Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How close is your home to a nuclear power plant? - Interesting!
http://money.cnn.com/news/specials/nuclear_power_plants_locations/index.html

Posted on 03/18/2011 2:02:43 PM PDT by jcsjcm

I'm not worried about how close I am, I just found this very interesting and thought some of you freepers might like to know as well!

Some of these plants I've never heard of!


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; Reference; Science
KEYWORDS: nuclearpowerplants
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 next last
To: jcsjcm

They don’t show Canadian Nuke plants. I guess the isotopes know better than to cross the border.


61 posted on 03/18/2011 3:08:42 PM PDT by Straight Vermonter (Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WestwardHo
"Are you west of Eastern New Mexico? Would you enjoy your ranch house bathed in the red glow of the hazard lights atop the forest of windmills at night? I don’t know where property rights fits in there. I hate the sight of the @#$$%^ things. Too bad they were stone still when we were having sub-zero temps this winter!"

Nope. You probably already guessed that I'm not a New Yorker, Californian or any variation of such. I'm in the middle of nowhere on the Rockies. Some New Yorkers down the road hate wind turbines, but they're not even within seeing distance. They can have some say in the matter, when they buy enough acreage to avoid seeing them.

I'll build what I want to build here, including a small, 10-foot, scary (to some) wind turbine for about 700 watts about half the time (an extra kilowatt with the new controller). The HOA queens and other globalistic./commie regulators can't cross the "no tresspassing" signs on the private road entrance a few miles away.

...little different situation here. I'm just saying that propaganda efforts against all wind turbines in general are stupid and had best be narrowed to those of subsidy-sucking power companies. ...need to ditch the commie subsidies/tax credits for PV (solar) electric modules, too. Such government welfare only hikes prices and kills better business.


62 posted on 03/18/2011 3:12:31 PM PDT by familyop ("Don't worry, they'll row for a month before they figure out I'm fakin' it." --Deacon, "Waterworld")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

You already know that around 25% of produced power is lost due to the distance from windmill, through long power lines to destination.
Huge subsidies are paid to the landowner to install these monsters on his land.
I don’t know how in the world, we can afford to keep running the windmills. Utility bills can’t possibly cover the running cost.
Understand I’m a grandma. I do not claim expertise.


63 posted on 03/18/2011 3:15:07 PM PDT by WestwardHo (Whom the gods would destroy, they first drive mad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: familyop
I'm just saying that propaganda efforts against all wind turbines in general are stupid

Machine Design is an engineering trade publication with no political axe to grind. Here's their take, and so far nobody has submitted any rebuttals.

http://beta.machinedesign.com/article/leland-teschlers-editorial-how-much-power-does-it-take-to-run-a-wind-turbine-0810

64 posted on 03/18/2011 3:17:08 PM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm
162 miles away from the closet Nuke (down south, North of Santa Barbara)....

But only 40 miles away from San Francisco where there resides more noxious and deadly plagues than some by-products from a fission reaction...

65 posted on 03/18/2011 3:17:08 PM PDT by El Cid (Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation
"I saw on FR earlier this week that the typical coal and nuke power plants produce electricity 80+ per cent of the time and wind turbines and solar produce 8 per cent of the time."

Yes. There are not enough wind and sun in most places (especially wind), and most big power plants are better of with nuclear or coal energy. Wind and sun are both good where I'm at, and the newly arriving lefties from the coasts continue to try to outlaw wind turbines and solar heating systems on large, private, off-grid properties. They're nuts, and we build anyway. They grow pot while trying to outlaw our healthier gardens (vegetables and grains for animals--no pot).

The big default will be good for our country, IMO (see "men at work").


66 posted on 03/18/2011 3:18:29 PM PDT by familyop ("Don't worry, they'll row for a month before they figure out I'm fakin' it." --Deacon, "Waterworld")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: mountn man
"And, besides 3 voluptuous breasts and larger feet, I'm perfectly normal. "

I just love this place! :) hahaha
67 posted on 03/18/2011 3:19:29 PM PDT by jcsjcm (This country was built on exceptionalism and individualism. In God we Trust - Laus Deo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm

I am screwed. 27 miles from primary home and 47 miles from secondary home. I never even knew this. Let’s hope that they are doing something to ensure that they are safe.


68 posted on 03/18/2011 3:19:57 PM PDT by napscoordinator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm
Kinda far:
☼ Diablo Canyon 159 mi
☼ San Onofre 367 mi

Its the Earthquakes Im worried about . .

