Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby EdwinSm » Fri 08 Mar 2019, 07:25:47

Problems at Hunterston B (UK). About 10% of graphite bricks in the core are found to be damaged. That seems to me to be a very high precentage.

The first pictures have emerged of cracking in the graphite bricks which make up the core of nuclear reactors at Hunterston B Power Station in Ayrshire.

Reactor three has not produced electricity since cracks were found to be forming quicker than expected.

About 370 hairline fractures have been discovered which equates to about one in every 10 bricks in the reactor core.


But they want to crack on with producing more power (until 20% of the bricks are damaged..

EDF plans to ask the regulator for permission to restart with a new operational limit of up to 700 cracks.


https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-47485321
EdwinSm
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 503
Joined: Thu 07 Jun 2012, 03:23:59

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby GHung » Mon 25 Mar 2019, 08:35:38

Federal Government Ups Its Commitment To Plant Vogtle, Secretary Perry Visits

Secretary of Energy Rick Perry visited Plant Vogtle for the first time Friday, to announce the federal government would guarantee $3.7 billion more in loans to the nuclear power plant’s expansion project.

Perry was joined by Governor Brian Kemp and Secretary of Agriculture and former Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue for the announcement. They also witnessed the “tuopping out” of the containment vessel for one of the new reactors. That’s the building that actually holds the nuclear reactor.

The plant, in Waynesboro, is the only one under construction in the country, and would be the first new one in more than 30 years. With $8.3 billion in loans already guaranteed by the Obama administration in 2011, this brings Vogtle’s total federal support to $12 billion.

The expansion of Plant Vogtle with nuclear reactors 3 and 4 has had a delayed and expensive history. Both units were already supposed to be on the grid by now, and the project’s current budget is double the original estimate, at more than $25 billion, split between four owners, the largest being Georgia Power.

Secretary Perry touted his strong support for nuclear energy as part of an “all of the above energy strategy” of the administration before a crowd of Vogtle employees: “Ladies and gentleman look around you, this is the real new green deal. That’s what we’re looking at folks. This is America. This is what we can do together.”

“If you want clean energy that helps our environment, there is no cleaner source than nuclear energy. This is it,” he said, calling nuclear and coal the only two sources of energy “that are on site and uninterruptable.” .......

https://www.wabe.org/federal-government ... ry-visits/
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2845
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby StarvingLion » Thu 04 Apr 2019, 11:46:26

Now that Ghung The Fake Solar Peasant has chimed in with no solution, I can only wonder how long it will be before Father Kaiserjeep who tells lies-to-children will torture us with his latest sermon.

Nuclear is doomed for the following irrefutable reason:

Mating an extremely sensitive nuclear fission core to large mechanical equipment is an exercise in futility. It requires the equivalent of Mission Control in Houston plus 5000 Marines to guard the place. As the debacle in Benghazi demonstrated, once the mortar rounds start landing in the "guarded" compound, the nuclear reactors will be abandoned and melt down.

Its only a matter of short time until Bankrupt France admits the truth: She can't afford to keep their nukes running and they can't afford to shut them down properly. They will abandon every one of them due to insolvency, and they will all melt down and blow up.
Cog is a ChickenShit.
StarvingLion
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1329
Joined: Sat 03 Aug 2013, 17:59:17

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Sat 06 Apr 2019, 08:03:42

StarvingLion wrote:They will abandon every one of them due to insolvency, and they will all melt down and blow up.

Nuclear plants that become un-economic are shut down and decommissioned. They do not blow up. Vermont Yankee the one nearest me has been shut down for a while now(2014) and all the fuel has been removed and is being placed in storage casks on site well ahead of schedule. The bad thing is they did not build a new state of the art nuclear plant next to it as a replacement instead moving to natural gas etc.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9772
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby StarvingLion » Wed 10 Apr 2019, 11:16:40

vtsnowedin wrote:
StarvingLion wrote:They will abandon every one of them due to insolvency, and they will all melt down and blow up.

Nuclear plants that become un-economic are shut down and decommissioned. They do not blow up. Vermont Yankee the one nearest me has been shut down for a while now(2014) and all the fuel has been removed and is being placed in storage casks on site well ahead of schedule. The bad thing is they did not build a new state of the art nuclear plant next to it as a replacement instead moving to natural gas etc.


