Nuclear reactors coming back to the US

S&L: Discussion of matters pertaining to theoretical and applied sciences, and logical thought.

Moderator: Charon

Post Reply
User avatar
Soontir948
Disciple
Posts: 783
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 10:19 pm
19
Location: Queens, NY
Contact:

#1 Nuclear reactors coming back to the US

Post by Soontir948 »

BBC wrote:9 February 2012 Last updated at 15:17 ET First nuclear reactors since 1970s approved in US

The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved the first nuclear reactors to be built in the country since 1978.
The commission voted 4-1 in favour of Southern Co building two nuclear reactors at an existing Georgia plant.

But Chairman Gregory Jaczko voted against, expressing concern that the licence was being approved "as if Fukushima never happened".

The reactors are expected to cost $14bn (£8.8bn) and could begin operating as early as 2016 or 2017.

No reactors have been approved for construction since a year before the accident at Three Mile Island, a nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania, in 1979.

'Binding commitment'
Safety concerns around nuclear power have risen following a meltdown at Japan's Fukushima power plant in March 2011 after an earthquake and tsunami damaged safety features.

In the wake of the Japanese disaster the commission launched a review into whether existing and new US reactors could withstand natural disasters like earthquakes and floods.

Mr Jaczko said he believes approving the reactors "requires some type of binding commitment" that safety enhancements planned from the review would be in place before the reactors opened.

Southern's project is considered a test of whether the industry can avoid costly delays that plagued previous reactors.

The Obama administration has offered Southern and its partners $8.3bn in federal loan guarantees, helping lowering financing costs.

The reactor design, approved separately in December, will also be used by utility companies in Florida and South Carolina currently in the approval process.
This is certainly something to keep an eye on. Though I suppose if something bad happens, it's only Georgia. :wink:
Image
User avatar
The Cleric
Thy Kingdom Come...
Posts: 741
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 1:34 pm
19
Location: The Right Hand Of GOD
Contact:

#2 Re: Nuclear reactors coming back to the US

Post by The Cleric »

Please please PLEASE let this happen. Please. It's not so hard, if people would just shut up and let the scientists do the explaining and not the lobbyists and special interest groups.
Never shall innocent blood be shed, yet the blood of the wicked shall flow like a river.

The three shall spread their blackened wings and be the vengeful striking hammer of god.
User avatar
General Havoc
Mr. Party-Killbot
Posts: 5245
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 2:12 pm
19
Location: The City that is not Frisco
Contact:

#3 Re: Nuclear reactors coming back to the US

Post by General Havoc »

About goddamn time that new nuclear plants started getting going. Down with superstition and up with science.
Gaze upon my works, ye mighty, and despair...

Havoc: "So basically if you side against him, he summons Cthulu."
Hotfoot: "Yes, which is reasonable."
User avatar
Josh
Resident of the Kingdom of Eternal Cockjobbery
Posts: 8114
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 4:51 pm
19
Location: Kingdom of Eternal Cockjobbery

#4 Re: Nuclear reactors coming back to the US

Post by Josh »

Having participated in nuclear-related industry, this is just one hurdle among many to clear. I have hopes that this carries on, but the litigation is going to get messy. At my previous employer, we had environmental groups illegally funding a political campaign against us. When we won the election, they went through the registration rolls and claimed that we shipped illegal immigrants in to bolster the vote.

Among those included in the list of suspicious-sounding names they 'found' was the company's chief financial officer. Because her surname is "Sanchez", y'see.

Nuke runs into the BANANA (Build Absolutely Nothing, Anywhere, Near Anyone) and NIMBY reactions bigtime.

Still and all, we need nuke and we need to be cranking them out as fast as we possibly can.

Also, fuck Chairman Jaczko. Fukushima still hasn't produced a radiation fatality nor, far as I know, any radiation sickness. Are we restricting the creation of natural gas plants because one torched off after the earthquake?

Image
When the Frog God smiles, arm yourself.
"'Flammable' and 'inflammable' have the same meaning! This language is insane!"
GIVE ME COFFEE AND I WILL ALLOW YOU TO LIVE!- Frigid
"Ork 'as no automatic code o' survival. 'is partic'lar distinction from all udda livin' gits is tha necessity ta act inna face o' alternatives by means o' dakka."
I created the sound of madness, wrote the book on pain
User avatar
Cynical Cat
Arch-Magician
Posts: 11930
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 8:53 pm
19
Location: Ice Sarcophagus outside a ruined Jedi Temple
Contact:

#5 Re: Nuclear reactors coming back to the US

Post by Cynical Cat »

Josh wrote: Also, fuck Chairman Jaczko. Fukushima still hasn't produced a radiation fatality nor, far as I know, any radiation sickness. Are we restricting the creation of natural gas plants because one torched off after the earthquake?
It will. A number of their workers took high doses. On the other hand, if you compare energy generated to number of deaths caused nuclear beats every other type of power plant. Coal, for example, kills far more people and dumps more radioactive pollutants into the atmosphere.
It's not that I'm unforgiving, it's that most of the people who wrong me are unrepentant assholes.
User avatar
frigidmagi
Dragon Death-Marine General
Posts: 14757
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 11:03 am
19
Location: Alone and unafraid