69 posted on 03/18/2011 3:23:25 PM PDT by ßuddaßudd (7 days - 7 ways Guero >>> with a floating, shifting, ever changing persona.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

Is Detroit in a Tsunami zone? Then they have very little to worry about. Fukushima withstood the earthquake, 7 times greater than what it was designed to withstand. It was the tsunami that doomed it.


70 posted on 03/18/2011 3:33:19 PM PDT by Tatze (I reject your reality and substitute my own!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation
Teschler's piece is a fallacy in regards to the situation here. None of his arguments apply (all beside the point). All I care about is how many watts per dollar that I get out of the thing. The open alternator is mounted on a trailer hub. It uses large, permanent magnets. There's no need for power to de-ice, etc. There's plenty of steady wind (over 20 mph right now and about half of time).

Wind Power
http://www.otherpower.com/otherpower_wind.shtml

MPPT controller for small wind turbines (well, small up to 20-foot rotors or so)
http://www.midnitesolar.com/

Here's a rebuttal against the left/liberal canard about bird kills. A conservative argument against the wind turbines of big power companies would be the argument against subsidies, and I can agree with that. But arguments in favor of regulations against wind turbines in general are arguments against property rights--arguments that will fail after the default.


Putting Wind Power's Effect on Birds in Perspective

Mick Sagrillo, Sagrillo Power & Light Co.
AWEA

Electricity generated from renewable energy resources is an environmentally-preferred alternative to conventionally produced electricity from fossil fuel and nuclear power plants. Many people believe that wind turbines should be part of the solution to a healthier environment, not part of the problem.

Over the past fifteen years, a number of reports have appeared in the popular press about wind turbines killing birds. Some writers have gone so far as to dub wind generators "raptor-matics" and "cuisinarts of the sky". Unfortunately, some of these articles have been used as "evidence" to stop the construction of a wind generator in someone's back yard. The reports of dead birds create a dilemma. Do wind generators really kill birds? If so, how serious is the problem? 

A confused public oftentimes does not know what to believe. Many people participate in the U.S.'s second largest past time, bird watching. Other's are truly concerned about the environment and what they perceive as yet another assault on our fragile ecosystem. Unwittingly, they rally behind the few ill-informed obstructionists who have realized that the perception of bird mortality due to wind turbines is a hot button issue, with the power to bring construction to a halt.

Birds live a tenuous existence. There are any number of things that can cause their individual deaths or collective demise. For example, bird collisions with objects in nature are a rather common occurrence, and young birds are quite clumsy when it comes to landing on a perch after flight. As a result, about 30% of total first-year bird deaths are attributed to natural collisions.

By far, the largest causes of mortality among birds include loss of habitat due to human infringement, environmental despoliation, and collisions with man-made objects. Since wind turbines fall into the last category, it is worthwhile to examine other human causes of avian deaths and compare these to mortality from wind turbines.

Death by….

Utility transmission and distribution lines, the backbone of our electrical power system, are responsible for 130 to 174 million bird deaths a year in the U.S.1 Many of the affected birds are those with large wingspans, including raptors and waterfowl. While attempting to land on power lines and poles, birds are sometimes electrocuted when their wings span between two hot wires. Many other birds are killed as their flight paths intersect the power lines strung between poles and towers. One report states that: "for some types of birds, power line collisions appear to be a significant source of mortality." 2

Collisions with automobiles and trucks result in the deaths of between 60 and 80 million birds annually in the U.S.3 As more vehicles share the roadway, and our automotive society becomes more pervasive, these numbers will only increase. Our dependence on oil has taken its toll on birds too. Even the relatively high incidence of bird kills at Altamont Pass (about 92 per year) pales in comparison to the number of birds killed from the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska. In fact, according to author Paul Gipe, the Altamont Pass wind farm would have to operate for 500 to 1000 years to "achieve" the same mortality level as the Exxon Valdez event in 1989.