State of the art as in totally useless in a Post-Peak Oil world. There are no designs with proper security and automation.
Cog is a ChickenShit.
StarvingLion
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1329
Joined: Sat 03 Aug 2013, 17:59:17

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Wed 10 Apr 2019, 11:27:21

You are entitled to your opinion on that.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9772
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby dissident » Sun 14 Apr 2019, 20:47:39

A reactor design that for some reason has been neglected is the fission-fusion hybrid. Instead of trying to get all the energy from pure fusion in a tokomak, a fissile blanket is deployed to be irradiated by the fast neutrons that are produced in abundant quantities by the tokomak plasma even if no break-even is reached. An advantage of the hybrid design is that it can burn actinides. So hybrid reactors are able to burn all nuclear waste. Molten metal fast neutron fission reactors can burn through the longer lived waste but not the actinides. (Nuclear waste actinides decay completely in about 300 years).

https://www.neimagazine.com/news/newsru ... or-6168535
User avatar
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5544
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby diemos » Sun 14 Apr 2019, 21:36:12

It hasn't been neglected. It's just an added complication that's not needed for a fusion test bed.

It also doesn't do anything to solve the problem of neutron damage in the inner wall of the tokamak.
User avatar
diemos
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 833
Joined: Fri 23 Sep 2005, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby EdwinSm » Mon 15 Apr 2019, 04:02:06

About eight (8) years after the accident:- Fukushima: Japan begins removal of nuclear fuel from damaged reactor

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-47933031

This is good news, but it occurs in a time of relative prosperity and stability, so I wonder in nuclear reactors could ever be made safe in a collapse situation. I suppose the minimum would be to remove the rods from the cores and store in water.
EdwinSm
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 503
Joined: Thu 07 Jun 2012, 03:23:59

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby diemos » Mon 15 Apr 2019, 09:28:20

If Mad Max arrives abandoned nuclear reactors are going to be the least of your worries.

We had three nuclear reactors melt down and even for the surrounding towns panic and fear did the most damage. Currently the wildlife there is running rampant. It's not exactly a blasted moon scape.
User avatar
diemos
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 833
Joined: Fri 23 Sep 2005, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Mon 15 Apr 2019, 10:44:28

The legacy of Godzilla and the dozens of Grade "B" through Grade "D" monster movies lives on. Most people were exposed at a young and impressionable age to the BS about nuclear energy. Those who would debate endlessly and without any evidence were obviously frightened the most.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6094
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: Wisconsin's Dreamland

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby dissident » Mon 15 Apr 2019, 19:27:57

BTW, fusion-fission reactors are the safest design by far. It is very easy to disable the tokomak plasma. It is hard to get it to be self-sustaining, but shutting it down can be done in microseconds. Without the tokomak high energy neutron source the fission inside the thorium blanket shuts down. No control rods could ever achieve this sort of neturon flux termination. The reactions inside the thorium blanket are not self sustaining by construction. The blanket is not able to form any sort of sub-critical and critical mass for self-sustaining reactions.
User avatar
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5544
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby diemos » Mon 15 Apr 2019, 21:56:41

Decay heat from fission products in a fusion-fission hybrid is just as big a problem as in a conventional fission design. If you don't keep the cooling going after shutdown it will melt down. There's no benefit to shutting the neutron production down in microseconds versus seconds for control rods.
User avatar
diemos
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 833
Joined: Fri 23 Sep 2005, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby aldente » Sat 20 Apr 2019, 04:02:30

thanks for the hint Killjoy
Image
impressive !
User avatar
aldente
permanently banned
 
Posts: 1559
Joined: Fri 20 Aug 2004, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby Tanada » Sat 27 Apr 2019, 11:11:55

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: 15441
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby dissident » Sat 27 Apr 2019, 12:15:08

Tanada wrote:Video


I agree with the gist of this video. No Congress critter has a clue about physical reality.

But electrolytic batteries are not the only way to store energy from wind and solar. Wind and solar can be used to generate NH3 and NH3 can be used by power cells of all scales to generate electricity in situ. NH3 can be stored easily even if it is caustic. H2 by contrast, has serious storage problems and basically leaks through metal container walls. Having a chemical product instead of just raw electricity from wind and solar plants removes both the intermittency and non-peak demand generation problems. The economy is already configured to use liquid fuels, so NH3 does not require a totally brand new infrastructure.