#6 Re: Nuclear reactors coming back to the US

Post by frigidmagi »

If nuclear power caused a 1/10th of the deaths coal caused (I'll be nice and not count the deaths from mining, which is a huge fraction of the total), we'd never hear the end of it! Coal kills tens of thousands.
"it takes two sides to end a war but only one to start one. And those who do not have swords may still die upon them." Tolken
User avatar
General Havoc
Mr. Party-Killbot
Posts: 5245
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 2:12 pm
19
Location: The City that is not Frisco
Contact:

#7 Re: Nuclear reactors coming back to the US

Post by General Havoc »

On a slightly different note, that picture is awesome.
Gaze upon my works, ye mighty, and despair...

Havoc: "So basically if you side against him, he summons Cthulu."
Hotfoot: "Yes, which is reasonable."
User avatar
LadyTevar
Pleasure Kitten Foreman
Posts: 13197
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 8:25 pm
18
Location: In your lap, purring
Contact:

#8 Re: Nuclear reactors coming back to the US

Post by LadyTevar »

frigidmagi wrote:If nuclear power caused a 1/10th of the deaths coal caused (I'll be nice and not count the deaths from mining, which is a huge fraction of the total), we'd never hear the end of it! Coal kills tens of thousands.
No, honey, go ahead and add in the cost in living miners. Its' inseparable from the whole.

I will simply state that one of WV's largest steam turbine power plants was build with the option to switch from coal to nuke. IIRC, it would take less than a month.
Image

Dogs are Man's Best Friend
Cats are Man's Adorable Little Serial Killers
User avatar
Josh
Resident of the Kingdom of Eternal Cockjobbery
Posts: 8114
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 4:51 pm
19
Location: Kingdom of Eternal Cockjobbery

#9 Re: Nuclear reactors coming back to the US

Post by Josh »

LadyTevar wrote:I will simply state that one of WV's largest steam turbine power plants was build with the option to switch from coal to nuke. IIRC, it would take less than a month.
Got any more info on that? I'd be amazed if they had something that simple to convert, with the cooling towers and reactor vessels and all that associated magic nuke engineering stuff.

(Not saying you're wrong, just that it'd be intensely cool if so.)
Cynical Cat wrote:It will. A number of their workers took high doses. On the other hand, if you compare energy generated to number of deaths caused nuclear beats every other type of power plant. Coal, for example, kills far more people and dumps more radioactive pollutants into the atmosphere.
Rad sickness is actually specific to receiving a big-ass acute dose. Now I did stop following the story after a month or so, but up to that point nobody had received dosage past the regulated special limits, which were still within spitting range of the usual conservative industry standards from what I saw.

Now, somebody might come down with a radiation-induced cancer later on, but even that's probably iffy. The standards the US runs trend out to a one percent increase in cancer risk if you work a forty year career in radiation-related fields, according to my Rad Worker classes.

The rad business is funny because it's so hyper-intensively regulated, to the point where what are miniscule risks are treated as potentially catastrophic. Now a lot of people say "Good! It's RADIATION!" but it gets to where you'll have major drama because a skosh of leaked tritium from an exit sign can become a major issue. Outside of a rad facility, nobody would think a thing of it, but inside and in the wrong place it becomes a major drama inducing endless meetings, finger-pointing, and maybe somebody gets fired, usually the guy who caught the buck last.

So you go from this hyper-regulated environment to the wide world outside. Any landfill in the world is rife with mercury, arsenic, and so on, has a shitload of methane waiting to cook off in a lovely fire that won't go out for days, etc. But very few people worry about stuff like that. Coal, as you point out, is nasty every which way and it dumps radioactive elements into the atmosphere.

(Which is much less bad than everything else it dumps, mind.)

To give an idea of how the safety standards roll, at least in US industry, the federally mandated max whole-body exposure in a year is 5 REM. Now we capped at 2, because going over your internal cap will produce drama and paperwork, but going over the fed cap will produce a shitstorm.

The average person gets over 1 REM a year from environmental sources alone. The average smoker gets 1.8 REM a year just from smoking. What does that mean? Pretty much jack and diddly, because the standards are extremely conservative. Living in Kentucky or Pennsylvania means you'll get triple the fed allowable radon dosage each year, just because of how much of the stuff occurs naturally there. Swimming in the ocean means you're swimming with microscopic uranium. Eating bananas or Brazil nuts gets you a dose. Sleeping next to somebody gets you a dose. Sleeping by yourself gets you a dose because we all have some radioactive elements within us.

It's another failure of education and it really pisses me off because I preferred radiation hazards to chemical hazards. Radioactivity is often polite- you can get a meter and check for it, or take a quick smear and get a read on it in a few minutes. If it's pumping out enough juice enough to kill you quick, you know it's there and you know how close you can get reeeeeal easy. On the other hand if you want to deal with something like arsenic, hey, take a smear and send it to the lab. In a couple of weeks you know how bad it is.*

The worst I ever worked in any proximity to was a bit over 200 REM an hour contact dose. That's kind of nasty, lethal dose is about 500 REM and so if you took a nap on the shit you'd get a lethal dose after a while. I stood about 200 yards away with a good berm of cover and didn't catch jack shit in dose. Inverse square law and some dirt shielding and it's easy-peasy. Highest dose on that job was the crane jockey, who took a whole whopping 15 milliREM dose.

Radiation is seriously, seriously misunderstood and it's a function of shitty education and an environmentalist lobby that has a fucking brain seizure on the topic. Of course, in our current media environment the coal companies are bigger players, so you could watch the usual 'journalism' on Fukushima followed by ads for Clean Coal, a bullshit scam if there ever was one.

Urgh.

/soapbox

* It can get a bit more complicated than that with airborne, crits and so on, but other than the airborne that's totally outside of my field and in the hands of the pocket protector brigade.
When the Frog God smiles, arm yourself.
"'Flammable' and 'inflammable' have the same meaning! This language is insane!"
GIVE ME COFFEE AND I WILL ALLOW YOU TO LIVE!- Frigid
"Ork 'as no automatic code o' survival. 'is partic'lar distinction from all udda livin' gits is tha necessity ta act inna face o' alternatives by means o' dakka."
I created the sound of madness, wrote the book on pain
User avatar
Josh
Resident of the Kingdom of Eternal Cockjobbery
Posts: 8114
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 4:51 pm
19
Location: Kingdom of Eternal Cockjobbery

#10 Re: Nuclear reactors coming back to the US

Post by Josh »

General Havoc wrote:On a slightly different note, that picture is awesome.
Nature makes the best fireworks.
When the Frog God smiles, arm yourself.
"'Flammable' and 'inflammable' have the same meaning! This language is insane!"
GIVE ME COFFEE AND I WILL ALLOW YOU TO LIVE!- Frigid
"Ork 'as no automatic code o' survival. 'is partic'lar distinction from all udda livin' gits is tha necessity ta act inna face o' alternatives by means o' dakka."
I created the sound of madness, wrote the book on pain
User avatar
Cynical Cat
Arch-Magician
Posts: 11930
Joined: Thu Jun 09, 2005 8:53 pm
19
Location: Ice Sarcophagus outside a ruined Jedi Temple
Contact:

#11 Re: Nuclear reactors coming back to the US

Post by Cynical Cat »

Josh wrote:
Rad sickness is actually specific to receiving a big-ass acute dose. Now I did stop following the story after a month or so, but up to that point nobody had received dosage past the regulated special limits, which were still within spitting range of the usual conservative industry standards from what I saw.
Unfortunately the Japanese were lying their asses off during that first month. Some ugly stuff has come out. Workers who received serious radiation burns and will be at high risks for cancer for the rest of their lives. Of course, to put it in perspective, no one has died yet. The number of people who had serious exposures is at most, several dozen. And that's for a shitty reactor design that should have been phased out years ago.

As for rad versus chemicals, yes radiation is nicely measurable and has its ass ruled by nice and steady physical laws. There's some seriously nightmare fuel chemicals out there (check out the blog "10 things I refuse to work with" for some of the nastiest including uranium hexafloride). Some of that shit is really fucking volatile and helliciously corrosive (there's one that will burn sand).
It's not that I'm unforgiving, it's that most of the people who wrong me are unrepentant assholes.
User avatar
LadyTevar
Pleasure Kitten Foreman
Posts: 13197
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 8:25 pm
18
Location: In your lap, purring
Contact:

#12 Re: Nuclear reactors coming back to the US

Post by LadyTevar »

It was built with three big cooling towers
Image

Dogs are Man's Best Friend
Cats are Man's Adorable Little Serial Killers
User avatar
Josh
Resident of the Kingdom of Eternal Cockjobbery
Posts: 8114
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 4:51 pm
19
Location: Kingdom of Eternal Cockjobbery

#13 Re: Nuclear reactors coming back to the US

Post by Josh »

Cynical Cat wrote:Unfortunately the Japanese were lying their asses off during that first month. Some ugly stuff has come out. Workers who received serious radiation burns and will be at high risks for cancer for the rest of their lives. Of course, to put it in perspective, no one has died yet. The number of people who had serious exposures is at most, several dozen. And that's for a shitty reactor design that should have been phased out years ago.

As for rad versus chemicals, yes radiation is nicely measurable and has its ass ruled by nice and steady physical laws. There's some seriously nightmare fuel chemicals out there (check out the blog "10 things I refuse to work with" for some of the nastiest including uranium hexafloride). Some of that shit is really fucking volatile and helliciously corrosive (there's one that will burn sand).
Thanks for the update. Fucking idiots screwed us all.

I'll check out the blog.
When the Frog God smiles, arm yourself.
"'Flammable' and 'inflammable' have the same meaning! This language is insane!"
GIVE ME COFFEE AND I WILL ALLOW YOU TO LIVE!- Frigid
"Ork 'as no automatic code o' survival. 'is partic'lar distinction from all udda livin' gits is tha necessity ta act inna face o' alternatives by means o' dakka."
I created the sound of madness, wrote the book on pain
Post Reply