×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

I get the feeling in this forum tha

I get the feeling in this forum tha

I get the feeling in this forum tha

(OP)
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

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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:  (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.

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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.

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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.  :)

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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.

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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.

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

Dont get your hopes too high yet.  See
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-licensing/license-revie... (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).

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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.

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

  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!

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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.

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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.

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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.

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

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.

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

Building gas-fired baseload in the present situation is, if not criminally stupid, at least stupidly fraudulent.  (kidding of course).  

Pechez les vaches.

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

(OP)
Such awesome, well-thought, well-written posts! (just now looked two plus years after the initial post).

Ccw, cynnical and right on the money. The storage, band-aid approach, agreed. Contracts and finances understood now are in the 10-30 year range. Not many builders guarantee no leakage in a 26,000 year deal for the first 10,000 years... No plutonium in my backyard, though. I'm more comfortable burning oil within 100 ft of where I sleep (granted I was on a nuke ship, but my house doesn't have a poly and lead primary and secondary shield).

Electricpete - how are you? My last look at France is a while ago and I saw 80% energy from zoomies... Processing and dealing with waste knowledge about France is what I lack. If I believe US media, probably all their waste is going to N. Korea and Iran so they can build bombs, correct?

Exnavynuke, totally accurate. In commissioning buildings, I try to get a few quality control measures implemented. They are usually "value-engineered" out because anything that has anything to do with quality while adding first cost is avoided. We bow to the money people and adhere to their short-sighted decisions in order to do the job in the first place.

Is there a way that nukes can survive the decisions of money moguls? Getting it built right is huge time and labor. I don't see anyone with the farsightedness now to accomplish this... The world now seems to be about making the big score.

CB

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

ChasBean1
I seem to recall about a year ago, France was debating at the politcal level what to do with the glass they make containing the 30 year half-life material, deep bury or bunker and guard it.  I think it was in the direction of bunker and guard, I don't know.  As for the long lived transuranics, that gets recycled back it the reactors.

I admire their plant design, one design, many sites unlike in the US where every site has it own design with (in most cases) no two alike.

Hydrae

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

President Bush's speech at Calvert Cliff's nuclear plant
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/06/20050622.html#

"Today, there are 103 nuclear plants in America. They produce about 20 percent of the nation's electricity without producing a single pound of air pollution or greenhouse gases. I think you told me that 20 percent of all Maryland's electricity is produced here at this plant. Without these nuclear plants, America would released nearly 700 million metric tons more carbon dioxide into the air each year. That's about the same amount of carbon dioxide that now comes from all our cars and trucks.

Across this state, Maryland has looked to Calvert Cliffs to keep their lights on and to keep their land, air and water clean. In other words, you're generating electricity and helping the environment at the same time. That's an important combination of talents and -- it's an important combination of -- that the American people have got to understand it's possible when we expand nuclear power.

Nuclear power is one of America's safest sources of energy. People out here practice a lot of safety, they're good at it. You've got nuclear engineers and experts that spend a lot of time maintaining a safe environment. Just ask the people that work here. You wouldn't be coming here if it wasn't safe, I suspect. (Laughter.)

Some Americans remember the problems of the nuclear plants -- that the nuclear plants had back in the 1970s. We all remember those days. That frightened a lot of folks. People have got to understand that advances in sciences and engineering and plant design have made nuclear plants far safer, far safer than ever before. Workers and managers are trained and committed and spend hours working on nuclear safety, and that's good. And they do such a good job here at Calvert Cliffs that this was the first nuclear plant in America to gets its operating license renewed. And I congratulate you. (Applause.)

There is a growing consensus that more nuclear power will lead to a cleaner, safer nation. Slowly but surely, people are beginning to look at the facts. One of the reasons I've come to this plant is to help people understand the difference between fact and fiction. Yet, even though there has been a growing consensus over time, America has not ordered a nuclear plant since the 1970s. By contrast, France has built 58 nuclear plants in the same period of time. By contrast, China now has eight nuclear plants in the works and plans to build at least 40 more over the next two decades.

In the 21st century, our nation will need more electricity, more safe, clean, reliable electricity. It is time for this country to start building nuclear power plants again. (Applause.)

We're taking practical steps to encourage new construction of power plants. Three years ago, we launched the Nuclear Power 2010 Initiative, which is a $1.1 billion partnership between government and industry to coordinate the ordering of new plants. The Department of Energy is working with Congress to reduce uncertainty in the nuclear plant licensing process. Look, you don't want to go out and build a plant, spend all the money, and have the license jerked at the last minute. (Laughter.) Nobody's going to spend money if that's the case.

And so we want to have a rational way to move forward, and one rational way to move forward is to provide incentives for new construction such as federal risk insurance, to help the builders of the first four plants -- that's what's now embedded in the energy bill -- first four plants against lawsuits and bureaucratic obstacles and other delays beyond their control. In other words, there's a rational approach for the federal government -- on the one hand, to convince the American people nuclear power is safe, that it makes sense for our consumers, it makes sense for the long-term economic security of our country to expand nuclear power; and on the other hand, say to those who are risking capital, here's some help, here's some ways we can provide incentive for you to move forward with the construction of plants.

Delivering a good energy bill is part of a comprehensive agenda, but there's some other things we need to do..."

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

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

Hats off to France.  They know how to get it done.  70% of their electric power grid is nuclear.  What does U.S. do?  Spend $billions on Yucca Mountain only to have congress critters declare it DOA.  The U.S.NRC, DOE, FERC, EPRI, Senate and House Energy Committees, etc., need to get rid of their deadwood and get on with the program!  

RE: I get the feeling in this forum tha

Actually, I've seen references saying France's electrical supply was 77.7% nuclear in 2003, though I'm not sure whether that's including the large amounts exported to Switzerland, Italy, Spain and Britain.

"France, where nuclear power constituted 77.7 percent of the electricity market in 2003"
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/nuc_generation/newnuc2.html

Good industry worldwide overviews at

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/nuc_generation/newnuc2.html

and EIA's Nuclear Timeline at

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/nuclear/page/nuctimeline.html

Interesting to follow Eskom's (and BNFL/Mitsubishi/?China?) PBMR, "The PBMR project entails the building of a demonstration reactor project at Koeberg near Cape Town and a pilot fuel plant at Pelindaba near Pretoria. The current schedule is to start construction in 2007 and for the demonstration plant to be completed by 2010. The fist commercial PBMR modules are planned for 2013." at

https://www.pbmr.com/
 

Pechez les vaches.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources