A Solution To Our Problem

[alphadude]

go fusion, since we are dreamin anyway!  it all gets passed to us the consumer  so who cares how much they cost?  windmill farms are on the same level as redlights for terrorists- god help us if they all turn green or red at the same time!

[littlebittime]

I have a question...

La Feet... is your CO OP pro Nuke?  Most that I've seen are not.  Just wondering...

(for those reading along... that question holds no judgement either way... I am just wondering)

[Nuclear NASCAR]

Here's one that is pro-nuke  http://www.kepco.org/ .  They're 6% owners of Wolf Creek.

[littlebittime]

Alphadude...
Making the mental leap that I am not in support of an integrated and diverse energy policy would be an error on your part.  
(I can sense that you're not used to being wrong... but in this case ... you are)

The fact of the matter is, I am in favor of a diverse energy plan...  
Which, in my opinion, includes building more nuke plants, as well as putting windmills where they will be most effective (Midwest?) and solar cells where they are most effective (south?), and reducing our dependence on fossil plants when and where we can - note, I didn't say eliminate, but rather reduce... it also includes researching improvements and new discoveries, and I for one would like to see our government revisit the issue of "recycling" spent fuel.  
(note to any media people out there:   wouldn't it be novel to do a different kind of nuke story... perhaps a "recycle spent fuel" story?)

What I repeatedly said  - and read this slowly this time so you comprehend the context - is, I am not in favor of forcing companies - regardless of their size -  to buy your excess power without you paying your share to support the grid.    You want to be a supplier of public power... then buy a power plant and follow all the rules and regulations and pay all the bills that go along with that - or join a CO OP.  You want to produce power... then produce it for yourself and be happy with the knowledge that you are doing your part to reduce the power dependence on "big boy companies"... period!

[LaFeet]

LittleBit

I am lucky for the CO-OP bit.  I do not have to purchase additional meter.  My company will also provide a 0% interest loan provided I build a system large enough to exceed my power needs.

I agree with the expansion and diversification idea.   We could benefit greatly by strategically placing different power generating technologies where they could best perform.

How do you feel about fuel cell cars?

[SloGlo]

too bad that gm just pulled the plug on the ev.  iffen that had been succesful, it wooda created a nice draw on the grid forcing utilities to generate more.... of course it'd be tough on thems what's generating their own juice, but they could keep on burning dinos to get to the piggly wiggly.

[LaFeet]

Hey SloGlo.....

where at is this Piggly Wiggly at ?

And do they have nuclear hotwings ?

ANd who knows - may be some day we will "...all have our own atomic power plant in the backyard..." to provide the necessary Hydogen for fuel cells.   Until then, I could get by on an electric car...... putt putt puttt   scuze me I mean  weer were ware

[littlebittime]

Well I've heard of "hybrids" (HEV)... and everyone I've talked to that has one loves them.  I noticed them being used a lot in Paris, when I was there this past summer... but also noted that they were not as popular in Normandy where towns were further apart.   Not sure why that is...  I think Hummer did a cross country trek with a hybrid didn't they?  I'd be interested in seeing what happens in the future... they look promising.  

As for the hope of fuel cells... well... from the little I've read about them they look interesting.  But if I got the gist correctly isn't there an issue with carbon dioxide when making the fuel?  All CO aside, I see a bigger issue blocking any "green" vehicle, and I'm inclined to think perhaps we should focus on getting more hybrids on the road now... because by 2020 - the date I read when fuel cell vehicles are supposed to be available -  even if 100,000 fuel cells vehicles are sold the positive effect that they may have on the environment will be dwarfed by conventional vehicles.  Big manufactures aren't steering away from conventional vehicles toward hybrids even now.. hybrids are simply another option.  

And I have to say as an SUV owner... I am, in a very real sense,  part of the problem there not part of the solution.   I suppose my only saving grace is that I work from home    

Oh and I have a little British car '76 - leaded fuel even...  Very Bad Littlebit ... bad girl!  


You never did mention if your Co Op was pro nuke.  

[alphadude]

finally, god that took for ever!  logic did set in!

how can i be wrong when i play the antagonist!  

hev are already on the maket in the US.  they are not cost effective since they are considered a luxury item-ie limited production.  the govt does give a $2k rebate but that dont offset the added expense of the car.

As far as forcing utilities to buy power, with de reg- a fiasco in its self- I guess we shouldnt force BIG business (enron types)to do any thing should we- its not reganomics!  besides some of us do own part of an elect. co-op. so i do own some of the T&D.  Besides who pays for the utilites to put up those power line? -look in the mirror- you pay for it every month.

does anyone here really know whats involved in fuel recycle? or is it a black box to most?  (im speaking of the chemical process and waste management issues?)  its not a clean process and the mention of fuel reprocess is just a cover for more big business rape of the american consumer.  folks uranium is almost free- the push to reprocess is a cover to take utility waste cause we dont have anyplace to put it. reprocess is  taking dollars (from us) and returning pennies. reprocessing is left over from the 50s mentality when U was big bucks.  there is so much plut and U in the world today that there is no market for it.  

[SloGlo]

alphadude... so yer sayin that there is no cost incentive for the reprocessing of fuel, is that correct?

[littlebittime]

Alphadude,
it must be so nice having your intellect.  what with knowing everything there is to know about everything it's amazing you are just a D&D engineer and not GOD.  Perhaps you should put in an application - Pet Cow knows of a website.  

how can i be wrong when i play the antagonist!

As for being the antagonist...  You haven't actually give an opposing position on anything I've said nor have you answered any of the tough questions with a coherent and logical response... you just keep coming up with silly comments after silly comments... that not an antagonist that's ADHD...

hev are already on the maket in the US.

The unfortunate scenario resurfaces for you.. and once again you are having trouble with reading comprehension... perhaps if I type slower...

I said "I saw many hybrids in France"  I said "I know people with them... and the owners of the hybrids seem to like them."

 Which btw pretty much implies that I know they are on the market.  (seeing is believing and all)

 
they are not cost effective since they are considered a luxury item-ie limited production.  the govt does give a $2k rebate but that dont offset the added expense of the car.

Umm, Since you can purchase the Honda Civic Hybrid for $20,000  - without the 2k rebate  and you can buy the Honda Civic Sedan for 18,000 - (Math alert... remove shoes if you must)  oddly enough... 20,000 minus 2,000 equals ... ummm... lets see... 18,000  -  can you be so kind as to explain to me again, oh brilliant one... What exactly your point was?  And while you're at it... where's the added expense you were pointing out?  I'm no engineer mind you... but well,  provide we aren't talking figures higher then 20 ... I can do simple math.

[littlebittime]

And here's your other brilliant point.... minced

As far as forcing utilities to buy power, with de reg- a fiasco in its self- I guess we shouldnt force BIG business (enron types)to do any thing should we- its not reganomics!  besides some of us do own part of an elect. co-op. so i do own some of the T&D.  Besides who pays for the utilites to put up those power line? -look in the mirror- you pay for it every month.

Jumping on the "Enron = bad" mantra is as sad and uninspiring as the "9/11" mantra ok.  Were there bad apples in Enron?Yes.  But the logic doesn't follow that then all big companies are Satan breeding grounds.  Grow up.   Life isn't that simplistic.    
Your recent ownership of a co op is creative... but not believable... and just for the record I am aware that a portion of my bill that goes to support the utility and various aspects of it's daily running... your point?  
Let me remind you that you stated you wanted to be off the grid and that if you are off the grid then you aren't paying the utility a monthly bill... therefore, and try to keep up here, you aren't paying for the lines any longer... I AM!  Which brings us back to ... you can make power for yourself... I don't have a problem with that... but I don't think you should be allowed to produce power without paying into the support of the system.  (I thought you said this sunk in... perhaps you should re read and take notes)

[littlebittime]

Ok... Ummm here's the forest... you're stuck in the trees.

does anyone here really know whats involved in fuel recycle? or is it a black box to most?  (im speaking of the chemical process and waste management issues?)  its not a clean process and the mention of fuel reprocess is just a cover for more big business rape of the american consumer.  folks uranium is almost free- the push to reprocess is a cover to take utility waste cause we dont have anyplace to put it. reprocess is  taking dollars (from us) and returning pennies. reprocessing is left over from the 50s mentality when U was big bucks.  there is so much plut and U in the world today that there is no market for it.  

 

I'm not going to pretend that I know the first thing about recycling fuel... Other than Jimmy Carter had a hand in ending it as an option while I was still watching Capt. Kangaroo... I am however going to make it a project of mine... and we can have this discussion in a week or so.  (if you're up to it)

Until then let me plant this seed...
I'm not sure most of the people on this site who are discussing recycling, are doing so because of the initial expense of uranium, but rather the expense of disposing of the spent fuel we have now and in an attempt to curb the creation of more spent fuel.
   Since I don't know what the cost is, I can't tell you whether it is financially a better option then what we're doing now - paying into a storage fund which is taking way to long to come to fruition and certainty isn't getting cheaper... But I can say it will go a long way to ease the minds of many citizens in this country who would rather not see nuclear plants run at all because of the spent fuel storage issue.  
And I can also say with absolute certainly that many people are unaware that an option of recycling or technology to recycle is even out there - expensive or not.  

My opinion is that the information and the idea should be out there for the public to discuss.   Just because it's not what you would consider doesn't mean it's not considerable - actually it prompts me to consider it more. (which by the way... would be an antagonistic response)

[alphadude]

Economics is an issue with power production. At present, enriched uranium market is at a glut, and has been for the last 8 years. Plut is almost free- the russians cant get rid of it fast enough- so all we have to do is fly over and get it. As for spent fuel reprosessing- its not a lesser amount of waste at the end of the reprocess- its tons more. highly active and chemically toxic from the organic extraction process. the best is to consolidate and store/monitor/retrieve(MRS) when needed.

One of the reasons the fuel cycle was broken was to take civilians out of weapons production-plut- that way innocents would not be considered war criminals, targets or suffer from knowing that what they did was used to kill others- in the event that a "cowboy" president or such used nukes to get revenge or in a criminal activity.

[alphadude]

In addition to the West Valley (New York) site, a commercial reprocessing facility was built in the U.S. (Illinois) with government technical and financial assistance support but was never operated because it was not economical. Construction of another commercial reprocessing facility was started in Barnwell, South Carolina, but never completed. The reason for building these facilities was to extract plutonium for mixed oxide fuel in light water reactors and for fast breeder reactors. The use of MOX fuel has never been considered economical enough to warrant reprocessing, and large-scale U.S. breeder reactor program was eliminated during the early 1980s during the Administration of President Reagan who was a strong supporter of nuclear power plants.

from an NRC report

[alphadude]

Today, the pressure felt by reactor owners from electricity deregulation works against nuclear safety. According to a report on utility deregulation and nuclear power by the Nukem Corporation, “In an era of deregulation there will be no pool of captive customers to shoulder uneconomic operating costs or massive capital additions.” Because of deregulation, the owners of many reactors are limited liability companies with little or no cash reserves. There is no financial incentive to move wastes to safer dry storage.

from another NRC report

[alphadude]

I own several houses and properties. The island is off the grid. the others have dependence and some independence. I have been on a co-op for 20 years and 10 years prior to that!  (30 years of nuke has been good to me!)

as for electric cars- today was the death of them.  california will no longer require them to meet air quality standards. they are waiting for H cell production.=0 emission  Electric cars were expensive more so than reg cars.  There are hybrids that produce their own juice but thats another story- those are expensive too.  HOWEVER, THE FACT THAT CALIF FORCED BUSINESS TO DO SOMETHING-GOD HELP US, has caused dramatic increase in research on alternative fuels vehicles.  The motors and designs to be used on H vehicles were the result of someone making big business do something.  


Cost of those cars- you must consider this- they did not or do not deliver the miles/cost/ range as conventionals. Using the supplied logic - we would all be driving Yugos!  The facts on economics for those cars was derived from Consumers Report and other sources.  

[alphadude]

I do have a problem with condescending attitudes and hubris that is displayed against anyone here that goes against the party lines.  I have not addressed anyone in a personal manner and dont intend too.  Its debate.. its not a challenge to anyones reading skills or how many socks they knit.   Its a sharing of knowledge, not dogma, as it should be!  

Oh yeah, we are hiring! good luck!
 

[getaclue2]

The site in IL was closed because Jimmy C. made the decision not to reprocess fuel in the states ( I believe mostly for security reasons). They actualy had several shipments of fuel on site ready to be processed when Carter made up his mind on the matter.

[alphadude]

that may be true but this is taken from a report published in 2000. I really have no more comments on the matter, nor in this thread actually.  Its getting kinda boring. so have fun with this! Most of us will be to old to care or dead before this changes.  Industry predictions is that 2025 is the expected revival of nuclear.  Ill be living in Costa Rica then waitin on the grim reaper.

[littlebittime]

Economics is an issue with power production. At present, enriched uranium market is at a glut, and has been for the last 8 years. Plut is almost free- the russians cant get rid of it fast enough- so all we have to do is fly over and get it. As for spent fuel reprosessing- its not a lesser amount of waste at the end of the reprocess- its tons more. highly active and chemically toxic from the organic extraction process. the best is to consolidate and store/monitor/retrieve(MRS) when needed.  

