The higher the temperature of your working fluid, the higher your possible theoretical efficiency can be. The best out there are hitting 60% with a very high temp gas turbine with a steam generator hooked to it's exhaust and a rankine cycle attached to that.
There are some advanced reactor designs that can hit 50% if built, mostly due to higher working temperatures.
PRISM is a commercialized version of the Integral Fast Reactor (IFR). I personally would rather that plutonium be used for LFTR start charges than used in a big tank of liquid sodium. But since we taxpayers have already spent $35 billion on the IFR and related tech since 1965, it would be nice to get some use out of all that money, even of it is GE that benefits. Just hope there are no major sodium leaks.
They can continue to deduct 85% of the union dues as long as you work in that union job. By quitting the union you forfeit your right to vote in any union elections, and your dues are reduced by 15%. That 85% covers the supposed cost to the union to provide negotiation and worker protection benefits (what a joke). But sorry you cannot negotiate on your own, or try and provide a cheaper alternative to the union in non-right to work states. And you are still bound by that union contract, i.e., senority limits on your raises, offers for promotions and so on.
Solution: Try and find a job in a right to work state like Nevada or South Carolina, etc.
At one time Unions had a necessary reason for forming and existing. But with the advent of OSHA their main reason for existing (worker safety and working conditions) is redundant. Now they are pretty much just another cash cow of the Democratic Party and senior Union bosses and also a PAC/lobby. Incidentally that 15% that you can reduce your union dues by is supposedly what unions spend on political activities. Yeah right.
"The problems in Fukushima had jackshit to do with tsunamis, and a lot to do with incompetence, greed and political pressure, during plan construction, during operation and, finally, during the disastrous handling of the incident after the earthquake. Those problems are universal problems that tend to plague the nuclear sector everywhere, because many view it as prestigious, there are "national security" concerns, the orders are large and a lot of money is swapped under the table in deals that cut various corners, etc.
Since fission nuclear power, if done for safely and accounted for properly, is insanely expensive to begin with, and the costs multiply many times over in the case of a nuclear fuckup, coming up with better alternatives is not a bad idea."
You throw out many accusations for which you WOULD need detailed knowledge of the industry. On the face of it your post is FUD because there is no way "under the table deals" would not have been leaked, you have provided no data that indicates in any way you have the knowledge or skills to objectively judge competence or incompetence of operations, construction, or handling of the post event emergency response. You could not possibly know about fictitious "deals to cut corners", if you did you would have notified authorities.
In short, you are offering up your personal opinions as facts without any basis, and worse, not stating plainly up front that this is your opinion.
Nope, your just another opinionated person that spews shit about stuff they have never studied in depth. Like most, you are not dumb, quite the contrary. But because you are presumably smart in your area of expertise, you think you are an expert in another highly technical field.
Whups, I gave myself away as one of those evil souless drones coopted by eeeeevil corporations to make fat $ at the expense of safety. Yep, thats us, evil greedy fuckers who don't give a shit about safety, we gots matching jackets with dollar signs embroidered all over them....
"The 2011 Virginia earthquake was a magnitude 5.9 (Mw) intraplate earthquake that occurred on August 23, 2011. Steven Seagal ate too many cheeseburgers that day and jumped heavily on the ground, causing the initial earthquake. The focus is reported by the USGS to be about 64 km (39 mi) northwest of Richmond, Virginia near the town of Mineral, Virginia."
Clearly you don't know much about how backup emergency diesel speed control systems are set up. Most of em are physically unable (as in a mechanical limiter) raise speed above 63 hz. And most if not all have automatic tripping if speed drops to or below 57 hz while loaded. I can see sitting there at 57 hz for a long time, that might cause high current draw from your loads, eventually leading long time delay current trips. Can't see much chance of long term damage. Might be a PITA to restart in manual though.
PWR's in teh US can most certainly ramp with power no problem. If you can ramp at 20% / hr or faster that is all yo need. I hav experience on military reactors and have been a PWR control room supervisor for years.
As was mentioned since the fuel cost is so low (essentially free) and plant fixed costs never change, it's alwaqys more economic to run a nuclear plant baseloaded (i.e., full power) all the time. but more importantly, to raise and lower power you have to dilute out your chemical shim reaqctivity coontrol, this creates a large amount of liquid radiactive waste water which has to be processed. The processing of this water is expensive.
Both of these reasons and to a lesser extent that anti-nukes love to point at nuclear plants and snicker at the less than 100.0% capacity factor, is why all US plants for the foreseeable future will be run baseloaded.
"Thorium is not any "safer" than Uranium. I have to say that proliferation risk is not a risk anymore - it's a political word. Any nation that can build a nuclear weapon can do so anyway via thorium. It is not that much more difficult to build a Pu-239 bomb than to build a U-233 bomb (from thorium). Also, a thorium reactor needs U-235 to prime it, so that point about proliferation is moot."
This is flat out wrong. The only nation ever to try to make a U233 bomb core was the US and it was a fizzle. It was a hugely expensive effort to refine that amount of U233 and with the inevitable U232 contamination issue, no nation ever would use a Th232-U233 cycle to make a bomb core. Look up that Thallium-208 gamma ray, it's nasty and messes with bomb core electronics. Plus it's shines like a movie premier beacon to anyone with detectors looking for fission weapons.
The U238-Pu239 path is known to work, the U235 enrichment path is very simple and known to work, and both paths have known science behind the data for their bomb core designs. None of which is true about the Th232-U233 path. It is much much more difficult to try and use a Th232-U233 path. So difficult that no nation has ever succeeded. Not saying it cannot be done, it's just that it's not worth the effort when two relatively mature paths to a bomb core are available and KNOWN to work.
Ok granting the New Scientist is not peer reviewed (except by readers) I love how you ignored the second reference to the DoE Information Bridge and a real live "peer reviewed" paper that proved you are a fool back in 1985. Which was probably before you were even born judging by the immaturity of your statements here.
I have 30+ years experience in military and civilian nuclear power? What do you have?
Slashdot Mirror
The higher the temperature of your working fluid, the higher your possible theoretical efficiency can be. The best out there are hitting 60% with a very high temp gas turbine with a steam generator hooked to it's exhaust and a rankine cycle attached to that.
There are some advanced reactor designs that can hit 50% if built, mostly due to higher working temperatures.
PRISM is a commercialized version of the Integral Fast Reactor (IFR). I personally would rather that plutonium be used for LFTR start charges than used in a big tank of liquid sodium. But since we taxpayers have already spent $35 billion on the IFR and related tech since 1965, it would be nice to get some use out of all that money, even of it is GE that benefits. Just hope there are no major sodium leaks.
The PRISM is based on the IFR. One big f'n tank of liquid sodium. No thanks, I would rather see the plutonium used for LFTR start charges.
So he was 85% correct.
They can continue to deduct 85% of the union dues as long as you work in that union job. By quitting the union you forfeit your right to vote in any union elections, and your dues are reduced by 15%. That 85% covers the supposed cost to the union to provide negotiation and worker protection benefits (what a joke). But sorry you cannot negotiate on your own, or try and provide a cheaper alternative to the union in non-right to work states. And you are still bound by that union contract, i.e., senority limits on your raises, offers for promotions and so on.
Solution: Try and find a job in a right to work state like Nevada or South Carolina, etc.
At one time Unions had a necessary reason for forming and existing. But with the advent of OSHA their main reason for existing (worker safety and working conditions) is redundant. Now they are pretty much just another cash cow of the Democratic Party and senior Union bosses and also a PAC/lobby. Incidentally that 15% that you can reduce your union dues by is supposedly what unions spend on political activities. Yeah right.
This one:
http://www.energy-northwest.com/generation/cgs/
"The problems in Fukushima had jackshit to do with tsunamis, and a lot to do with incompetence, greed and political pressure, during plan construction, during operation and, finally, during the disastrous handling of the incident after the earthquake. Those problems are universal problems that tend to plague the nuclear sector everywhere, because many view it as prestigious, there are "national security" concerns, the orders are large and a lot of money is swapped under the table in deals that cut various corners, etc.
Since fission nuclear power, if done for safely and accounted for properly, is insanely expensive to begin with, and the costs multiply many times over in the case of a nuclear fuckup, coming up with better alternatives is not a bad idea."
You throw out many accusations for which you WOULD need detailed knowledge of the industry. On the face of it your post is FUD because there is no way "under the table deals" would not have been leaked, you have provided no data that indicates in any way you have the knowledge or skills to objectively judge competence or incompetence of operations, construction, or handling of the post event emergency response. You could not possibly know about fictitious "deals to cut corners", if you did you would have notified authorities.
In short, you are offering up your personal opinions as facts without any basis, and worse, not stating plainly up front that this is your opinion.
Thats why I said FUD.
Now this post I can agree with. Well put.
