News and Discussions > Nuke News
Nuclear Plants Closing
SloGlo:
--- Quote from: Bonds 25 on Feb 20, 2016, 11:16 ---Why spend 70 million on "Fukushima Mods" that really don't decrease your core damage risk much? Especially when you're 3 1/2 hours from the coast.......
Oh wait, because the NRC says you have to ;D
--- End quote ---
yins got a lake eerie oar michigan sew nammy yule sea why.
GLW:
pretty much on schedule:
--- Quote from: GLW on Jul 30, 2013, 07:47 ---"Renaissance in Reverse: Competition Pushes Aging U.S. Nuclear Reactors to the Brink of Economic Abandonment,"
....a review of the remaining U.S. fleet reveals that 38 reactors in 23 states are at risk of early retirement, with 12 facing the greatest risk of being shutdown, according to a major new analysis by Mark Cooper, senior fellow for economic analysis, Institute for Energy and the Environment, Vermont Law School.....
....The 12 reactors (in alphabetical order) were found to be at greatest risk of early retirement and their risk
factors are Clinton (selling into a tough market), Davis-Besse (large number of risk factors), Fitzpatrick (high cost but offset by high market clearing price), Fort Calhoun (outage, poor performance), Ginna (single unit with negative margin, existing contract), Indian Point (license extension, state opposition), Millstone (tax issues), Nine Mile Point (site size saves it, existing contract), Oyster Creek (already set to retire early), Palisades (repair impending, local opposition) Pilgrim (large number of risk factors, local opposition), and Vermont Yankee (tax issue and state opposition).
http://216.30.191.148/atriskreactors.html
to be objective the author does have an agenda and it is not favorable to making electricity via nuclear fission,...
the author would like to claim 38% of the current on-line reactors are at risk and settles on 12% being essentially "imminent",...
I might go with 6% in the next six years,...
but really, they should have gone anyhow, there is some concern, even on my part, about extending some of these old dogs out twenty or more years,...
it would be nice to actually see a new construction plant come on line in the next six years,...
but historically, we are way too far behind on the sustainability curve,...
woo hoo some more,.... :-\
--- End quote ---
three years ago we had about 100 plants on line,...
since then we've lost VY, Kewaunee & CR3,...
by 2019 we also lose Pilgrim and Fitz and IIRC Oyster Creek goes away too,...
--- Quote from: GLW on Jul 30, 2013, 07:47 ---
I might go with 6% in the next six years,...
--- End quote ---
I'm right on schedule,...
and the apologists are wrong, still wrong, six years later:
--- Quote from: Dave Warren on Jan 29, 2010, 02:38 ---As the Second Coming spoke and delivered his prophecy, the true believers admired his vision, while the negative minded nukeworker bloggers prepared their ridicule.
This post is one prime example. He takes a positive step toward enhancing nuclear power and all we get on this blog is negativity. All I can say is TYPICAL.....
--- End quote ---
not happening before January 2017,....not happening at all,...
Rerun:
Dont do it and you have no nuke plants at all
GLW:
--- Quote from: Rerun on Feb 21, 2016, 11:52 ---Dont do it and you have no nuke plants at all
--- End quote ---
don't do what?!?!?
we've covered a few points of contention on this thread,...
Rerun:
Fukushima items
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version