.

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

1 hour ago, Ecocharger said:

What? "Once built"? Give me a break. The costs of building are prohibitive and rule out any economic rationality for these things. 

I'm old enough to remember when the promise of nuclear power was "Energy too cheap to meter". And I didn't just fall off the tuna boat, my father was fairly high up in the Atomic Energy Commission, admittedly on the weapons side. Somewhere there's a picture of a 6 year old me sitting on the knee of the Father of the Hydrogen Bomb discussing nuclear physics. 

Nuclear power plants aren't inherently expensive to build, but in the USA you have to budget about half again the price of the entire plant just for the inevitable lawsuits from the Sierra Club et al. Separating the spent fuel disposal issue, which is handled in literally the most insane method imaginable in the US, operating and running a nuke plant is quite simple. The three big disasters were twice due to people doing stupid things and once due to an unprecedented natural disaster. Even then, slightly better engineering would have solved it. The Japanese just didn't believe they'd lose all power at once. One big genset could have solved everything, but a 600 mile per hour giant tsunami can throw a big wrinkle into the best laid plans, regardless. 

I was personally invited to tour the brand spanking new Taiwanese nuke built by Baishauwan (no idea if this is how it's spelled). They thought of everything including a massive tsunami and power outage. They built a holding lake above the plant and designed things so they could run chilling water with zero power into the plant by gravity. They also built it up high enough that even a level 11 earthquake wouldn't inundate it. 

But the US refused to sell them fuel and as signatories to the non proliferation agreement they were hamstrung in their choices. Eventually the public voted to stop funding it, when it was precisely 99% complete. When the CCP takes over, they'll add their own fuel and be fat dumb and happy, inheriting the newest and best designed nuke plant in the world. Knowing China, they've probably been dumping their spent fuel in the ocean. We'll see when Godzilla shows up to say thanks for the meals.  😉

[Old-Ruffneck + 1,245]

2 hours ago, turbguy said:

You would think the total cost of the plumbers and replaced pipe alone would have covered the "weatherization" corrections to whatever went wrong.

That be some good herb ya 'tokin' !!!

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

58 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

I'm old enough to remember when the promise of nuclear power was "Energy too cheap to meter". And I didn't just fall off the tuna boat, my father was fairly high up in the Atomic Energy Commission, admittedly on the weapons side. Somewhere there's a picture of a 6 year old me sitting on the knee of the Father of the Hydrogen Bomb discussing nuclear physics. 

Nuclear power plants aren't inherently expensive to build, but in the USA you have to budget about half again the price of the entire plant just for the inevitable lawsuits from the Sierra Club et al. Separating the spent fuel disposal issue, which is handled in literally the most insane method imaginable in the US, operating and running a nuke plant is quite simple. The three big disasters were twice due to people doing stupid things and once due to an unprecedented natural disaster. Even then, slightly better engineering would have solved it. The Japanese just didn't believe they'd lose all power at once. One big genset could have solved everything, but a 600 mile per hour giant tsunami can throw a big wrinkle into the best laid plans, regardless. 

I was personally invited to tour the brand spanking new Taiwanese nuke built by Baishauwan (no idea if this is how it's spelled). They thought of everything including a massive tsunami and power outage. They built a holding lake above the plant and designed things so they could run chilling water with zero power into the plant by gravity. They also built it up high enough that even a level 11 earthquake wouldn't inundate it. 

But the US refused to sell them fuel and as signatories to the non proliferation agreement they were hamstrung in their choices. Eventually the public voted to stop funding it, when it was precisely 99% complete. When the CCP takes over, they'll add their own fuel and be fat dumb and happy, inheriting the newest and best designed nuke plant in the world. Knowing China, they've probably been dumping their spent fuel in the ocean. We'll see when Godzilla shows up to say thanks for the meals.  😉

If the CCP tries to take over, the dangers of nuke plants will be low on the priority list, we will all be heading to the shelters.

[turbguy + 1,543]

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

I'm old enough to remember when the promise of nuclear power was "Energy too cheap to meter". And I didn't just fall off the tuna boat, my father was fairly high up in the Atomic Energy Commission, admittedly on the weapons side. Somewhere there's a picture of a 6 year old me sitting on the knee of the Father of the Hydrogen Bomb discussing nuclear physics. 

Nuclear power plants aren't inherently expensive to build, but in the USA you have to budget about half again the price of the entire plant just for the inevitable lawsuits from the Sierra Club et al. Separating the spent fuel disposal issue, which is handled in literally the most insane method imaginable in the US, operating and running a nuke plant is quite simple. The three big disasters were twice due to people doing stupid things and once due to an unprecedented natural disaster. Even then, slightly better engineering would have solved it. The Japanese just didn't believe they'd lose all power at once. One big genset could have solved everything, but a 600 mile per hour giant tsunami can throw a big wrinkle into the best laid plans, regardless. 

I was personally invited to tour the brand spanking new Taiwanese nuke built by Baishauwan (no idea if this is how it's spelled). They thought of everything including a massive tsunami and power outage. They built a holding lake above the plant and designed things so they could run chilling water with zero power into the plant by gravity. They also built it up high enough that even a level 11 earthquake wouldn't inundate it. 

But the US refused to sell them fuel and as signatories to the non proliferation agreement they were hamstrung in their choices. Eventually the public voted to stop funding it, when it was precisely 99% complete. When the CCP takes over, they'll add their own fuel and be fat dumb and happy, inheriting the newest and best designed nuke plant in the world. Knowing China, they've probably been dumping their spent fuel in the ocean. We'll see when Godzilla shows up to say thanks for the meals.  😉

Unfortunately, the Japanese did have "big gensets", but they put them WAY to low.

What would it have cost to put them higher?

Ooops!

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

Unfortunately, the Japanese did have "big gensets", but they put them WAY to low.

What would it have cost to put them higher?

Ooops!

I've carefully analysed the Fukushima location. They oped for easy access to the ocean rather than safety. To raise the altitude, they'd have needed to make a massive pile of dirt, rock, whatever. They could have chosen a location up or down the shoreline with natural elevation, but then they'd have had to run the grid and infrastructure further. Remember, absent the tsunami, their resilient grid could have delivered power from elsewhere. Actually, they did have emergency gensets, they were just underwater. My suggestion at the time was to bring a navy ship over and power the pumps from the ship. Harbor was a mess but they could have done it, or used a barge. But Japanese aren't good at thinking on their feet, they like to plan and have consensus decision making. Sub optimal in a class 5 emergency. 

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

2 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

The three big disasters were twice due to people doing stupid things and once due to an unprecedented natural disaster. Even then, slightly better engineering would have solved it. The Japanese just didn't believe they'd lose all power at once. One big genset could have solved everything, but a 600 mile per hour giant tsunami can throw a big wrinkle into the best laid plans, regardless. 

The Tsunami at Fukushima was a once in 10,000 year event. Really.That tsunami directly killed more than 20,000 Japanese. The failure at the nuclear plant did not directly kill anybody. (It did kill about 25 very elderly people when they were evacuated from their nursing homes in a rush and their care was interrupted. They would not have died if they had not been evacuated.) Nobody remembers the 20,000 deaths, Everybody remembers the "nuclear disaster".

Unfortunately, if you have 1,000 nuclear plants in the world, you will get a once in 10,000 year event roughly once every ten years, and people are totally, insanely terrified by nuclear accidents. It remains the best technical solution, but only if the world's population is willing to accept the fairly modest risks. Since they are not, we are forced to fall back on renewables, which can provide the power we need without  the risk of climate change.  Based on this, I reluctantly abandoned by lifelong support for nuclear power.

[LANDMAN X + 181]

8 hours ago, Gerry Maddoux said:

The burning question in my aging brain is, has our planet always had a tilt of 23 degrees? Have plate tectonics and continental drift--moving India, for example, up from the Southern Hemisphere--also affected tilt? It's a very naive question and I imagine one of you torpedoes has the answer, which I'd like to learn.

One thing is for sure: our planet has undergone at least fifty cycles of extreme warming and cooling. The Ice Age will almost certainly revisit the earth at some point. There have been extreme levels of methane in our atmosphere in the past--but it was more likely secondary to the weather than causing the weather to change. 

Gerry, your brain is sharp as a razor!  So blessed to have you opine on this site.  Your knowledge not matched by very many for wisdom is king...love your writing!  Here's a post from a mom in Texas trying to educate her daughter on global warming indoctrination on children...

A Mom’s Research (Part 2): Texas Freezing and Global Warming

https://www.theepochtimes.com/a-moms-research-part-2-texas-freezing-and-global-warming_3705225.html

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

20 hours ago, Boat said:

Some say so but in BC I read their cutting down ancient old growth Forrest for pellets so others say no. Not every pellet is equal.

Yea that is bull, there are no Old growth forests in BC left to cut.  Everything has either been cut, or preserved. 

[turbguy + 1,543]

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

I've carefully analysed the Fukushima location. They oped for easy access to the ocean rather than safety. To raise the altitude, they'd have needed to make a massive pile of dirt, rock, whatever. They could have chosen a location up or down the shoreline with natural elevation, but then they'd have had to run the grid and infrastructure further. Remember, absent the tsunami, their resilient grid could have delivered power from elsewhere. Actually, they did have emergency gensets, they were just underwater. My suggestion at the time was to bring a navy ship over and power the pumps from the ship. Harbor was a mess but they could have done it, or used a barge. But Japanese aren't good at thinking on their feet, they like to plan and have consensus decision making. Sub optimal in a class 5 emergency. 

Cooling water access is required. The Ocean makes a great heat sink. That said they were indeed kinda close.

All nuc plants that I know of MUST have emergency generation in case of a "loss of offsite power" incident.  Think transmission line(s) failure.  If a plant cannot "pump out the power", it WILL trip, then you gotta get rid of the residual heat in the reactor with water circulation, steam bypass to the condenser, whatever. The "nuclear fire" keeps smoldering for quite a while.

I'm not gonna go into all the requirements for electric power after a SCRAM.  Some cooling systems are steam operated and independent of power or compressed air (until they run out of steam or water).OH, you gotta keep the spent fuel pools full and cool as well, else that water boils out, and REALLY nasty stuff is exposed that no human can think of approaching.

A Fukushima, the "original install" emergency generators were inundated with seawater.   EVEN WORSE, SO WAS SOME OF THE ELECTRICAL SWITCHGEAR FROM THOSE GENERATORS TO THE EMERGENCY SYSTEMS!    While TEPCO did install more emergency generators much higher up about a decade earlier, they never relocated the switchgear!

Those emergency generators (at LEAST two full capacity per reactor) get more attention than the Main Generator (IMO).

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

9 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

No. It. Isn't. 

This is called EVIDENCE you should try it sometime. 

 

That site you linked was even able to compare the States of Iowa vs Texas regarding the direct assertion:

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

18 minutes ago, turbguy said:

Cooling water access is required. The Ocean makes a great heat sink. That said they were indeed kinda close.

All nuc plants that I know of MUST have emergency generation in case of a "loss of offsite power" incident.  Think transmission line(s) failure.  If a plant cannot "pump out the power", it WILL trip, then you gotta get rid of the residual heat in the reactor with water circulation, steam bypass to the condenser, whatever. The "nuclear fire" keeps smoldering for quite a while.

I'm not gonna go into all the requirements for electric power after a SCRAM.  Some cooling systems are steam operated and independent of power or compressed air (until they run out of steam or water).OH, you gotta keep the spent fuel pools full and cool as well, else that water boils out, and REALLY nasty stuff is exposed that no human can think of approaching.

A Fukushima, the "original install" emergency generators were inundated with seawater.   EVEN WORSE, SO WAS SOME OF THE ELECTRICAL SWITCHGEAR FROM THOSE GENERATORS TO THE EMERGENCY SYSTEMS!    While TEPCO did install more emergency generators much higher up about a decade earlier, they never relocated the switchgear!

Those emergency generators (at LEAST two full capacity per reactor) get more attention than the Main Generator (IMO).

Crappy design... When we have Fast Salt Breeder reactors nearly complete in the 70's it was canceled... Unbelievable we are still using crappy pressurized reactors with a solid lump cores which do not eat most of their own waste products and only use ~0.3% of the available fuel and then do not even use most of that.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

1 minute ago, Dan Warnick said:

That site you linked was even able to compare the States of Iowa vs Texas regarding the direct assertion:

 

What is truly sad is that every home in TX, or nearly 100% have AC... why not another loop for HVAC...

PS: They work just fine in below freezing conditions.  You do need a larger radiator though.  Or they work less efficiently when frozen.  That was my heat source for a decade when super super poor.  Turn a wall mounted AC unit around and viola, there you go.  Far cheaper than Electric heat. 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

9 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

Chicago law enforcement is hamstrung by regulations, the need to fill out endless reports for any interaction with anyone, a joke. That is why the only solution is for the Prez to send in the National Guard, block off neighbourhoods, and do a thorough house-by-house search for illegal firearms. That would flush out a lot of problems which are contributing to this crisis. Look, it is not impossible. New York turned things around under Giuliani. It can be done elsewhere, too.

Hmmm, but practically, that would turn Chicago's Black and Hispanic neighborhoods into war zones, and the Left, together with their tool BLM, would wail to the heavens that is was simply the height of racism.  The mob with the Democrat Machine used to rule Chicago; Now I'd say the drug lords/gangs with the Democrat Machine rules Chicago.  Those Dems use the tools available to them!    A cleanout is not going to happen any time soon as long as the Democrats rule, and it would take a long time to right the ship under Republican leadership, for all the same reasons.  Having said that, the time is ripe for Republicans: State debt, mismanagement of Chicago, crime/murder rates in Chicago that never seem to go down, Madigan finally getting thrown out (and hopefully convicted by the FBI), and Illinoisan's general displeasure with the goings on of big government.

One can hope.  Illinois, south of Jolliet or thereabouts, is a great and beautiful state, with pristine agriculture and a great work ethic.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

3 hours ago, LANDMAN X said:

Gerry, your brain is sharp as a razor!  So blessed to have you opine on this site.  Your knowledge not matched by very many for wisdom is king...love your writing!  Here's a post from a mom in Texas trying to educate her daughter on global warming indoctrination on children...

A Mom’s Research (Part 2): Texas Freezing and Global Warming

https://www.theepochtimes.com/a-moms-research-part-2-texas-freezing-and-global-warming_3705225.html

Well, that wasn't what I thought it was going to be.  Good article, eh?

[Ecocharger + 1,473]

28 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

Hmmm, but practically, that would turn Chicago's Black and Hispanic neighborhoods into war zones, and the Left, together with their tool BLM, would wail to the heavens that is was simply the height of racism.  The mob with the Democrat Machine used to rule Chicago; Now I'd say the drug lords/gangs with the Democrat Machine rules Chicago.  Those Dems use the tools available to them!    A cleanout is not going to happen any time soon as long as the Democrats rule, and it would take a long time to right the ship under Republican leadership, for all the same reasons.  Having said that, the time is ripe for Republicans: State debt, mismanagement of Chicago, crime/murder rates in Chicago that never seem to go down, Madigan finally getting thrown out (and hopefully convicted by the FBI), and Illinoisan's general displeasure with the goings on of big government.

One can hope.  Illinois, south of Jolliet or thereabouts, is a great and beautiful state, with pristine agriculture and a great work ethic.

The same arguments could have been used against Giuliani's reform of New York City, but everyone seemed to be taken aback and stunned that anyone would even try to fix that city...and his get-tough campaign really worked. Why not try the same thing in Chicago? I know, Giuliani was the Mayor, not the Prez. But someone has to take the bull by the horns and do something, it is getting to be a national emergency in some areas.

[turbguy + 1,543]

1 hour ago, Dan Warnick said:

That site you linked was even able to compare the States of Iowa vs Texas regarding the direct assertion:

Hey, look at the percentages of electric vs gas residential heating in TX.  Electric wins big (until it doesn't)...

[turbguy + 1,543]

1 hour ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Crappy design... When we have Fast Salt Breeder reactors nearly complete in the 70's it was canceled... Unbelievable we are still using crappy pressurized reactors with a solid lump cores which do not eat most of their own waste products and only use ~0.3% of the available fuel and then do not even use most of that.

I agree, there's PLENTY of room for improvement, and plenty of proposed alternative designs. 

Going back to history, much of this tech evolved from scaled-up naval reactors, or reactors that could produce some plutonium for "you know what".

Fermi #1 (between Toledo OH and Detroit MI) was a prototype breeder. One of my bosses was involved in the design.  He had stories to tell.  At least that reactor operated near atmospheric. I always shuddered at the thought of a water leak into the liquid sodium in the steam generator, but apparently that never occurred.   BTW, that unit had a meltdown, too.

"We could use a man like Admiral Rickover again...🎹"

I've heard he insisted on the ability to track the mining date and mine location of every welding rod, nut, and bolt used in naval reactor plant.

 

 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

43 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

The same arguments could have been used against Giuliani's reform of New York City, but everyone seemed to be taken aback and stunned that anyone would even try to fix that city...and his get-tough campaign really worked. Why not try the same thing in Chicago? I know, Giuliani was the Mayor, not the Prez. But someone has to take the bull by the horns and do something, it is getting to be a national emergency in some areas.

Nope.  Giuliani's time as mayor was a different era.  The era of busing the mafia and crime.  He would never get away with his actions today; hell, he barely got away with it then!

I agree with the rest of your statement, but it can't happen in the current political environment, again, for all the same reasons I've stated already.

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

1 hour ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

What is truly sad is that every home in TX, or nearly 100% have AC... why not another loop for HVAC...

PS: They work just fine in below freezing conditions.  You do need a larger radiator though.  Or they work less efficiently when frozen.  That was my heat source for a decade when super super poor.  Turn a wall mounted AC unit around and viola, there you go.  Far cheaper than Electric heat. 

Yep, that's a traditional air source heat pump (ASHP). It's pretty much just an AC with a fancy reversing valve on the refrigerant lines: no additional loop required. Cheaper to run than gas furnace down to below about 40 degrees, cheaper than resistance electric down to somewhere below 20 degrees.

If you want to get really efficient and stay efficient, you couple the outside heat exchanger to a water-filled ground loop, either in a 200 ft well or  a good-sized field at least 6 feet deep. This is called a ground source heat pump (GSHP). Unfortunately, they are fairly expensive to install. Because the ground stays at about 56 degrees, the heat pump doesn't have much work to do.

[turbguy + 1,543]

3 minutes ago, Dan Clemmensen said:

Yep, that's a traditional air source heat pump (ASHP). It's pretty much just an AC with a fancy reversing valve on the refrigerant lines: no additional loop required. Cheaper to run than gas furnace down to below about 40 degrees, cheaper than resistance electric down to somewhere below 20 degrees.

If you want to get really efficient and stay efficient, you couple the outside heat exchanger to a water-filled ground loop, either in a 200 ft well or  a good-sized field at least 6 feet deep. This is called a ground source heat pump (GSHP). Unfortunately, they are fairly expensive to install. Because the ground stays at about 56 degrees, the heat pump doesn't have much work to do.

Don't forget to check the anti-freeze in the ground loop.

[Dan Clemmensen + 1,011]

4 minutes ago, turbguy said:

Don't forget to check the anti-freeze in the ground loop.

Yep, unless you have the compressor/heat exchanger in the basement and the loop runs underground all the way to the compressor. These units are extremely quiet, not like an ASHP. I think they still put glycol in the loop, but it isn't really needed in this installation.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

2 hours ago, turbguy said:

I agree, there's PLENTY of room for improvement,

Fermi #1 (between Toledo OH and Detroit MI) was a prototype breeder. One of my bosses was involved in the design.  He had stories to tell.  At least that reactor operated near atmospheric. I always shuddered at the thought of a water leak into the liquid sodium in the steam generator, but apparently that never occurred.   BTW, that unit had a meltdown, too.

 

Erm, not what I wrote bud.  Fermi was same half way design as a near standard Pressure water reactor.  Only addition was that it was also a partial breeder reactor.

Liquid salt, breeder... any kind of problem, the reactants pour via gravity into their own containers which are not large enough for continuous reaction or outgasing.  Last two portions were done in the late 70's at Oak Ridge same with liquid salt.  Breeder, portion is partially done but did not get all the poisons out of(Namely Tritium).  What is poignant was that breeder, while it made plutonium, ate it an ate the other long lived poisons.  I believe it left Iodine/cesium and I forget which one of them has an 800 year half life. 

[Boat + 1,324]

8 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Yea that is bull, there are no Old growth forests in BC left to cut.  Everything has either been cut, or preserved. 

https://www.focusonvictoria.ca/forests/30/
 

[Boat + 1,324]

16 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

No. It. Isn't. 

This is called EVIDENCE you should try it sometime. 

 

You showed no evidence that by winterization of turbines like Iowa does would not fix the turbine problem in Texas. The chart does show just how little consumption Texas uses from wind in comparison to FF. The next storm has the potential to be devistating unless FF infrastructure like wind is weatherized. 
Glad I could clear up another Trumpism type misdirection post that does not do justice to the debate on how to end the killing and economic damage from large winter systems in Texas. You know, typical Ward speak.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

43 minutes ago, Boat said:

https://www.focusonvictoria.ca/forests/30/
 

How Naive and stupid are you(for being gullible), and ignorant are those in the link you linked?  Those trees are maybe 60 years old in said photos and any tree that requires 3 people to hug in the PNW requires about ~ 200 years to grow(not bad but barely older than normal 2nd growth where I grew up, and on my own property there are several Cedars which 3 people cannot hug.  Also the moss they talk about?  Not sure which kind, but if we are  talking carpet forest floor moss, requires about 30-->50 years to grow.  If branch hanging moss depends where/conditions, but anywhere from 5 years to 30+ years. 

I unlike you have driven all over Vancouver island and flown and taken boats all up the inside passage....   There are old growth forests with large trees, they are called parks, setback around rivers, creeks, lakes.  Setbacks started small and are much larger now.  As for those pictures in the vid, yes, blocks get cut sequentially year after year so look bad for a while, as to the untrained eye it looks like all one big clearcut when in fact it is not, but rather staggered for safety actually, but no human hand touches large blocks for the next 60 years.  It is wonderful for blackberry picking as you just to old 2 or 3 year old cuts and pick and then walk around and find the next 3 year old cut to pick in.