Tall building and residential house windows also claim their share of birds. Some of the five million tall buildings in U.S. cities have been documented as being a chronic mortality problem for migrating birds. There are more than 100 million houses in the U.S. House windows are more of a problem for birds in rural areas than in cities or towns. While there are no required ongoing studies of bird mortality due to buildings or house windows, the best estimates put the toll due collisions with these structures at between 100 million and a staggering 1 billion deaths annually.4 

Lighted communication towers turn out to be one of the more serious problems for birds, especially for migratory species that fly at night. One study began its conclusion with, "It is apparent from the analysis of the data that significant numbers of birds are dying in collisions with communications towers, their guy wires, and related structures."5 Another report states, "The main environmental problem we are watching out for with telecommunication towers are the deaths of birds and bats."6 

This is not news, as bird collisions with lighted television and radio towers have been documented for over 50 years. Some towers are responsible for very high episodic fatalities. One television transmitter tower in Eau Claire, WI, was responsible for the deaths of over 1,000 birds on each of 24 consecutive nights. A "record 30,000 birds were estimated killed on one night" at this same tower.7 In Kansas, 10,000 birds were killed in one night by a telecommunications tower.8 Numerous large bird kills, while not as dramatic as the examples cited above, continue to occur across the country at telecommunication tower sites.

The number of telecommunication towers in the U.S. currently exceeds 77,000, and this number could easily double by 2010. The rush to construction is being driven mainly by our use of cell phones, and to a lesser extent by the impending switch to digital television and radio. Current mortality estimates due to telecommunication towers are 40 to 50 million birds per year.9 The proliferation of these towers in the near future will only exacerbate this situation.

Agricultural pesticides are "conservatively estimated" to directly kill 67 million birds per year.10 These numbers do not account for avian mortality associated with other pesticide applications, such as on golf courses. Nor do they take into consideration secondary losses due to pesticide use as these toxic chemicals travel up the food chain. This includes poisoning due to birds ingesting sprayed insects, the intended target of the pesticides.

Cats, both feral and housecats, also take their toll on birds. A Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR) report states that, "recent research suggests that rural free-ranging domestic cats in Wisconsin may be killing between 8 and 217 million birds each year. The most reasonable estimates indicate that 39 million birds are killed in the state each year."11

There are other studies on the impacts of jet engines, smoke stacks, bridges, and any number of other human structures and activities that threaten birds on a daily basis. Together, human infrastructure and industrial activities are responsible for one to four million bird deaths per day!

TOP

But what about wind turbines?

Commercial wind turbines
Since the mid-1980's, a number of research organizations, universities, and consultants have conducted studies on avian mortality due to wind turbines. In the U.S., these studies were prompted because of the relatively high number of raptors that were found dead at the Altamont Pass Wind Farms near San Francisco.

After dozens of studies spanning nearly two decades, we now know that the Altamont Pass situation is unusual in the U.S. The high raptor mortality there was the result of a convergence of factors, some of which were due to the bad siting in the local ecosystem while others were due to the wind turbine and tower technology used at the time. In fact, a very different situation exists not far away at the San Gorgonio Pass Wind Farms near Palm Springs. A 1986 study found that 69 million birds flew though the San Gorgonio Pass during the Spring and Fall migrations. During both migrating seasons, only 38 dead birds were found during that typical year, representing only 0.00006% of the migrating population. 

A report recently prepared for the Bonneville Power Administration in the Northwest U.S. states that "raptor mortality has been absent to very low at all newer generation wind plants studied in the U.S. This and other information regarding wind turbine design and wind plant/wind turbine siting strongly suggests that the level of raptor mortality observed at Altamont Pass is quite unique."12

The National Wind Coordinating Committee (NWCC) completed a comparison of wind farm avian mortality with bird mortality caused by other man-made structures in the U.S.

The NWCC did not conduct its own study, but analyzed all of the research done to date on various causes of avian mortality, including commercial wind farm turbines. They report that "data collected outside California indicate an average of 1.83 avian fatalities per turbine (for all species combined), and 0.006 raptor fatalities per turbine per year. Based on current projections of 3,500 operational wind turbines in the US by the end of 2001, excluding California, the total annual mortality was estimated at approximately 6,400 bird fatalities per year for all species combined."13


This report states that its intent is to "put avian mortality associated with windpower development into perspective with other significant sources of avian collision mortality across the United States."14  The NWCC reports that: "Based on current estimates, windplant related avian collision fatalities probably represent from 0.01% to 0.02% (i.e., 1 out of every 5,000 to 10,000) of the annual avian collision fatalities in the United States."15  That is, commercial wind turbines cause the direct deaths of only 0.01% to 0.02% of all of the birds killed by collisions with man-made structures and activities in the U.S. 

Back in Wisconsin

My home state of Wisconsin is a good example of current research. In December of 2002, the report "Effects of Wind Turbines on Birds and Bats in Northeast Wisconsin" was released. The study was completed by Robert Howe and Amy Wolf of the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay, and William Evans. Their study covered a two-year period between 1999 and 2001, in the area surrounding the 31 turbines operating in Kewaunee County by Madison Gas & Electric (MG&E) and Wisconsin Public Service (WPS) Corporation.