Another benefit of chemical storage is that all the solar and wind plants can be located where they maximize output. So I don't buy the fear mongering about land use. Cover the deserts with solar panels. No farmland or even biologically active real estate will be lost. (Forget about trying to paint deserts as equivalent to forest land in terms of biomass).

The electric car as fossil fuel generators argument is weak. Air quality (i.e. cancer and metabological syndrome health impact) improvement in urban areas by using plug in hybrids is justified all by itself. Only now are we seeing gasoline engines approaching 40% efficiency. Over most of the last 40 years they have been less than 25% efficient. Using power plant electricity is an effective 42% efficiency. So conversion to plug in electric vehicles has been justified for decades. It is a net CO2 reduction.

No, Chernobyl was not an idiotic design. The criminals (likely working for NATO to destabilize the USSR) who conducted the unauthorized experiment on increasing power yield are 100% responsible for the "accident". Any nuclear engineer with qualifications would have known that a runaway risk existed due to the positive void coefficient. This experiment was not conducted and even designed by qualified people. Such experiments can only be conducted in experimental reactors with controls specifically created to deal with the experimental risks. Running experiments on operational power plants that take them way outside their engineered operational scope is a pure criminal enterprise.

Fukushima was a case of criminal negligence since they could have easily placed the backup generators on a hill about 135 feet from the plant that was much higher than any tsunami water rise but chose to keep them in the basement as per the original GE plant design. GE designed the plant for the USA where there is basically zero tsunami risk.

Chernobyl and Fukushima cannot be used to exclude nuclear power as the main choice to combat CO2 emissions. Both were ancient water moderated and cooled designs that are simply not relevant today. Build molten metal vat designs and neither of the "accident" scenarios will apply. Unpressurized vat reactors that do not use water and have enormous passive cooling built in. They can't lose coolant even if it is sodium. Sodium can burn in air but it does not explode. Tens of tons of sodium will take vastly longer to burn off than it will take for the reactor to cool down. And there is plenty of time to respond to any fire since the threat of meltdown is not there in the first few days. Fukushima was doomed as soon as the backup generators got flooded and it took only a few hours to get meltdowns at all four reactors.
User avatar
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5544
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby StarvingLion » Sat 27 Apr 2019, 17:28:50

Nero Fiddles while Rome Burns

The Dissident Doodles with 60's Nuclear Junk While Giant Oil Fields SharkFin.

When will someone tell The Dissident that Fission Reactors + Ponzi Counterfeit Fake Money can't coexist.

We are only a couple of years away from the obvious: Boeing JetLiners crashing into France Nuclear Reactors

Its inevitable.
Cog is a ChickenShit.
StarvingLion
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1329
Joined: Sat 03 Aug 2013, 17:59:17

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby kublikhan » Sat 27 Apr 2019, 18:19:35

I agree with what dissent said batteries not being the only way to store electricity. Other storage options include pumped hydro, compressed air, thermal, etc. Any one of those would have orders of magnitude less requirements for the mining of materials.

Also, not everyone in the US is following in the steps of Germany & Vermont and closing their nuclear power plants. Illinois, the state with the largest nuclear generation in the country, is moving in the opposite direction. Instead of prematurely closing plants it is extending lifelines to allow nuclear to compete with cheap gas & subsidized wind.

Dec 4, 2016 - Illinois State Legislature passed The Future Energy Jobs Bill. The bi-partisan bill allows Exelon’s Clinton and Quad Cities nuclear power plants to remain open, saving 4,200 jobs and over 22 billion kWhs of carbon-free power each year, more than all of the state’s renewables combined. These two plants were in jeopardy of closing because even at a low cost of five cents or so per kWh, they were losing a combined $100 million per year because they could not compete with cheap natural gas and wind energy that is subsidized at 2.3¢/kWh. Exelon had drafted a press release announcing the closure of the two plants that was to be issued last night if the bill failed. Instead, these plants will be operating for at least another 10 years, producing over 200 billion kWhs of carbon-free energy.