The economics of things… I suppose everything we do involves economics in one way or another… and there are always – as with anything two sides to the coin.
“Economic conditions are leading to extension of the operating cycle, higher fuel burnup and increased power levels. As in this country, initiatives have been identified in several other IAEA member countries to explore use of mixed oxide fuel either because of non proliferation considerations or to recycle fuel to use it more efficiently. “  quoted from a speech by Greta Joy Dicus Commissioner U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission at the Nuclear Safety Research Conference  10/12/01 in reference to the present challenges of the nuclear industry.    
So the Commissioner of the NRC is stating economics as a reason to explore recycling… hmmm.  Interesting.

[littlebittime]

a personal comment from someone on the site

As for spent fuel reprosessing- its not a lesser amount of waste at the end of the reprocess- its tons more. highly active and chemically toxic from the organic extraction process. the best is to consolidate and store/monitor/retrieve(MRS) when needed.  

A quote from some nrc report - posted previously...

The use of MOX fuel has never been considered economical enough to warrant reprocessing, and large-scale U.S. breeder reactor program was eliminated during the early 1980s during the Administration of President Reagan who was a strong supporter of nuclear power plants.  

I’ve only just started my reprocessing “studies” but from what I’ve read so far the fuel doesn’t have to be mixed with plutonium to create MOX in can be just simply used as fresh fuel.  
I searched the NRC – briefly – I was unable to find a whole lot in the way of text for reprocessing… my guess is because the US isn’t involved that much with reprocessing at this time… (or I could just not have spent enough time looking there.)

I then decided it was probably more logical to gather info from locations that do in fact reprocess fuel currently.  (from the horse’s mouth as it were)

Institute of Electrical Engineers ( UK) January 2003
“Reprocessing effectively reduces the volume of waste and limits the need to mine new supplies of uranium, thereby extending the lifetime of finite resources.
When the uranium has been separated it can be made into fresh fuel or mixed with
the plutonium to produce a ceramic Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuel. Both of these types of fuel can then be used in conventional reactors.

If the fuel were not reprocessed, it would need to be stored and then disposed of - 100% of the fuel, rather than just 3%, would then become waste.”


This is from a chart at the end of the same article.
"Reprocessing 1 ton of used nuclear fuel produces typically:

0.1 cubic metres of high level waste, containing nearly 99% of the radioactivity in the used fuel;
1 cubic metre of intermediate level waste, containing nearly 1% of the radioactivity in the used fuel;
4 cubic metres of low level waste containing 0.001% of the radioactivity in the used fuel."

[littlebittime]

an excerpt from an NRC document quoted in a post earlier in this thread...

Today, the pressure felt by reactor owners from electricity deregulation works against nuclear safety. According to a report on utility deregulation and nuclear power by the Nukem Corporation,

I searched the NRC site as well as the Nukem Corp site and could find no mention of this report, so I can’t speak directly to the entire content of the report.  However, from what I did read about Nukem Corp, I gather they are a company that deals with spent fuel.  
(from their site  "Nukem Corp. provides safe, compliant, and cost-effective solutions to radioactive waste management problems through the innovative application of proven technologies.")

The fact that they wrote a report about nuclear power plants not spending money – another translation could be not hiring Nukem Corp – isn’t shocking.  If I were a company that worked in spent fuel storage… I’d be pissed that nuclear power plants were storing spent fuel in the spent fuel pools rather than paying me to put them in “safer” dry storage tanks too.  It goes back to the economics of it all that were referred to in previous posts.   No dry storage tanks… no money for Nukem = nasty letter.  

[littlebittime]

That's the third time on this site I've been called condescending.   I thought condescending meant “patronizing behavior”, but I’m starting to think it means “being able communicate in a coherent manner”, well either that or bitch.  Either way I’m ok with it.

I personally loved the “Oh yeah, we are hiring!  good luck.”  comment.  
But unless you need a graphic designer…  I wouldn’t be looking to you for employment.  Not that I don’t think I could do the work… but rather, why would I want to?   I have stated repeatedly on this site… and once specifically in this thread, that I am a graphic designer… not a nuke worker.  

By the way for those of you reading along… I don’t actually know how to knit… it was what we "condescending" people like to call an analogy.  

Hey if I’m gonna be wearing the label I should at least be able to enjoy it every once in a while!

[SloGlo]

littlebittime....somehow i'm getting the impression that label yinze'r wearing is going to be graphically redesigned, somehow


alpha dude.... thanx fer setting me straight on the presidents. i thunk it was carter who made that speech that there'll be no breeders in the united states.... but he neglected to mention that shippingsport (not beaver valley) was breeding and operating commercially too!  'n iffen there ain't no reason to operate reprocessors, whyinell have the french and others done so?  or is it that the french ain't scairt of something, like nukes?