TOP

The report found that over the study period, 25 bird carcasses were found at the sites. The report states that "the resulting mortality rate of 1.29 birds/tower/year is close to the nationwide estimate of 2.19 birds/tower.16- The report further states, "While bird collisions do occur (with commercial wind turbines) the impacts on global populations appear to be relatively minor, especially in comparison with other human-related causes of mortality such as communications towers, collisions with buildings, and vehicles collisions. This is especially true for small scale facilities like the MG&E and WPS wind farms in Kewaunee County."17 

The report goes on to say, "previous studies suggest that the frequency of avian collisions with wind turbines is low, and the impact of wind power on bird populations today is negligible. Our study provides little evidence to refute this claim."18

So, while wind farms are responsible for the deaths of some birds, when put into the perspective of other causes of avian mortality, the impact is quite low. In other words, bird mortality at wind farms, compared to other human-related causes of bird mortality, is biologically and statistically insignificant. There is no evidence that birds are routinely being battered out of the air by rotating wind turbine blades as postulated by some in the popular press.

Home-sized wind systems

How does all of this impact the homeowner who wishes to secure a building permit to install a wind generator and tower on his or her property? They will likely still be quizzed by zoning officials or a concerned public with little to go on but the sensational headlines in the regional press. But while the press may or may not get the facts right, peoples' concerns are real, and need to be addressed with factual information such as is presented here.

While there have been any number of studies done on bird mortality caused by commercial wind installations, none have been done on the impact of home-sized wind systems on birds. The reason? It is just not an issue, especially when "big" wind's impact on birds is considered biologically insignificant.

When confronted with the question of why there were no studies done on home-sized wind systems and birds, a Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources person familiar with these issues responded, "it is not even on the radar screen." There has never been a report or documentation of a home-sized wind turbine killing birds in Wisconsin.

The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, or any other government or research organization for that matter, just does not have the financial resources to conduct a study just because a zoning official requests it, especially given the lack of evidence nationwide that any problem exists with home-sized turbines. Based on our best available information, the relatively smaller blades and short tower heights of residential wind energy systems do not present a threat to birds.

See also: Bats and Wind Turbines

__________________________________________________________________

Notes:

1. National Wind Coordinating Committee Avian Collisions with Wind Turbines: A Summary of Existing Studies and Comparisons to Other Sources of Avian Collision Mortality in the United States (NWCC), p. 10. 

2. NWCC, p. 10.
3. NWCC, p. 8.
4. Tower Kill p. 2.
5. Communication Towers: A Deadly Hazard To Birds p. 19.
6. Battered By Airwaves p. 6.
7. Battered By Airwaves p. 4.
8. Communication Tower Guidelines Could Protect Migrating Birds p. 2.
9. NWCC p. 12.
10. The Environmental and Economic Costs of Pesticide Use p. 1.
11. Cats and Wildlife: A Conservation Dilemma p. 2.
12. Synthesis and Comparison of Baseline Avian and Bat Use, Raptor Nesting and Mortality information from Proposed and Existing Wind Developments p. 7.
13. NWCC p. 2.
14. NWCC p. 1.
15. NWCC p. 2.
16. Effects of Wind Turbines on Birds and Bats in Northeast Wisconsin p. 68.
17. Effects of Wind Turbines on Birds and Bats in Northeast Wisconsin p. 75.
18. Effects of Wind Turbines on Birds and Bats in Northeast Wisconsin p. 67.

References:

Avian Collisions with Wind Turbines: A Summary of Existing Studies and Comparisons to Other Sources of Avian Collision Mortality in the United States; National Wind
Coordinating Committee; West, Inc.; August, 2001

Battered By Airwaves; Wendy K. Weisenel; Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources; October, 2002.

Cats and Wildlife: A Conservation Dilemma; John S. Coleman, Stanley A. Temple, and Scott R. Craven; University of Wisconsin-Extension; 1997.

Communication Towers: A Deadly Hazard To Birds; Gavin G. Shire, Karen Brown, and Gerald Winegrad; American Bird Conservancy; Jume, 2000.

Communication Tower Guidelines Could Protect Migrating Birds; Cat Laazaroff; Environmental News Service; 2002.

Effects of Wind Turbines on Birds and Bats in Northeast Wisconsin; Robert W. Howe, William Evans, and Amy T. Wolf; November, 2002.

Synthesis and Comparison of Baseline Avian and Bat Use, Raptor Nesting and Mortality information from Proposed and Existing Wind Developments; West, Inc.; December, 2002

The Environmental and Economic Costs of Pesticide; David Pimentel and H. Acquay; Bioscience; November, 1992.

Tower Kill; Joe Eaton; Earth Island Journal; Winter, 2003.

 

-- Mick Sagrillo, Sagrillo Power & Light Co. 



71 posted on 03/18/2011 3:40:00 PM PDT by familyop ("Don't worry, they'll row for a month before they figure out I'm fakin' it." --Deacon, "Waterworld")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: familyop

There you go confusing us with facts again!


72 posted on 03/18/2011 3:43:36 PM PDT by Gideon7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation
"Machine Design is an engineering trade publication with no political axe to grind."

The first line in the piece:
"Jerry Graf is a concerned citizen who happens to have a Master’s degree in mechanical engineering."

...concerned citizen, eh? It appears that he has a pink ax.


73 posted on 03/18/2011 3:45:04 PM PDT by familyop ("Don't worry, they'll row for a month before they figure out I'm fakin' it." --Deacon, "Waterworld")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm

San Onofre 13 mi
Diablo Canyon 2214 mi
Palo Verde 3277 mi

I’m in SoCal


74 posted on 03/18/2011 3:51:10 PM PDT by TruthConquers ( Delendae sunt publicae scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TruthConquers

Let’s try this again.
Silly nuclear rector numbers smushed into the miles!

San Onofre 13 mi
Diablo Canyon 214 mi
Palo Verde 277 mi

I’m in SoCal


75 posted on 03/18/2011 3:54:00 PM PDT by TruthConquers ( Delendae sunt publicae scholae)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: jcsjcm

San Onofre, CA — about 70 miles

Diablo Canyon, CA — about 175 miles

But........... as a former smoker who lived across the street from a busy L.A. freeway for 25 years, I suspect radiation from these plants is not my biggest problem ;)


76 posted on 03/18/2011 3:57:10 PM PDT by CaliforniaCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Gideon7
"There you go confusing us with facts again!"

Thanks. I just wish that they'd catch on to arguing against the various energy subsidies instead of using generalizing arguments of the left against the machines and our right to build or use them.

Such political waywardness really pushes me more nonpolitical every month, and that'll be the death of the political game as it's being played. Because we're not buying much of anything and are tightening up more every month. A few months from now, there won't be many government or big global corporate jobs, and therefore, no big, socialist political PACs. There won't be much, if any, Social Security or pension incomes. There won't be any social engineering jobs (e.g., feminist social work, affirmative action, etc.). ...no easy money. There will only be men and women at work for their families, like it or not.

I'm going out to work now. It's time to begin to do some gardening where they say that it can't be done. ;-)

Thanks again. Here's a link to instructions for the 10-footer. But it's for those who have a lot of wind most of the time, and industrial and construction safety experience are probably prerequisites (or a whole lot of common sense and attention to physical interactions).

Homebrew 10' Wind Turbine construction
http://www.otherpower.com/turbineplans.shtml

As for nuclear power plants (topic of the posted article above this thread), more of those back east are probably a good idea. As for the West, well,...

The Wayward Wind
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSPLSo3U46Q


77 posted on 03/18/2011 4:02:34 PM PDT by familyop ("Don't worry, they'll row for a month before they figure out I'm fakin' it." --Deacon, "Waterworld")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

I’m cool with Fermi being nearby.


78 posted on 03/18/2011 4:06:22 PM PDT by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio
In between Fermi and Davis Besse.

One that is like Fukushima and one (DB) that FE put the hole in it's Rx head.

I've worked at both in the past and I'm not worried.

We must either select Nuclear Power or Coal as our primary base load. We can't abandon both. Actually I prefer both.

Natural Gas is a fuel of convenience and should be reserved for home/commercial/institutional heating and possibly as an alternative vehicle fuel (in liquefied form). Why waste easy fuel on power generation at a stationary generator staffed by people who can deal with the more difficult fuels we have here on earth?

79 posted on 03/18/2011 4:09:29 PM PDT by SteamShovel ("Does the noise in my head bother you?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: familyop

The bird kills are actually a plus.
They provide shredded poultry for the starving victims of the Baraqqi Depression.


80 posted on 03/18/2011 4:17:45 PM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson