Help | Contact Us
NukeWorker.com
NukeWorker Menu New Nuclear Plants Status

Author Topic: New Nuclear Plants Status  (Read 123687 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sloughter

  • Guest
Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #25 on: Jun 18, 2009, 12:53 »
One of the best statistics comes from the Sierra Club; they claim that there are 30,000 coal-related deaths every year. That works out to about 1,000,000 deaths to coal-related diseases during the past 35 years i.e about when the unofficial moratorium on nuclear power was declared. Anybody know how many people have died from the nuclear energy fuel cycle in the same period of time? I have incorporated this in an article I am writing called The Role of Nuclear Power in North America.

Interesting statistic: According to a recent World Health Organization Report, so far 23 years later, 40 people total have died because of Chernobyl, a plant with a tarpaper roof, just like American plants! By the way, I am a geologist and can state categorically that the "China Syndrome" has never occurred, could never occur and will never occur; it is great entertainment, lousy science.

I predict in my article with several large reactor complexes on Hudson Bay, it should be possible to bring in 1500-3000gigawatts of installed capacity in 100 years at a cost of 8c/kWh in constant dollars. Anyone wanting a preliminary copy of the article, feel free to get in touch.
The DOE has a great page that tracks the New construction process better than I can, see the link below.

http://www.nuclear.gov/np2010/neScorecard/neScorecard.html

Offline Jimmykroffa

Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #26 on: Jun 18, 2009, 08:35 »
DTE Energy in SE Michigan applied for a license for FERMI 3.....

Fermi2

  • Guest
Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #27 on: Jun 18, 2009, 10:38 »
DTE Energy in SE Michigan applied for a license for FERMI 3.....

Fermi3 will never be built.


Offline Jimmykroffa

Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #28 on: Jun 18, 2009, 11:20 »
True. With the decreased load from the closing of the auto plants, and the push for energy efficiency the need for it will probably never be there. Also DTE's cost to build Fermi 2 really put a hurting on their finances when it was being built. I don't think they are prepared to take on that financial burden given the current state of the economy.

Fermi2

  • Guest
Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #29 on: Jun 18, 2009, 11:41 »
Regardless of the economy DTE is too bottom line of a company to build another Nuke. If they told the Shareholders they were going to pat them 3 dollars a share and in building a nuke they could pay only 2.99999999 a share they simply won't do it. There's nothing wrong with that by the way as their purpose in life is to make money for the shareholders. IIRC the first so many utilities that ask for a license are going to get some sort of tax break or incentive for even considering it. DTE is a small utility and any breaks they can get are welcome.

Mike

Offline MeterSwangin

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 152
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: -77
  • Gender: Male
  • Somebody get decon!
Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #30 on: Jun 18, 2009, 09:50 »
New nuke is dead.

Requires 3 vital ingredients:  1) massive funding from credit markets, 2) stong enough customer demand to persuade Wall Street to invest, and 3) timely government review and approvals.

That is clearly oh-for-three.  Credit markets are on life support, demand is in the crapper, and the NRC has a 10-year plan to start the 3 year CLA reviews...but is too dysfunctional to issue wet tissue.

Oh, and about the ultimate bogie; Yucky Mountain.

fuggetaboutit.

Offline Adam Grundleger

Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #31 on: Jul 30, 2009, 09:09 »
Makes me wonder:  How many license extensions will the current plants be granted?  Seeing as the entire plant is replaced part by part several times over the proposed forty year lifetime, it would seem justifiable to extend current plant life nearly indefinitely.  The current round of license extensions seems to support this.  At least a few plants will be operating when eighty years old...

Besides, once the grid reaches a certain critical point of overload/undersupply there will be no choice but to build new plants.  Once it becomes less fashionable to push the fallacy of wind/solar/biomass/nonsense, there will be only a couple of options left: nuke, coal, or gas. 

I'm more worried that the longer we wait to build, the fewer experienced new construction veterans will be around and the fewer domestic manufacturers will still be in the nuke business.  Do you really want to work at a plant labeled, "Made in China?"  Having first hand experience with receipt of Chinese materials and products, that possibility scares me.   

Offline HydroDave63

Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #32 on: Jul 30, 2009, 09:59 »
At least a few plants will be operating when eighty years old...

No Rx vessel has operated more than 40 years, and even with extension won't exceed 60 years. Annealing would likely be required past that point due to fast neutron embrittlement.

Some European experience on this topic is found here

« Last Edit: Jul 31, 2009, 07:12 by HydroDave63 »

Offline Adam Grundleger

Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #33 on: Jul 31, 2009, 03:26 »
I know many of the components we source currently are foreign (German, French, Korean, Japanese), but many are of good quality.  It's the historically dishonest suppliers (China and much of Eastern Europe) that bother me.  Regarding Rx vessels, I wouldn't be surprised to see lots of new options (including annealing and changes to the regulations) to keep current plants operating. 

