Nuclear Power Needs To Go

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Yep, we need to rid ourselves of over 50% of our generation capacity tout de suite.

Do you reject the idea that we need to get rid of them at all?

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Do you reject the idea that we need to get rid of them at all?

As I think I've said before on this board, your stance reminds me of a joke that was made about the German Green Party when they were getting started in the early '80's. Roughly translated it said "The Greens get their electrical power directly from the wall receptacle," as if to say that their self-righteousness alone somehow ensured that their power was spontaneously and cleanly generated at the receptacle.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by Boreas

Do you reject the idea that we need to get rid of them at all?

I would love to get rid of the coal burning plants west of me in Ohio. Then my well water would not be so acid. But we have already spent the money for a neutralizer.

Why is this NIH factor so strong? The CANDUs have had no real accidents, they could probably burn the spent fuel we have stored all around the country because they do not need enriched uranium.

I might as well join this discussion since the thread has been so nicely sidetracked.

[Pio1980]

We already know the pitfalls of the present system approaches already in service re nondisposable residue and system failures.
Let's inject some "safe" plausible nuclear power proposals into the discussion, anyone?

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[sheltiedave]

Pop, there is no perfect safe nuclear reactor design, and the liquid salt reactors, pebble bed reactors, and smaller inert gas cooled reactors all have an Achilles heel as well.

Our national electrical power grid is designed and engineered to supply power utilizing large, high density, constant power utility plants, and nuclear is the best in this regard.
Over the years, the NRC has succeeded in creating layer after layer of regulations so taxing that meeting all the regs represents over 70% of new plant costs, and close to 50% of operating costs.

There is all kinds of information about incidents, and bad plants. The real bad ones are legendary... The sticking pressure relief valve and lack of operator recognition that caused the TMI core meltdown. The same plant behavior at Davis Besse about 18 months prior had no incident because the operators, without totally recognizing the situation or root cause, still implemented the correct immediate action. The time the control room at Clinton plant in Illinois played "scram Sam", and reset the scram breaker in a controlled area by reaching into the area with a broomstick. The five year period where Millstone I and II did an emergency refuel every maintenance cycle, exceeding the allowed heat storage capacity of their spent fuel pools. Davis Bessie having a boron corroded reactor vessel head crdm steel layer less than 3/64" thick, not the as built 2" thickness. The coke can left in the bottom of the Detroit Fermi plant during construction, which caused a fuel channel failure when the plant was started up.

All these are quite well documented, in the public domain, and are available to read at the NRC.gov librar

[merrylander]

The Canadian Heavy Water CANDU reactor would never have the problems they had in Japan because when the power fails the control rods drop, shutting down the reactor Also it does not need to be shut down to re-fuel it India is planning (if they have not done it already) to run thr one they bought on Thorium.

That said all those labs built during the cold war were not power stations although Mound did design and build small power plants for satellites.

[sheltiedave]

Hook your house up to solar, wind, or spend $20k for the solid geothermal heat/cool cycle that actually works. Just don't get the batteries you need for the solar because lead, cadmium, and lithium are as bad for the environment as anything.

We need to develop a base of 50% of our base power from nuclear , with effective regulations, and go from there. We have to be masters of our energy future, and this platform is readily attainable in a decade. As Rob pointed out, the Candus are a fairly effective platform with natural fuel.

[noonereal]

Originally Posted by sheltiedave

Hook your house up to solar, wind, or spend $20k for the solid geothermal heat/cool cycle that actually works. Just don't get the batteries you need for the solar because lead, cadmium, and lithium are as bad for the environment as anything.

We need to develop a base of 50% of our base power from nuclear , with effective regulations, and go from there. We have to be masters of our energy future, and this platform is readily attainable in a decade. As Rob pointed out, the Candus are a fairly effective platform with natural fuel.

town told me no to wind

You need two acres of empty land to get an OK....

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by sheltiedave

Hook your house up to solar, wind, or spend $20k for the solid geothermal heat/cool cycle that actually works. Just don't get the batteries you need for the solar because lead, cadmium, and lithium are as bad for the environment as anything.

We need to develop a base of 50% of our base power from nuclear , with effective regulations, and go from there. We have to be masters of our energy future, and this platform is readily attainable in a decade. As Rob pointed out, the Candus are a fairly effective platform with natural fuel.

There is no safe way to operate a nuke and no way to safely store the waste. You will disagree but history proves my point.

[sheltiedave]

The fact is all energy consumption has major health and environmental consequences. We need to be open and truthful, which has not been the case for the past century.