Slashdot Mirror
China Is Restarting Its Reactor Pipeline, Westinghouse Isn't Invited (technologyreview.com)
"China hasn't launched a new nuclear reactor build for over two years, but Chinese press reports that this nuclear hiatus has broken," writes Slashdot reader carbonnation. "Approvals have reportedly been made for four Hualong One reactors -- a domestic "Generation III" design -- instead of U.S.-designed AP1000s." From a report via MIT Technology Review: China's Jiemian News started the chatter on Tuesday with an exclusive interview with senior leadership of the Hualong One design's owner, Hualong International Nuclear Power Technology, a collaboration of nuclear heavyweights China General Nuclear Power (CGN) and China National Nuclear Corp. (CNNC). According to the news site, the joint venture's leaders said that two dual-reactor projects had received provisional permission to begin pouring concrete. Other publications also picked up the story yesterday, including First Financial Journal, which claimed to have confirmed the approvals through "relevant authoritative channels." CNNC and CGN have not responded to the media reports.
The reactors are slated for two new sites along China's coast: CNNC's Zhangzhou power project in Fujian and CGN's Huizhou Taipingling project in Guangdong. Both projects had been planned and approved by Chinese authorities with Westinghouse's AP1000 reactor design, which promises safety advances such as passive cooling. That means it stores water above the reactor, leveraging gravity to keep the plant cool should the pumps fail. But Westinghouse's flagship AP1000 projects have been plagued by cost overruns and delays. Those troubles may have helped the Hualong One to catch up. CNNC started building the first Hualong One reactor in 2015 at its Fuqing power plant and expects to have it operating later this year.
The reactors are slated for two new sites along China's coast: CNNC's Zhangzhou power project in Fujian and CGN's Huizhou Taipingling project in Guangdong. Both projects had been planned and approved by Chinese authorities with Westinghouse's AP1000 reactor design, which promises safety advances such as passive cooling. That means it stores water above the reactor, leveraging gravity to keep the plant cool should the pumps fail. But Westinghouse's flagship AP1000 projects have been plagued by cost overruns and delays. Those troubles may have helped the Hualong One to catch up. CNNC started building the first Hualong One reactor in 2015 at its Fuqing power plant and expects to have it operating later this year.
They should show more pride in their work
I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
They will blow up, melt, and sink all the way to China!
hmm...
Nuclear is less popular in China since the movie came out "Miguó zònghé zhèng" (The America Syndrome).
So instead of building something safe by design, they're going to dick around with Rube Goldberg cooling and control systems.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
so why should China invite others for their power plants, ..?
They screwed the pooch at every opportunity with AP600/1000 and now they're out of customers. These hidebound Western companies (yes I know it was owned by Toshiba for a time; the mentality of Westinghouse wasn't improved through that change) have thoroughly purged the decision making process of any meaningful engineering contribution. Designs are driven by fantastical cost and efficiently promises that look great on paper, but no manufacturer is seriously consulted about whether building any of it is realistic prior to contracts being signed. This manifested as an outrageously large and impractical coolant pump design that took years to deliver, blew out every deadline, and squandered every last bit of good will that Westinghouse was generously provided in both the US and China.
The management and marketers of Westinghouse turned the act of pumping water into a engineering disaster and ruined the company with it. What's left of Westinghouse is now the property of some investment cabal; They'll retire the name and milk the IP and service contracts for decades.
Perhaps this is best left to the Chinese. They probably have a few decades to go before their processes are subsumed by the same bullshit that ruins the West.
Since China steals the IP there is no need to have them come back. Western companies either give away their tech. or have it stolen by the chinks so there is no need for the rest of the world. Within the next 10 years you can expect to serve the Communist parties regardless of your job and country. Fools.
Let's hope they have studied the the Fukupshima NPP and learned something.
They are very protective of their citizenry https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
And I expect their nuclear hygiene will be at least as good as their oceanic plastic dumping. So I predict a perfect track record - never an accident, never a problem. I'll be here munching on popcorn though.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
...word on the street is China already stole the plans so there will be some heavy-duty plagiarizing going on.
They likely have.
In Fukushima, the chain of events was something like this - 1) earthquake leads to emergency reactor shutdown and switch to shutdown cooling. 2) tsunami causes flooding which destroys emergency diesel generators, 2ndry emergency diesel generators, AC electrical switchboards, DC batteries and UPS systems. 3) Reactor cooling is shutdown by loss of electrical power (unit 1), reactor cooling operates using thermo-hydraulic/mechanical system but with no control/monitoring and therefore degraded performance and eventual malfunction (units 2 and 3). 4) Reactors overheat and dump heat into containment. 5) Reactor cores begin to melt down, eventually melting through the reactor and escaping into the containment building. 6) Containment building overheats due to loss of cooling - pressure relief valves are locked closed by governement requirement - causing containment buildings to rupture leading to uncontrolled leakage.
The HPR1000 design addresses several of the issues. 1) Emergency generators, 2ndry emergency generators, AC switchboards, DC batteries and UPS systems are all separated into different buildings and compartments, several are placed at high level, and all are flood sealed, with water tight bulkhead doors, "tanked" rooms with waterproofing of all penetrations; 2) Reactor cooling does not require electrical power, even battery power, as cooling is provided by natural circulation to very large water tanks located outside of the containment; 3) Even if emergency passive reactor cooling is not available and heat is discharged to containment, the containment building is cooled to large external water tanks by natural circulation (no moving parts at all in this system); 4) In the event of core melt, the reactor is externally cooled by passive containment flooding, and as a result, the core cannot melt through the reactor itself to contaminate the containment. The water reserves are sized such that no action is required for 72 hours, and even after that point, all that is required is refilling of the tanks which are outside of the containment building. No complex water injection systems are required.
We can achieve a "zero carbon" economy in one of two ways. The first is to revert to near stone age technology. Given the discoveries in science and technology I'm sure that our lives would not be nearly as poverty stricken, brutal, nasty, and short but we'd lose access to many luxuries we have today. Airplanes would be right out. People would need to resort to travel long distances by water, rail, or maybe lighter than air vessels.
If you want a modern economy that is "zero carbon" then the only solution must include nuclear power. That does not mean we cannot also include sun, wind, and hydro power, in fact ruling them out is not anything I have seen nuclear power advocates call for. What we need to do though is not shoehorn these technologies into places where they do not make economic sense. Doing that leads to poverty, and the brutal and short lives that come with it.
China could leapfrog the rest of the world on achieving a modern and "zero carbon" economy because they are investing in nuclear power while the rest of the world is not. Right now the USA gets 20% of it's electricity from nuclear power and powers many vessels in its navy by nuclear power. To remove nuclear power means replacing those nuclear reactors with something that, barring some leap in technology, will be less safe, higher CO2 emissions, and less reliable.
We cannot have both a modern economy and a "zero carbon" economy without nuclear power. I put "zero carbon" in scare quotes because I know someone will point out that nuclear power is not truly zero carbon, and they'd be right. What they ignore, or chose to remain ignorant of, is that nuclear power produces less carbon per energy produced that wind, solar, and perhaps even hydroelectric energy. What these anti-nuclear types also ignore, or chose to remain willfully ignorant of, is the long safety record of nuclear power. Even though many died from Chernobyl, and dozens died in the poorly managed (and likely unnecessary) evacuations from Fukushima, nuclear power is still far safer than any other energy source we have. Don't believe me? Look it up!
Here's one source to prove my point: http://cmo-ripu.blogspot.com/2...
If you dispute my source then I'm happy to provide others so long as there is a source cited that shows otherwise. Best I've seen so far is speculation on how many could die if we deployed the same 1950s technology that was used at Chernobyl or an explanation of the dangers of nuclear power with no comparisons to what might replace it. Yes, nuclear power is dangerous. Much like a republican form of government is the worst except all the others we tried we know that nuclear power is the worst except all the others we tried.
Our choices are nuclear power, keep burning coal, or reverting to near stone age in living standards. You can claim that future technology will bring another option and I can agree but for now, as of today, we have only those three choices. Until technology advances to give another option we must choose from those three. I suggest we choose nuclear power, just as China has.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
We gotta realize that they too can learn and if we teach them (how to do and thus how to think) it will be a short time till the U.S. is irrelevant, until we can outdo or out think them. Surely the U.S.is concerned with staying relevant, right? Soon, US heavy industry will be Sicilan Pizza and Large Donuts. What jobs will support the middle class? Had been progress was swapping current job for a better one.... whats the -new- plan? Make healthcare and Education cost too much?
Time for a new Political party in the US (or two!) One is off the rails Other cant pony up a leader.
We can achieve a "zero carbon" economy in one of two ways. The first is to revert to near stone age technology. Given the discoveries in science and technology I'm sure that our lives would not be nearly as poverty stricken, brutal, nasty, and short but we'd lose access to many luxuries we have today. Airplanes would be right out. People would need to resort to travel long distances by water, rail, or maybe lighter than air vessels.
You forgot the fact that without carbon/industrialization we can't feed most of the people on the planet. That will lead to lots of happy outcomes I'm sure. Other than that, spot on post. Mod parent up...without nuclear in the long run, we are done...all of us...
"Those that start by burning books, will end by burning men."
6) Containment building overheats due to loss of cooling
The containment building blew up due to released hydrogen gas and the lack of basic safety provisions present in most western reactors, such as catalytic recombiners and spark igniters which get rid of the explosive gas while concentrations are still small and not large enough to blow up the whole building.
Let's hope they have studied the the Fukupshima NPP and learned something.
They are very protective of their citizenry https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
This is one reason why Communism terrifies me.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
They likely have.
I'll go with evidence over conjecture.
In Fukushima, the chain of events was something like this -
You forgot -1) TEPCO didn't move the back-up generators from a flood prone area and 0) TEPCO colluded so they wouldn't have to set aside budget for sea wall improvements.
The HPR1000 design addresses several of the issues.
The core, fundamental design flaw with the AP1000 is multifaceted. It employs a passive cooling system which converts the containment building into a pressure vessel. A feature that has never been tested with reactor experience on a smaller reactor. It has several areas that are prone to corrosion and inaccessible for inspection or maintenance. Finally its thermal containment ratio, the amount of energy vs concrete in the containment vessel, was reduced to make the AP1000 cheaper because less concrete was required to build it. It has much less concrete than Three Mile Island used.
Before launching into a explanation of the simulated tests what they don't account for is that neutron pulses from plutonium banging embrittles concrete so that it crumbles. No amount of "workarounds" are going to avoid that so it will work fine until it doesn't and then it is unpredictable.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
So long as we don't use a reactor from sixty years ago, yes.
It is possible to make new designs that are worse.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
Let's hope they have studied the the Fukupshima NPP and learned something.
They are very protective of their citizenry https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
This is one reason why Communism terrifies me.
n It is true. The individual is given the status of an ant. A disposable utility device.
The USA is quite popular to bash. But we've never had an ideology based famine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
That is really all you need to understand communism.
For the purists out there, all pure ism's are doomed to fail. They mutate into some nasty forms.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Actually that is the major reason why the AP1000 projects were delayed in China. The construction work was stopped for a couple of years while the design was reviewed. There were problems in the supply chain for components as well but those were to a less degree than the problems Westinghouse had in the USA because the Chinese have actually build quite a few reactors over the past decades so their industry is more used to the work and supply chains are in place.
The article is fallacious. Four AP1000 reactors have reached operational status in China over the past couple of months and are already outputting electric power into the grid. Two reactors at Sanmen and another two at Haiyang. The Huanlong One reactor is actually a modified Generation II French reactor with some safety improvements to which the Chinese own 100% of the IP. That is why it is proceeding with manufacture.
Why aren't the Chinese manufacturing more AP1000 reactors? There are many reasons. But first a little backstory.
Westinghouse was hiding huge losses in their US nuclear reactor construction operations. To be more accurate the construction company in charge of the construction hid their losses and eventually got bought out by Westinghouse. Then later Toshiba (Japan) acquired Westinghouse (US). Eventually they dived into the books and found the hole in the accounts. This meant that the Toshiba conglomerate nearly went bankrupt to plug the hole because of their nuclear business. Eventually they took a huge hit on their accounts and then sold off their former Westinghouse assets, now clean of debt, to some US corporate fund I think. US corporate magic at work.
So Westinghouse has proven itself to be unreliable in terms of the construction side of the business. Nothing wrong with the design business AFAIK. Westinghouse weren't even into construction initially.
Now for the real reason. One part of the AP1000 deal with China was that the Chinese would pay Westinghouse, not only to build those reactors and train the personnel to operate them, which has been done, but also would design an AP1400 reactor with increased capacity to which the Chinese would hold 100% of the IP to be build by China in the future. Of course, given the financial difficulties Westinghouse is having with project funding, and the fact that the Chinese hold the license to the AP1400 means that all future projects with the AP1000 are likely to be shitcanned and replaced with the AP1400.
This is nothing new really. The Chinese did the same thing with their high-speed rail industry. First you had technological partnerships with the leading vendors in China, Germany, and Japan, to build trains and tracks. Then once the technology was dominated by the Chinese themselves they made their own trainsets and track signaling systems and manufactured them in large quantities while not signing any future contracts with their prior vendors. To this is the Chinese borg business model in action at its finest.
The AP1400 design is much newer than the Huanlong One so it is likely the Huanlong One was fast tracked earlier because they needed the generation capacity sooner rather than later. But eventually I expect the Chinese to build significant quantities of AP1400 reactors. To which they also own the IP. The Chinese government itself has stated that all future reactor construction in China is to be Generation III. Period.
The main competition to nuclear power in China is basically natural gas. Besides the pipeline the Chinese have to Turkmenistan, late this year the Power of Siberia pipeline is supposed to start operations. That will likely mean that Chinese cities in the north of that country will start switching at least part of their generation from coal to natural gas to clean up the heavy particulate air pollution in cities like Beijing. So that is nuclear power's competitor.
However cities in the