What about new construction personnel?  Almost all the people I've worked with with any new-con experience are pushing the retirement envelope and many others are fast approaching it.  There are a lot of unrecorded experiences that would be invaluable during the assembly of a new plant.  I've heard horror stories about the mistakes made in the '70s and '80s during the last go-around, and I'm in no hurry to repeat them.   True, the new designs are supposed to be simpler and more practical to assemble, but any misstep these days will be catastrophic to a new project.  The window to act before the construction workforce ages away and is restaffed with greenhorns is going to close soon. 

I really see a future of rolling blackouts and hundred year old plants pushing electrons if things don't turn around.  That or a new wave of coal plants, which nobody outside of a mining community wants. 

Offline Preciousblue1965

  • Very Heavy User
  • *****
  • Posts: 687
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 524
  • Gender: Male
  • "It is good for you, builds character"
Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #34 on: Jul 31, 2009, 07:23 »
I know many of the components we source currently are foreign (German, French, Korean, Japanese), but many are of good quality.  It's the historically dishonest suppliers (China and much of Eastern Europe) that bother me.  Regarding Rx vessels, I wouldn't be surprised to see lots of new options (including annealing and changes to the regulations) to keep current plants operating. 

What about new construction personnel?  Almost all the people I've worked with with any new-con experience are pushing the retirement envelope and many others are fast approaching it.  There are a lot of unrecorded experiences that would be invaluable during the assembly of a new plant.  I've heard horror stories about the mistakes made in the '70s and '80s during the last go-around, and I'm in no hurry to repeat them.   True, the new designs are supposed to be simpler and more practical to assemble, but any misstep these days will be catastrophic to a new project.  The window to act before the construction workforce ages away and is restaffed with greenhorns is going to close soon. 

I really see a future of rolling blackouts and hundred year old plants pushing electrons if things don't turn around.  That or a new wave of coal plants, which nobody outside of a mining community wants. 

it is almost as if you work for a company that deals with new construction standards of nuclear power plants and the requirements for how stuff has to be built.  Amazing.  Oh and the autoclave company you left is missing you.
"No good deal goes unpunished"

"Explain using obscene hand jestures the concept of pump laws"

I have found the cure for LIBERALISM, it is a good steady dose of REALITY!

Offline Adam Grundleger

Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #35 on: Aug 01, 2009, 11:14 »
Yes, amazing.  There are a lot of shops in Atlanta missing me, but Wolf Creek sure is happy to see me.  Just in time for the workup prior to the fall outage, too. 

And, yes, codes and standards work gives a very different perspective on the situation.  It cuts a different cross section than almost any other role in this business.  An ANII is in no way important to plant operation, but almost every aspect of plant schedule affects how the inspection work goes down.  Between covering the material receipt, handling, welding, NDE, changes to the code and NRC NUREGs, etc., there's a whole different view than from a supplier shop or from the plant personnel.  Not better, just different.     

The point I was trying to make is that if the utilities don't find a way to get off the fence and break ground while there are still Americans in the nuclear manufacturing and assembly business then we as an industry either will need to reinvent our manufacturing and assembly ability or outsource the whole darn thing.  It's bad enough looking at material certifications written half in pictographs.  The first time I see welding documents written that way will be the last.

withroaj

  • Guest
Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #36 on: Aug 02, 2009, 10:36 »
...

Once it becomes less fashionable to push the fallacy of wind/solar/biomass/nonsense, there will be only a couple of options left: nuke, coal, or gas. 

...

I don't think we'll actually turn to nuclear power as a mainstay until we run out of butterflies and baby dreams to Repower America.  :P

By the way, good to hear you've been successful post-Navy.  I envy people of your intelligence and adaptability.  L-ville y'all.
« Last Edit: Aug 02, 2009, 10:42 by withroaj »

withroaj

  • Guest
Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #37 on: Aug 03, 2009, 09:35 »
That day is still far off.... you can see the brand new wind farm Duke is building west of Cheyenne, WY, "green" stimulus money included....with the turbines made by SUZLON in India  >:(

I've got some family friends cashing in on those WY wind farms near Elk Mountain (turns out thousands of acres of windswept cow pasture can be put to use for more than shooting prairie dogs and coyotes) and in my recent road trip to Iowa I saw a few hefty wind farms out in the corn and soybean fields.  Wyoming certainly has plenty of open, windy space to hold tons of wind turbines; and I'd love to buy some land in/around the Saratoga (WY, not NY) hobo pool area just in case geothermal takes off.

I still think that you can't beat nuclear when it comes to MWe/acre.  For example:  Horse Hollow vs Turkey Point (I think I used these two stations in support of this same argument last year, so I figured it'd save me some poking around).

SSBN640Blue

  • Guest
Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #38 on: Aug 04, 2009, 04:42 »
Everything you want to know about new nukes is on the NRC website here:
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors.html
The yellow box on the left of the page has good charts and maps.

Everything you want to know about License Renewal and Power Up Rate is on NRC website here:
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/ql-reactors.html
Scroll down to the LICENSING section in the table.

ddm502001

  • Guest
Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #39 on: Jan 01, 2010, 12:04 »
I was out in Washington State last fall, saw the big wind farm outside of Ellensburg but that power can't come to the NE or make much difference to the midwest as it is being used locally.  Wind farms are arising in Iowa and Nebraska but the immense area they need for a few hundred mw is astounding as is the maintenance on these marvels, I have heard they leak lubricants everywhere requiring monthly shutdowns for inspection; a large station of a few hundred units could be a high dollar fiasco.

ddm502001

  • Guest
Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #40 on: Jan 01, 2010, 12:18 »
I wanted to add, our second unit at Callaway seems to be done, that is it won't be coming to fruition.  The company has decided the power is not currently needed and they have stopped all work on the COLA selling the large forgings back to Areva.  There is hope among the managers that Unistar will pick up where Ameren has dropped out but that seems unlikely.

With the loss of so much manufacturing in the US we may be revisiting the decline of nuke of the 80's.  There is just too little funds available to build these multi-billion dollar monsters.  With that there is now the specter of carbon cap & trade, the loss of major dirt burners along with canceled nukes may mean more rolling black/brown outs.

Content1

  • Guest
Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #41 on: Jan 01, 2010, 12:32 »
When people find themselves cold (global warming hoax) and in the dark from brownouts and taxed to death (literally, death taxes end this year but comes back with a vengeance as the Bush tax cuts expire) and capped and traded taxes start in the Nuclear Option may suddenly look better.  One can only hope at this time the current bunch of left wingers will be voted out this year before the next successful terrorist attack and before our economy collapses.   Start buying your gold and silver, it may be the only currency of value the government cannot print on demand.

drayer54

  • Guest
Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #42 on: Mar 14, 2011, 07:31 »
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/14/us-nrg-nuclear-idUSTRE72D7VH20110314

I was afraid of stories and press like this to follow. I think we need to get a nuclear lobbying agency to fly Charlie Sheen to Libya and get him to throw some rocks with the rest of them...
Also, hire Lindsey Lohan to do something... anything really..

Offline navynukedoc

Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #43 on: Mar 24, 2011, 02:09 »
It looks like we have someone in the upper ranks gunning for our side through all this mess.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-03-15/chu-says-u-s-doesn-t-need-to-suspend-new-nuclear-plant-permits.html
"Be courteous to all, but intimate with few, and let those few be well tried before you give them your confidence" - George Washington

Offline Shayne


Offline tritiumgun

Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #45 on: Aug 11, 2011, 02:16 »
from what i gathered as of yesterdays local news press its probly looking like wb2 will be 2013 at the earliest.. which isnt no shocker..and bellfonte is still up in the air til next weeks meeting. and i dont think it will be easy on them to get it up and running like they think it will be.

drayer54

  • Guest
Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #46 on: Aug 15, 2011, 09:15 »
I got this in my ANS newsletter. Interesting speech from John W. Rowe, the CEO of Exelon. His take on the future of nuclear and some of the issues going forward.

Offline Rennhack

Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #47 on: Aug 16, 2011, 12:34 »
I got this in my ANS newsletter. Interesting speech from John W. Rowe, the CEO of Exelon. His take on the future of nuclear and some of the issues going forward.

Thanks fro the file.

Offline wingnut

Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #48 on: Sep 16, 2011, 11:57 »
AREVA snags Bellefonte job. Gets going after WBN2 is running--at least thats the current wisdom here in TN.

Offline Gamma Glue

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 39
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 8
  • Gender: Male
  • If you're not first, you're last!
Re: New Nuclear Plants Status
« Reply #49 on: Feb 09, 2012, 03:49 »

 


NukeWorker ™ is a registered trademark of NukeWorker.com ™, LLC © 1996-2021 All rights reserved.
All material on this Web Site, including text, photographs, graphics, code and/or software, are protected by international copyright/trademark laws and treaties. Unauthorized use is not permitted. You may not modify, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit or distribute, in any manner, the material on this web site or any portion of it. Doing so will result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law.
Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Code of Conduct | Spam Policy | Advertising Info | Contact Us | Forum Rules | Password Problem?