Tanada,

You could replace "small nuclear" with "LNG" in your last sentence and you'd be up to date in another topic.
Synapsid
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 775
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 20:21:50

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests