Nuclear energy - does it scare you?

[thirdworld19 0]

This is a great article about Terrestrial (Nuclear) Energy.

http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2008&month=02

[Amazon 7]

Nuclear energy does not scare me in the least.
What scares me is the lack of quality that has been used by greedy contractors and construction worlers not building the damn things as they were designed.

Substandard construction and materials have been used and corners were cut. Knowing this I would require ANYONE who designed one or built one to live within 5 miles of the plant they designed and built. That requirement would extend for 5 generations for their entire family.

Perhaps they MIGHT build it better if they had to live next to it

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

That requirement would extend for 5 generations for their entire family.

you sure are a big fan for punishing people for things they had nothing to do with

why do you hate children?

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Knowing this I would require ANYONE who designed one or built one to live within 5 miles of the plant they designed and built. That requirement would extend for 5 generations for their entire family.

Perhaps they MIGHT build it better if they had to live next to it

So what if we want them to build a second reactor?
Wouldn't you prefer experienced people on the next project? Or would they then have to live within 5 miles of the new plant? Of course, then the motivation is to get the next contract before the current one's deficiencies show up.

We could go even further and insist all people live within 5 miles of their workplace. This will dramatically lower fuel consumption (and free will).

[livendive 8]

Not in the least. In my opinion, it's our best option.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[Darius11 12]

If it is done right it is a much better option then corn and an option that would solve many if not all energy issues. The problem is managing the waste and of course safety.

My trust in corporations and the government doing something right and not just right for their pockets is at an all time low.

So it does not scare me at all if I knew the people doing it were ethical people but the reality is that I will never know that for sure.

Is that confusing enough?

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Amazon 7]

You both know exactly what I was talking about. Those who would have something to lose MIGHT just make better decisions in the design and construction of the plants.

It may be more expensive to build something better.. but building one of these things "for the ages" makes far more sence than building it for short term profit and greed.

The Trojan plant in Oregon was closed because the materials used were substandard and the cost of replacing them was just too prohibitive for PGE to replace.

Of course... they had a political hot potato on their hands.. AND the people had a referendrum to close it for safety after the cracks in the pipes came to light...after which the executive types made the decision to just shut it down rahter than expend so much money...as a "business" decision

PGE still pawned off the debt on the people in the long run though

That said... I STILL think it is a very good option.. I just dont trust the people who build the things.

[kelpdiver 2]

indeed - but you need a realistic solution to encouraging/mandating proper design. We need the plants badly and anything that needlessly slows them down is not helpful.

[Amazon 7]

I think shoddy construction and the problems it has caused... has done more harm ... and done more to colors peoples judgement than any other factor.

[TrophyHusband 0]

doesn't scare my at all. i've made a lot of money working in nukes.

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[Amazon 7]

I bet you are fun on night jumps

[TrophyHusband 0]

substandard construction can and does happen in every field. it has nothing to do with the nuclear industry. i cannot speak for when the plants were built, but currently workmanship and materials are held to the highest of standards. you sound kinda like you have an ax to grind. i wouldn't worry about any more trojans being built in the future and I would have no problem living within five miles of a plant, although I grew up just down river from trojan so i'm used to it.

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[shropshire 0]

Quote

I bet you are fun on night jumps

10 built in Glo-Sticks. 5 on each hand?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[Amazon 7]

Quote

you sound kinda like you have an ax to grind

Yeah.. I am a Downwinder...

http://www.doh.wa.gov/hanford/publications/history/release.html

[Gawain 0]

If France and Japan can each get 75%+ of their energy from nuclear power, then I see no reason why we can't do the same.

So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh
Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright
'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life
Make light!

[Everon 0]

If properly overseen I have would have no fear at all of even living next door to a nuclear facility, but the industry itself has obstacles that it cannot overcome - some of which could lead to disaster. Operators aren't trained to properly handle common mode failures (two or more simultaneous, independent failures - which led to the TMI accident, for example). Those who could comprehend the intimate workings of the "machine" that is the reactor are usually overqualified to be operators. The NRC is comprised mostly of people not familiar with the technology. No one has been able to come up with a good solution for the disposal of spent fuel. The enormous costs of construction and INSURANCE make it virtually unapproachable by the utilities, etc.

Fear it or not - it's not a viable solution for our future energy needs.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I think shoddy construction and the problems it has caused... has done more harm ... and done more to colors peoples judgement than any other factor.

Actually, the rather sensational coverage of 3 mile island did more to color opinion than anything else.

[Everon 0]

Quote

Actually, the rather sensational coverage of 3 mile island did more to color opinion than anything else.

It may have been sensational but it was quite accurate. Both Metropolitan Edison and the NRC were in complete denial of the condition of the reactor despite clear evidence to the contrary. The public quickly caught on to what it viewed as lies. That coupled with the fear of an unseen killer that is radiation resulted in the negative public opinion of nuclear power in general.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

If France and Japan can each get 75%+ of their energy from nuclear power, then I see no reason why we can't do the same.

The NIMBY factor and environmentalists....who help stir up the NIMBY factor.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[TrophyHusband 0]

things that have happened in the past aren't very likely to happen in the future. we've come a long way since 1972. tmi has also brought some things to light in the nuclear industry. your concerns are valid, but they are equally as valid for any type of plant or factory that is built in this country.

"Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama
www.kjandmegan.com

[jimmytavino 16]

well, in areas that heavily populated, it would be hard to find the remote , far -away places to build reactors...

But where space is more available, such plants, should be considered.. Nuclear to Electric.. to batteries,,,,makes sense to me, for vehicles...
Nuclear for lighting and many other electrical needs, sure beats burning,,,, coal and oil....

as for spent nuclear materials...i recall talk of burying it in some high security, reinforced concrete and steel, billion dollar bunker, under some mountain somewhere... I would dismiss that idea, as expensive, unwanted, and not really a permanent solution...
So we can't bury it, we can't sink it to the bottom of the oceans, we can't evaporate it...
but can we "air freight " to a place like maybe.... the moon????? or is that silly????
How about using the space shuttle to place highly customized capsules of such matter, into space orbit????

i dunno.. i suppose we could just shoot it all out into infinity.... but that would seem like "interstellar littering" to me, and might not be well appreciated by any galactic neighbors, who may be monitoring us....

but afraid of Nuclear energy?????

damn right... that fission/fusion is serious business...
can it be harnessed and tapped for the benefit of the planet??? I think history has proved that it can.

Can safety be assured, and can the "lunatic fringe", be kept at bay..? that is the real question regarding nuclear,, in today's volatile world....
i do hope that the world can work out the issue.


work for peace, peacefully


jmy

[1969912 0]

Quote

........as for spent nuclear materials...i recall talk of burying it in some high security, reinforced concrete and steel, billion dollar bunker, under some mountain somewhere... I would dismiss that idea, as expensive, unwanted, and not really a permanent solution...
So we can't bury it, we can't sink it to the bottom of the oceans, we can't evaporate it...

Current plans are to permantly entomb our (US) waste in deep tunnels under Yucca Mountain in Nevada (Yucca Mountain Project). They were supposed to start accepting waste in 1998, but numerous lawsuits and political opposition have continually delayed startup. As of now, there is no official start date anymore, AFAIK. The project is still being funded through the NWPA*.

*The NWPA (Nuclear Waste Policy Act) became federal law in 1982, requiring nuke plants to pay a tax of 1 cent/Mw-Hour of energy produced to support development of a permanent disposal site for commercial spent fuel. The tax revenue is ~$300 Million/year, or ~$8 Billion in total so far. Yucca Mountain was the site/method selected.

Yucca will never receive waste unless it's done as temporary, monitored, retrievable storage, and even then, it's unlikely. YMP should be shut down and abandoned as a repository, IMHO. Permanent geologic disposal is probably politically infeasible in the US. Monitored, retrievable storage in secure concrete bunkers of some sort seems like a good bet, but there's no absolute assurance that "we" will still be monitoring/protecting/controlling the stuff for the next 10+ thousand years.

Reprocessing/recycling is what I'd like to see. Only ~5% of the uranium in LWR fuel is "burned" before the fuel assemblies are removed and replaced with new ones for various good reasons. That means ~95% by weight (and approx. by volume) of nuke plant waste is unused fuel. Reprocessing is not allowed in the US at the current time due to proliferation concerns (~1% of spent fuel by weight is Pu-239 (good bomb stuff, and also one of the most persistent waste components)), but that was entirely a political decision, not technical. Several other countries reprocess their spent fuel, using the Pu in what's called Mixed Oxide fuel, which burns essentially all of the Pu to produce power. Also, it's possible to change several other long halflife isotopes into less persistent one's through "transmutation". Highly radioactive (short halflife) fission products like Cs-131 and Sr-90 (both ~30 yrs) can be isolated and managed without the kind of long-term concerns associated with Pu (24,000 yrs). Even with reprocessing, though, there's still some nasty waste that's unusable, but separating the various fission products allows them each to be dealt with based on their individual properties/hazards/uses instead of just burying or storing entire fuel assemblies.

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[Royd 0]

That requirement would extend for 5 generations for their entire family.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote

you sure are a big fan for punishing people for things they had nothing to do with

why do you hate children?

She believes in visiting the sins of the father even unto the fourth or fifth generation.

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Yucca will never receive waste unless it's done as temporary, monitored, retrievable storage, and even then, it's unlikely. YMP should be shut down and abandoned as a repository, IMHO. Permanent geologic disposal is probably politically infeasible in the US. Monitored, retrievable storage in secure concrete bunkers of some sort seems like a good bet, but there's no absolute assurance that "we" will still be monitoring/protecting/controlling the stuff for the next 10+ thousand years.

Reprocessing/recycling is what I'd like to see. Only ~5% of the uranium in LWR fuel is "burned" before the fuel assemblies are removed and replaced with new ones for various good reasons. That means ~95% by weight (and approx. by volume) of nuke plant waste is unused fuel. Reprocessing is not allowed in the US at the current time due to proliferation concerns (~1% of spent fuel by weight is Pu-239 (good bomb stuff, and also one of the most persistent waste components)), but that was entirely a political decision, not technical. Several other countries reprocess their spent fuel, using the Pu in what's called Mixed Oxide fuel, which burns essentially all of the Pu to produce power. Also, it's possible to change several other long halflife isotopes into less persistent one's through "transmutation". Highly radioactive (short halflife) fission products like Cs-131 and Sr-90 (both ~30 yrs) can be isolated and managed without the kind of long-term concerns associated with Pu (24,000 yrs). Even with reprocessing, though, there's still some nasty waste that's unusable, but separating the various fission products allows them each to be dealt with based on their individual properties/hazards/uses instead of just burying or storing entire fuel assemblies.

Great post!

I have a bet with some retired Air Force Colonel who oversees 'shiny metal death'-related things (who's also a PhD nuclear engineer), that the US will completely eliminate our CW stockpile before *any* nuclear fuel is stored in Yucca Mountain.


~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~


Even though nuclear energy neither "scares" me nor am I opposed to expansion and investment in civilian nuclear power, "scare" isn't a very useful word in the context. It makes it a polarized issue. Polarized issues like this tend to get tied up in courts -- both legal & the court of public opinion.

Even if you (general, non-specific "you") think most opponents are irrational, dimissing the concern of someone for his or her family, their health, and the property value of their home is rarely an effective tactic to accomplish the policy goals one desires. (Ask Sen Mitch McConnell, R-KY, how well it's worked on delaying construction of the destruction facility at the Blue Grass Army Depot.)

The linked article is good. (NB: Tucker doesn't use the word "scare".)

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[Amazon 7]

Quote

She believes in visiting the sins of the father even unto the fourth or fifth generation.

I believe in making the fuckwits who design and build them ACCOUNTABLE. Since nothing else has worked in the past... PERHAPS if they felt it would have a DIRECT effect on THEM and THEIR CHILDREN.. they would have more to lose..The engineers and construction companies would be invested in the proper design and building of the thing so that it is and will be safe for those who live around it.....i.e. themselves. That is far better than just the ability to walk away and leave a mess behind that OTHERS will have to deal with. In the case of radioactive materials... that can be a VERY long running mess.

In the case of building a nuclear plant that fails because of design flaws.. or using materials that are substandard.. to make a short term windfall profit... the radioactivity will indeed be visted on someones childrens childrens children. I just want them to be in the mix as well.