Nuclear Power

[Everon 0]

Considering today's energy demands, along with controversial global warming claims, etc. wouldn't it be wise to reconsider investing in fission as a clean, efficient energy source? The Three Mile Island accident basically put an end to nuclear facility expansion in the US, but in reality it really shouldn't have been considered an accident, as the design of the reactor was well known to be very "touchy," and the resulting events were predictable of Babcock and Wilcox reactors at the time (among other things.) About one half of TMI unit two's core did actually melt, with no resulting catastrophe, and this was 26 years ago.

Without going into too much detail at this point, what's your opinion on this? There's research into (safer) fusion reactors, but it is not a priority. The nuclear industry stalled after TMI, and there are insurance and cost issues as well. Would investing in nuclear generating facilities by the utility companies be viable today?

[dixieskydiver 0]

It's time to fire up some new ones. The newer designs are much safer these days. I'll also be interested to see how the big Fusion experiement goes in France in the coming years.

Dixie
HISPA #56 Facil Rodriguez
"Scientific research has shown that 60% of the time, it works every time."

[billvon 3,118]

>Without going into too much detail at this point, what's your opinion on this?

Nuclear power is safer than any other form of baseline power out there. Coal power plant pollution kills about 30,000 people a year; coal power plants emit about 100 pounds of uranium a year directly into the air. Coal mine fires destroy entire towns. But that's considered 'safe' for some reason.

I'm all for increasing our nuclear power investment. Thorium reactors, CANDU reactors, PBMR reactors and even the more conventional AP600 designs all have a place in the near term. Hopefully the future will see development of all these sorts of designs, so we have some real-world experience with them and decide which one is really safest/cheapest/easiest to operate.

[Viking 0]

with the newer designs is there still a problem with highly radioactive spent fuel rods?

I swear you must have footprints on the back of your helmet - chicagoskydiver
My God has a bigger dick than your god -George Carlin

[billvon 3,118]

> with the newer designs is there still a problem with highly
>radioactive spent fuel rods?

Depends. There's almost always a problem with nuclear waste of some sort. But thorium reactors don't require as much refueling; they generate about 1/4 the waste of a regular reactor, and the waste has fewer nasty isotopes in it when it's spent. The CANDU reactor is similar. It uses more fuel than a thorium reactor, but the fuel is natural uranium (i.e. no enrichment required) and the wastes it produce generally have a shorter half-life.

Again, compare it to a coal fired power plant. A coal fired power plant puts more uranium and thorium into the _air_ than a thorium reactor produces as waste. And we breathe it in. Compare that to nuclear waste, which is treated like it's deadly (which it is) and stored in pools then buried far underground.

[Sen.Blutarsky 0]

I favor building new plants provided they will be funded 100% by the consumers of their power. If either my rates or my taxes would escalate to pay for new construction in districts where I’m not drawing, or if I am convinced a project is mostly pork, then I’ll actively campaign and contribute money against. The technology can be safe, and I don’t suffer from NIMBY syndrome - I grew up near Big Rock (Charlevoix), Pallisades (South Haven) and D.C. Cooke (Bridgman), where coincidently my brother-in-law is a nuclear technician.


Blutarsky 2008. No Prisoners!

[goose491 0]

I say we just start treckin' around with nylon jackets over wool sweaters.

My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

[arlo 0]

i operated at a three-unit PWR plant for almost 11 yrs. i think they're great. not very efficient, though (~34% efficiency, if i remember correctly).

(how's THAT for not too much detail?)

[jasonRose 0]

Nuclear power will be the future just wait a few more years..

Some day I will have the best staff in the world!!!

[davedlg 0]

Another thing that I am convinced we will see in the not too distant future is nuclear powered water desalinization plants.

Nuclear powered desalinization plants are already used in dry parts of the world to provide the cleanest water possible to large populations. As we use up more and more of the limited resource that water is, coastal populations will be forced to consider this option. Unfortunatly today, I cannot see it happening, because no one would want to know that their water was coming from a nuclear source. I really dont understand the stigma against nuclear power in this country... One day, we will have to "get over it" and realize that it is the only way and it is safer and cleaner than coal!

[racer42 0]

I have my hopes set on nuclear powered Twin Otters and Skyvans. I mean start up costs would be a bitch, but think about it.... no more shut downs for refuel

L.A.S.T. #24
Co-Founder Biscuit Brothers Freefly Team
Electric Toaster #3
Co-Founder Team Non Sequitor
Co-Founder Team Happy Sock

[billvon 3,118]

>no more shut downs for refuel . . .

Well, at least fewer shutdowns. They were flying some nuclear-powered aircraft a while back, but 1) they only had enough power to cruise, not to climb and 2) flight crews would rotate out of the plane when their dosage hit a set limit.

[Kris 0]

Quote

i operated at a three-unit PWR plant for almost 11 yrs. i think they're great. not very efficient, though (~34% efficiency, if i remember correctly).

Well, for starters, Arlo, your being around that much radioactivity answers some questions I had about you.

*if anyone needs me, I'm changing my name and moving to Greenland now*

Sky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and
Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™

[SpeedRacer 1]

They say the Simpsons is the longest running animated series ever.

It started in 1989. I think you heard a lot more of the "NO NUKES" type back then, hence the Mr. Burns character running the nuclear power plant, (that creates 3-eyed fish) etc. maybe times have changed now in terms of peoples attitudes.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[racer42 0]

C'mon Bill, work with me here. A shut down every 18 months or so would be OK. And I'm pretty sure pilots are capable of taking substantially larger doses of radiation than regular people.

Now we need you to solve the climb rate thing.

L.A.S.T. #24
Co-Founder Biscuit Brothers Freefly Team
Electric Toaster #3
Co-Founder Team Non Sequitor
Co-Founder Team Happy Sock

[billvon 3,118]

>C'mon Bill, work with me here. A shut down every 18 months or so
>would be OK. And I'm pretty sure pilots are capable of taking
>substantially larger doses of radiation than regular people.

True. And that way they could save money on vasectomies.

>Now we need you to solve the climb rate thing.

No problem! Have the jump plane circle the field and drop 13,000 foot long rope ladders. Just snag one and climb up!