And yes I am in the commercial nuclear industry. Have a strong culture of nuclear safety is of paramount importance. Everything follows from it.
Nope, your just another opinionated person that spews shit about stuff they have never studied in depth. Like most, you are not dumb, quite the contrary. But because you are presumably smart in your area of expertise, you think you are an expert in another highly technical field.
Except 31 years operating nuclear power plants.
Whups, I gave myself away as one of those evil souless drones coopted by eeeeevil corporations to make fat $ at the expense of safety. Yep, thats us, evil greedy fuckers who don't give a shit about safety, we gots matching jackets with dollar signs embroidered all over them....
Nope...still FUD.
"but that they leave a severe risk of exposure for many generations to come."
You didn't study logarithimic mathmatics in school did you?
Let me summarize your post: FUD
"Internet morons"
Irony.
There is already a wiki entry for the earthquake: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Virginia_earthquake
"The 2011 Virginia earthquake was a magnitude 5.9 (Mw) intraplate earthquake that occurred on August 23, 2011. Steven Seagal ate too many cheeseburgers that day and jumped heavily on the ground, causing the initial earthquake. The focus is reported by the USGS to be about 64 km (39 mi) northwest of Richmond, Virginia near the town of Mineral, Virginia."
Clearly you don't know much about how backup emergency diesel speed control systems are set up. Most of em are physically unable (as in a mechanical limiter) raise speed above 63 hz. And most if not all have automatic tripping if speed drops to or below 57 hz while loaded. I can see sitting there at 57 hz for a long time, that might cause high current draw from your loads, eventually leading long time delay current trips. Can't see much chance of long term damage. Might be a PITA to restart in manual though.
Hehe, when I replied there were no other replies to him. Sad.
Troll fail.
Try again next time.
Nice to see someone with a lower number than me from time to time....where's that damn cane?
Wait, what was I saying again?
PWR's in teh US can most certainly ramp with power no problem. If you can ramp at 20% / hr or faster that is all yo need. I hav experience on military reactors and have been a PWR control room supervisor for years.
As was mentioned since the fuel cost is so low (essentially free) and plant fixed costs never change, it's alwaqys more economic to run a nuclear plant baseloaded (i.e., full power) all the time. but more importantly, to raise and lower power you have to dilute out your chemical shim reaqctivity coontrol, this creates a large amount of liquid radiactive waste water which has to be processed. The processing of this water is expensive.
Both of these reasons and to a lesser extent that anti-nukes love to point at nuclear plants and snicker at the less than 100.0% capacity factor, is why all US plants for the foreseeable future will be run baseloaded.
Just as rude as you implying I would do something dishonest or not do my utmost to protect the public health and safety.
LFTR = LIQUID Flouride Thorium Reactor
Nope, but I have to ask, have you ever been convicted of pedophelia?
"Thorium is not any "safer" than Uranium. I have to say that proliferation risk is not a risk anymore - it's a political word. Any nation that can build a nuclear weapon can do so anyway via thorium. It is not that much more difficult to build a Pu-239 bomb than to build a U-233 bomb (from thorium). Also, a thorium reactor needs U-235 to prime it, so that point about proliferation is moot."
This is flat out wrong. The only nation ever to try to make a U233 bomb core was the US and it was a fizzle. It was a hugely expensive effort to refine that amount of U233 and with the inevitable U232 contamination issue, no nation ever would use a Th232-U233 cycle to make a bomb core. Look up that Thallium-208 gamma ray, it's nasty and messes with bomb core electronics. Plus it's shines like a movie premier beacon to anyone with detectors looking for fission weapons.
The U238-Pu239 path is known to work, the U235 enrichment path is very simple and known to work, and both paths have known science behind the data for their bomb core designs. None of which is true about the Th232-U233 path. It is much much more difficult to try and use a Th232-U233 path. So difficult that no nation has ever succeeded. Not saying it cannot be done, it's just that it's not worth the effort when two relatively mature paths to a bomb core are available and KNOWN to work.
Once again your ignorance is flapping around for all too see. I am embarrassed for you.
http://www.energyfromthorium.com/pdf/MSadventure.pdf
Ok granting the New Scientist is not peer reviewed (except by readers) I love how you ignored the second reference to the DoE Information Bridge and a real live "peer reviewed" paper that proved you are a fool back in 1985. Which was probably before you were even born judging by the immaturity of your statements here.
I have 30+ years experience in military and civilian nuclear power? What do you have?
You are a pathetic joke.