Nuclear power produces over half of Illinois’ electricity, all with no carbon or other polluting emissions. The enormous negative impact of shutting down nuclear plants because of an artificial market finally got through to the Legislature, since the generating capacity of these nuclear plants would have to be replaced by natural gas or coal, doubling the State’s total carbon emissions and ensuring that the state would not meet its emissions goals anytime soon. This is just what happened in New England after the unnecessary closing of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant in 2014. Their clean nuclear energy was replaced entirely by natural gas and out-of-state purchases, the local community was devastated economically, and electricity prices have increased. The fate of these Illinois nuclear plants had drawn the attention of the entire country, including the leading climate scientists, since Illinois generates more zero-emissions electricity than any other state, 90% of which comes from nuclear power, and climate scientists are in favor of nuclear power.
Illinois Sees The Light -- Retains Nuclear Power

MAY 30, 2018 - U.S. energy regulators said federal rules do not preempt Illinois’ program to provide money to nuclear reactors that provide carbon-free energy to help prevent the units from shutting early, according to a filing with a federal appeals court. Several nuclear reactors in the United States are in danger of shutting for economic reasons because cheap and abundant natural gas from shale formations and subsidies paid to renewable energy projects have reduced power prices to their lowest levels on record in several parts of the country. Illinois adopted the ZEC program in 2016 to keep some nuclear power plants in service to help meet the state’s greenhouse gas reduction goals after Illinois power company Exelon Corp said it would shut its Clinton and Quad Cities nuclear plants because they were losing money.

In addition to Illinois, New York, Connecticut and New Jersey have also adopted rules to subsidize nuclear power plants. Pennsylvania and Ohio are considering similar legislation to keep reactors in their states in service.
Illinois can subsidize nuclear power if it wants: U.S. FERC brief

Mar 27, 2019 - Illinois lawmakers have set the wheels in motion to allow for power provider Exelon’s nuclear fleet, as well as wind and solar power providers, to sell energy to a state authority that opponents say will give it preferential pricing over coal and natural gas sources. The legislation passed unanimously.
Illinois lawmakers move ahead with bill to benefit nuclear power plants
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Master Prognosticator
Master Prognosticator
 
Posts: 4498
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Illinois

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby eclipse » Sat 22 Jun 2019, 02:58:34

I have a new favourite reactor. For years it has been the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor (LFTR) but now I'm moving to the Molten Chloride Salt Fast Reactor (MCSFR).

SAFETY: It *cannot* melt down as it is already a liquid. If the fuel overheats it expands and the atoms move apart, reducing fission and cooling the reactor. It is self-limiting and self-cooling. Also, a Molten Salt Reactor requires power to hold the liquid fuel up in the reactor. If the power fails, the liquid salt drains out of the reactor into safety tanks that shed nuclear-decay heat and absorb neutrons (stop the fissioning). Win win. How does it hold up in the reactor core? Power supply runs a fan blowing freezing gas across the drain pipe. The hot liquid salts only have to get under 450 degrees to 'freeze' and trap the hot molten salt above. In a power failure, the fan stops blowing, the 'frozen' salt plug melts and the reactor fuel drains away to safe drain tanks under the reactor where it spreads heat and dumps neutrons into the surrounding drain tanks.

The diesel generators at Fukushima were knocked out and failed to cool their solid fuel reactor, causing a meltdown. But when was the last time gravity failed? ;-) Power failure = automatic shut down, with or without technicians. Even if someone shot an armour piercing bullet through the reactor, the liquid salt would drain out of the core and into the containment room and the liquid salt dries hard at 450 degrees C. It wouldn't burn and boil off across a continent like Chernobyl did, it's stuck in the salt crystals.

BREEDERS EAT NUCLEAR WASTE! They effectively 'recycle' spent fuel, getting 90 times the energy out of once-through reactors. This means the UK's spent fuel rods could run her 500 years, and America's would last a millennia! Uranium from seawater is 'renewable' as geological processes and erosion constantly top it up. It means nuclear power is now renewable — that uranium from seawater will last billions of years.

NO SEPARATION OF REAL WASTE FOR DECADES! While breeder reactors 'eat nuclear waste', nuclear waste is a complex mix of stuff and some of it will eventually become fission products — the broken atoms that must one day be extracted from the reactor. Fortunately we can melt this final waste into ceramic tablets and store it under the reactor park for 500 years and then it is safe. It's only 1 golf ball per person or 1.25 Olympic swimming pools for 70 years of clean energy for 25 million Australians. But here's the real miracle — the MCSFR can run for 40 years or more without extracting wastes, but other molten salt reactors like the LFTR must do it all the time. The diagram above shows a Reprocessing chemical plant off to the left of the reactor. That's more expensive industrial pumps and equipment per reactor, and more expense. The simpler MCSFR is cheaper.

NO BLANKET REQUIRED. The LFTR requires a nuclear 'blanket' around the reactor. If nuclear waste is like wet firewood that must be put around the edge of your firepit to 'dry out' (absorb neutrons), the blanket is the brick ledge you built to sit wet firewood on without burning. It's a special drying rack around your firepit. In a LFTR version of the molten salt reactor, it's an extra layer of expensive industrial plumbing around the reactor core, where the fertile actinides sit and soak up extra neutrons and become fissile (our wet firewood drying metaphor). But think of the MCSFR as such a big super-hot bonfire, you can just chuck the 'wet firewood' straight into the fire. The physics and chemistry of fast reactions in chloride salt is simpler than fluoride salts, and allows a simpler more elegant reactor with a lot less plumbing. The LFTR only burns thorium feed, but the MCSFR uses any actinide or waste. More wastes and warheads and fuels can just be dumped in! Got some chunks of plutonium from a bomb? Into the fire! Old fuel rods from a reactor core? Cut them up, and in they go!

ANTI-PROLIFERATION: Other waste-eating breeder reactors use various fuel reprocessing steps outside the reactor. This could be as many as 7 chemical reprocessing stages! Some worry that these stages could be fine-tuned to siphon off bomb-grade material. That's a nuclear weapon's proliferation risk — or it *could* be to the very paranoid. (1.) The MCSFR just outright bypasses the whole reprocessing stage. Old fuel rods are cut up a little, then thrown directly into the hot molten salt core, zirconium cladding and all. The coating on the fuel rods will one day bubble out as particulates. It also helps bypass anti-proliferation laws in America. As nuclear engineer Ed Pheil told me, "Conversion of SNF to Chloride de salt fuel is not reprocessing according to NNSA. This process supercedes the ANL processes for pyro-processing by reducing it from 7 chemical steps to 1 chemical step. Pyro-processing involves Plutonium and uranium separations, and we separate nothing, but oxygen, so no proliferation concerns."

More here: http://www.elysiumindustries.com/

Half hour youtube here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqVt8cxx-44

(Footnote 1: I'm convinced that almost any reactor is better than coal, and any modern breeder reactor that eats nuclear waste is better than any normal reactor. There are lots of great breeder reactors I like, including the Integral Fast Reactor and other Molten Salt Reactors. Good governance and inspection regimes and video surveillance would prevent any proliferation risks during fuel reprocessing, as bomb-making equipment and processes stand out like a sore thumb! This isn't a 'good vs bad' list, but a best of the possible good.)
Dr James Hansen recommends breeder reactors that convert nuclear 'waste' into 1000 years of clean energy for America, and can charge all our light vehicles and generate "Blue Crude" for heavy vehicles.
https://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/recharge/
User avatar
eclipse
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Fri 04 Feb 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Sydney

Re: THE Nuclear Power Thread pt 9 (merged)

Unread postby eclipse » Sat 22 Jun 2019, 03:52:02

StarvingLion wrote:Nero Fiddles while Rome Burns

The Dissident Doodles with 60's Nuclear Junk While Giant Oil Fields SharkFin.

When will someone tell The Dissident that Fission Reactors + Ponzi Counterfeit Fake Money can't coexist.

We are only a couple of years away from the obvious: Boeing JetLiners crashing into France Nuclear Reactors

Its inevitable.


We can build mostly plane proof reactors, of even build them underground.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--_RGM4Abv8

But even if the plane still hit the reactor, there are various kinds of reactors. Molten Salt Reactors would vaporise and send hot salt around for a bit, but as the reactor is already a liquid the fuel would crystalise and fall back to the ground, not float off around the continent.
Dr James Hansen recommends breeder reactors that convert nuclear 'waste' into 1000 years of clean energy for America, and can charge all our light vehicles and generate "Blue Crude" for heavy vehicles.
https://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/recharge/
User avatar
eclipse
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 403
Joined: Fri 04 Feb 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Sydney

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests