I get the feeling in this forum tha 1

[ChasBean1]

I get the feeling in this forum that many of us were at one time involved in the nuclear field but career opportunities have brought us into other fields... I myself am in HVAC as there seems to be a need for building commissioning. Not many buildings work right after they're first built. There's not many of us that are nukes anymore, and some of us that have been convinced in the past that nuclear is the way to go might now be convinced (through media and realization of the waste issue, along with the progress of cogeneration and other fossil fuel advances) that the nuclear field is near dead.

Here we are now, facing political issues, some of which no doubt result from our interests in foreign energy sources. I wonder if we have become numb to our energy production methods due to a prospering economy through a period in the nineties, a seeming resemblance of relative world peace (at least as seen by the U.S.

What are your thoughts on this? What about the 26,000 year half-life of depleted uranium (or whatever it was - I'm starting to forget things in this field I used to know!).

Your thoughts on this are welcomed and appreciated.

-CB

 

[TheBlacksmith]

Thanks to the vast ignorance of the general populace, some of whom believed you could get radiation exposure from the electricity produced in a Nuke plant, the anti-nuke movie, "The China Syndrome", Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, nuclear power is dead. Oh, add in the many unique plant design allowed in the US, so applying standards is difficult (imagine every airplane being unique and see how far commercial avaition would be!) and we have lost the promise (somewhat ambitious, but possible) of cheap (but not too cheap to meter) virtually unlimited energy.

Blacksmith

 

[vpl]

As someone who is currently involved in nuclear power, albeit from the regulator's side, I am more concerned about all the people who post in this forum on subjects that show they are not nuclear engineers having legitimate engineering questions.

In regard to the broader political issues, I worry about the "anti-nuke" publicity being given out by the "dirty bomb" people - who are using scare tactics to create and spread fear without any real understanding of the technology necessary to create such an artifact.

I wouldn't say nuclear power is dead - other countries are very much using it as a means to produce electricity. And even here in the US, there are always rumblings. NRC currently has a draft standard review plan out for public comment for reviewing applications for early site permits and is reviewing some new "standard" designs. Visit the NRC web site for more details, if you're interested: (

http://www.nrc.gov

- nuclear reactors - new reactor licensing - public involvement) Patricia Lougheed

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of the Eng-Tips Forums.

 

[TheBlacksmith]

VPL,

I guess dead is too strong a word. The hottest thing on the utility block seems to be a well built, well run and established nuke plant that be be relicenced and run as base load for pennies on the kW.hour. I just don't see any new development in the US, even brownfield, unless we overcome the "stigma", or oil hits about $100 a barrel.

Blacksmith

 

[vpl]

Blacksmith, all I can tell you is that there are indications that nuclear power isn't quite as dead as you believe. A search in NRC's ADAMS system under early site permits might provide you more information. Patricia Lougheed

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of the Eng-Tips Forums.

 

[TheBlacksmith]

VPL,

Thanks for the link. I hope nuclear power comes back. I'm currently working on turbine generator development for a new class of nuclear aircraft carrier and new commercial nukes would make the technology cheaper and give the country some energy independence. I'll continue to visit the NRC site for current information.

Blacksmith

 

[lawandy]

I wouldn't say nuclear power is dead in the UK ... yet. It certainly is in a long illness, which may prove terminal unless someone gets up and really hammers it home that wind and waves aren't going to supply all our needs!
I'm an ex-nuclear submarine engineer, and after 20 years service went to work at Sizewell B power station - the UK's first PWR. Talk about regulated to death!! The costs for public enquiry alone would have paid for a number of hospitals - all for the sake of satisfying (or not - as some people are never satisfied) the public.
Since I left Sizewell I have been employed at Rolls-Royce as we are the designers and builders of the nuclear reactors for the Royal Navy. I'm coming to the conclusion that in 20 years time the only reactors left in the UK will be those onboard our rapidly diminishing submarine flotilla.
Regards
Andy

 

[lucy5]

Nuclear power/storage/reprocessing what ever guise it comes in will be with us for a very long time to come, the expertise in engineering on the whole that has been gained from this industry is phoneme so while it is here let us all learn valuable engineering lessons from it what ever section of engineering we come from

 

[electricpete]

There has been some recent action in the senate which indicates a desire to encourage new nuclear development:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&e=19&u=/ap/20030611/ap_on_go_co/senate_energy_19

 

[mauk2]

I get the feeling that nuclear power is poised for a comeback.

The AP-600 is licensed already, the AP-1000 is well on the way to the same goal, the feds are preparing a fat package of loan guarantees, and the utilities are realizing that building nothing but combined-cycle peakers for the last 12 years was stoopid.

We NEED new baseline, especially if windmills get a solid installed base going.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Know_Nukes/

Here, go check out that list, it's a solidly optimistic pro-nuclear place. Maybe it'll cheer you up a bit.

 

[electricpete]

Just-released MIT report on nuclear power future directions. In the link below it sounds pretty positive:

http://ens-news.com/ens/jul2003/2003-07-29-09.asp#anchor3

I read summary of the same report summarized in nucleonics week and it was quite a different slant. From my understanding they were recommending abandoning all advanced development. It also sounded like they were encouraging building of more reactors similar to most recent generatioin built in US, but NOT of the already-approved AP-600 and similar new-generation reactors being built elsewhere in the world. I couldn't quite grasp the reason. If there are any other links to that report I'd be interested to see them.

 

[dspDad]

Years ago I used to say that when Jane Fonda had to take a cold shower that nuclear reactors would come back.
When California had its power crisis, voila, there was mention by politicians and newspapers that reactors might have a use.
I still am not sure if this is just wishful thinking.
The time frame between the education and having more power on-line..a lot of cold showers in between.

 

[DeLaRey]

Anybody ever heard of the PBMR project? Development in a modular nuclear power station using PBMR technology is nearing the phase of constructing a demo plant in South Africa. These power plants will be smaller but safer, modular units giving between 100-140MW. Nuclear power might be coming back in a 'small' way.
DeLaRey

 

[lengould]

Dont get your hopes too high yet. See

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-licensing/license-reviews/pbmr.html

(thanks VPL)
for Excelon's (now abandoned) application to build some PBMR's.

Anybody know of a website to review the South African progress on this machine?

I agree with Blacksmith above that the industry won't make a comeback until those who control it are prepared to be open to totally novel approaches to nu-power generation/application (of course while applying all the safety experience gained in the last 50 years).

 

[martindup]

The PBMR company website is the best bet. It is

https://www.pbmr.com

- do remember the 's' after http, it is a secure site.

 

[itsmoked]

Lets face it oil WILL hit $100 a barrel and not in the too far future. China is making a HUGE sucking sound. Only a few years ago they all rode bicycles, 470 million of them. As business heats up more and more chinese are moving to cars. This is a big part of why the price of oil is rising rapidly.
I believe our country will start looking for cheaper power soon. I'm paying $0.256 a kW-hr. I want cheaper power! I bet nuks make a come back. I hope so!

 

[ccw]

CB,
Sen. Deconcini (sp?) in an interview said the new U.S. Energy Bill has some funds for nuclear energy. IMO one of the big issues is a clear and safe waste stream, particularly for alpha spewing type waste. The U.S. DOE/NRC has failed miserably in providing for this pathway and has left the generators defensless against the anti-nuke wolves. Spent utility fuel is being stored at the generator sites. This is a bandaid approach.
Years ago I visited the U.S. TVA 1/128? scale model mock up for their Turkey Creek nuclear station design at their Knoxville TN design office. This was another "unique" design, I think. It used the concentric rings concept. The model almost filled an entire room roughly 40' x 40'. Down in the center of these ever expanding concentric rings there was the reactor. I was upset because I could not identify the reactor at all, lost in the maze of all the auxilliary support equipment. At the time I thought, "This is too complicated, nuclear power is dead."
The new "Hydrogen Economy" is going to require large nukes down by the seashore, otherwise it isn't going anywhere. If you don't believe it, go over to your nearest 8 or 16 lane express highway running full bore, park on the shoulder, get out and stand next to all of that kinetic energy, while the slip stream tugs at your clothes, and the roar of exhaust, running gear, and tire noise obscures all other sounds and hurts your ears. Hydrogen fuel for mobile equipment is like charging batteries. There will have to be large electrical power sources somewhere.
Perhaps we can eventually have enough wind and PV generation to power all those 80,000 lb trucks, but I am not buying it now. Personally I would rather get off the grid by having a Pu238 decay heat powered SNAP generator in the backyard. A couple of those scarfed on surplus, and some "radioactive" signs would provide all the homemade hydrogen, elec. power, and security one could hope for, even on cloudy, windless days. Of course the homestead might have to buy some fuel next millenium. ;-)

 

[lengould]

How times they are a'changing, when greenpeace runs the political system and the nuclear engineers are building homesteads in the hills. 8<[


Pechez les vaches.

 

[electricpete]

Nuclear waste no doubt is a challenging problem but infinitely more manageable than greenhouse gases and global warming imho. The technology to safely address the waste is already available and proven (just look at France), but we don't have any glimmer of a technology that can begin to repair the atmosphere and the climate.

I can't figure out why environmentalist who share my view on global warming oppose one of the most logical alternatives (nuclear power).

=====================================
Eng-tips forums: The best place on the web for engineering discussions.

 

[exnavynuke]

One other massive hurdle that nuclear needs to overcome: Bean-counters. The power industry has undergone a massive shift in the past decade - from the mindset of a utility with a guaranteed profit (no matter how inefficiently run), to that of electricity as a real-time trading commodity.

Utilities (for the most part) are no longer building power plants; independent power producers are. Calpine alone has probably built more generation in MW than all the regulated US utilities combined in the past 10 years.

That said, if you are an investor, and want to have a 1300 MW power station built, would you rather spend 1 billion, and have an easily permitted gas turbine plant returning profits in 1.5 years?

Or would you rather spend 2 billion and have a difficult to permit nuclear plant that may take as long as 3 years to begin returning profits?

True, the fuel costs will even things out over many years, but the MBA's only seem to look ahead about 24 months... and they're the ones running the show nowadays.