Plantagenet wrote:Sure.
new nuclear power plants worldwide
Now, would you or Socrates please provide a link for Socrates' claim that "many" countries are phasing out nuclear power so it is "less and less of a concern".
Thx.
C8 wrote:Whoa- I am not part of that debate, ask Socrates, I am just genuinely interested in learning more about this explosion of nuclear plants planned by China and thought your list was a good starting point- especially since I don't know what the numbers behind each plant listed means, Thanks for the link- your check is in the mail!
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada wrote:C8 wrote:Whoa- I am not part of that debate, ask Socrates, I am just genuinely interested in learning more about this explosion of nuclear plants planned by China and thought your list was a good starting point- especially since I don't know what the numbers behind each plant listed means, Thanks for the link- your check is in the mail!
PWR=Pressurized (light) Water Reactor
BWR=Boiling (light) Water Reactor
ABWR=Advanced (light) Boiling Water Reactor
PHWR=Pressurized Heavy Water Reactor
The number that follows is the number of MW(e) the plant produces at full rated power, 1600 would be pumping out 1,600 MegaWatts electric current every second.
Anything else just ask and if I don't know myself I can probably point you in the right direction.
Plantagenet wrote:Now, would you or Socrates please provide a link for Socrates' claim that "many" countries are phasing out nuclear power so it is "less and less of a concern".
socrates1fan wrote:The spent fuel will be radioactive for a very long time, however it won't be catastrophically radioactive for very long. After a certain point the radioactivity of the spent fuel becomes irrelevant to people (unless people come into direct contact with it).
mmasters wrote:95% of waste can be recycled...
In Germany a 2 week blackout would cause most of our nuclear facilities to collapse and will contaminate most of our country. I don't know about other countries...
cephalotus wrote:
Countries in different "green colors" are phasing out nukes or have already done so:
cephalotus wrote:I do not care about reactors in China.
cephalotus wrote:socrates1fan wrote:The spent fuel will be radioactive for a very long time, however it won't be catastrophically radioactive for very long. After a certain point the radioactivity of the spent fuel becomes irrelevant to people (unless people come into direct contact with it).
I will name just one example of radiaktiv waste:
There is around 500,000kg of plutonium "waste" from nuclear reactors around.
This has a radiocative half time of 24,000 years, so it will still by very harmful in 100,000 years.
It's also enough to make around 85,000 Nagasaki type bombs. (Plutonium bombs are quite easy to make, even 3rd world countries like India or Pakistan have been able to do so many years ago...) With access to Plutonium Iran would already have its nukes...
You can use Plutonium as a fuel in nuclear reactors (typical designes are cooled by liquid sodium), but sadly those reactors tend to have many security problems, so most nations have stopped to use them. Russia instead is building a new Plutonium reactor in Obninsk. I would bet some of my money that this reactor will melt down during the next decades, zombi apocalypse or not...
---
If it would be easy to store nuclear waste and if that waste would be ahrmless in just 300 years, nations would not spent several billions of $/€ on research for long term storage facilities...
socrates1fan wrote:In a post-peak world ... unless you have a highly modern civilization you aren't going to be making any nukes anytime soon.
Plantagenet wrote:socrates1fan wrote:In a post-peak world ... unless you have a highly modern civilization you aren't going to be making any nukes anytime soon.
We are in the post-peak world right now. Global conventional oil production hit a plateau in 2005 and hasn't gone much higher since.
And yet somehow civilization hasn't collapsed. And dozens of nuclear power plants are being built right now, even though we are in the post-peak world.
Imagine that!
Plantagenet wrote:I don't have time to check all of these claims, but some of your data is clearly out-of-date and wrong. For instance, Spain isn't "phasing out nukes"---Spain recently voted to issue licenses to extend the life of all their operating reactors.
Other countries you mention are EU countries whose credibility isn't the best.
These same EU countries also promised to cut their CO2 emissions, something that will be impossible to do if they shut down zero-emission nukes and replace them with coal-fired power plants as Germany is doing.
It certainly is possible a few EU countries will phase out nuclear power 2030....
but it is also possible that as the climate changes and they flip back to wanting to cut CO2 emission
and as peak oil bites harder and energy becomes even more expensive they will change their minds yet again.
[/quote]I don't care either. But the facts don't change depending on whether or not you care about them...and its a fact that China and Russia and other countries are still building lots of new nuclear power plants.
socrates1fan wrote:In a post-peak world not much of anyone is going to be making nuclear bombs my friend. You can have all the plutonium you can imagine, but unless you have a highly modern civilization you aren't going to be making any nukes anytime soon.
cephalotus wrote:The world now agrees that we do not care about climate change anymore and this includes Europe.
cephalotus wrote:
peak oil?
We have so much fossil fuel resources to heat up our planet to make parts of it unliveable. The peak oil problem does not exist.
cephalotus wrote:it is fact that China's nuclear power addition during the last years is almost negligible.
cephalotus wrote:Maybe they will expand their nuclear fleet significantly, maybe not.
dissident wrote:Only if you are all total morons. Will the backup generators, that only need to run for a few days, disappear or be comprised?
Russia, China and likely India will proceed with nuclear power plant construction and the eventual transition to molten metal fast neutron breeder designs. Hysterical idiots in the west will wake up about 10 years from now when the magical alternatives have demonstrated their inability to replace declining fossil fuel production on any timescale that matters to the economy.
Germany will be burning coal in the next 10 years like crazy as well. Who cares about the mother of all threats called anthropogenic climate change, we just all want our precious insecurities to be coddled.
Plantagenet wrote:Dream on. Scientists remain very concerned about climate change.
Dream on. Global conventional oil production has been on a bumpy plateau since 2005.
Dream on. As of 2012, the People's Republic of China has 16 nuclear power reactors spread out over 4 separate sites.
Dream on. China currently has 26 nuclear power plants under construction.
cephalotus wrote: only a collapse would stop the CO2 emissions....Building nukes will not change anything on this.
Plantagenet wrote:
Nukes have zero CO2 emissions. Of course building nukes would reduce CO2 emissions. Its quite simple mathematics. Replace existing fossil fuel power plants with solar and and wind and nuke that have Zero CO2 emissions and you get......zero CO2 emissions...
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests