Nuclear power's 'renaissance'?

The Washington Times ^ | June 18, 2006 | Joyce Howard Price

[T Ruth]

It's been 20 years since the deadly explosion and fire at Ukraine's Chernobyl nuclear power plant, and with the passing of two decades comes a time of renewed interest in nuclear energy, given the high levels of safety and production at U.S. power plants and the advancement of technology.

Industry leaders are calling this the "renaissance of nuclear energy," . . .

. . . A partnership called UniStar Nuclear, . . . has told the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) it expects to submit applications to build and operate reactors at both Calvert Cliffs and a site in upstate New York in 2008 and 2009.

* * *

Nuclear power plants were a pariah for many years after TMI 2 and Chernobyl, but now the mood is changing for these reasons: the overall performance and safety records of nuclear power plants; the fact that they are clean -- with no air-pollution emissions at all when they are operated correctly; plus the fact there are already designs on the books successfully being used for even safer reactors being built in Europe and Asia.

* * *

Nuclear power supporters include President Bush; his brother, Florida Gov. Jeb Bush; Christie Whitman, former Environmental Protection Agency director and New Jersey governor; and Sen. Pete V. Domenici, New Mexico Republican, who chairs the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on energy and water development.

Mr. Kerekes of NEI agrees the future looks bright for nuclear power.

"We have 103 nuclear reactors operating in the United States, which represent 2,500 combined reactor years. So we have compiled quite a lot of experience."

* * *

[gotribe]

The greens will scream themselves into irrelevance on this one.

[xcamel]

imagine the headline:

Nuclear power's 'New Glow'?

[Buck W.]

One of the very few things that the French have done right.

[rottndog]

"We have 103 nuclear reactors operating in the United States, which represent 2,500 combined reactor years. So we have compiled quite a lot of experience."

You throw in the hundreds of reactors the US Navy has built, operated, and decommissioned without incident, and the safety record of US nucs is truly impressive.

[T Ruth]

Interesting. I hadn't thought of that.

How does the Navy do the decommissioning?

[VOA]

bump

[Peter W. Kessler]

Maybe they retire the ship?

[SnuffaBolshevik]

Let's see-

The tree huggers don't like fossil (carbon dioxide, greenhouse gasses, global warming, unsightly Gulf Oil rigs).

Hydro-electric (ugly, deprive fish of upstream affirmative action rights).

Windmills (Despoils Kennedy's ocean view, kills birds too dumb to avoid blades).

Geothermal (Screws up Old Faithful)

Nuclear (Three Mile Island, Chernobyl)

Wood, Coal, Pellet stoves (See #1)

Solar (Icky rows of cells in the pristine desert)

The only thing left is to burn endangered species manure and go to work on bicycles dressed in Mao suits.

[rottndog]

How does the Navy do the decommissioning?

I can only speak for subs, but I imagine surface vessels are similar: after the fuel rods are removed, reactor compartment(the whole reactor section of the boat) is cut out and sealed on both ends, then shipped to a long term storage facility at Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington State, where it is buried.

[T Ruth]

How? What do they do with the radioactive parts?

Maybe it is a secret.

[T Ruth]

Thanks.

[T Ruth]

burn endangered species manure and go to work on bicycles dressed in Mao suits.

LOL

[SamAdams76]

Back when I was young and ignorant, I used to go around wearing a "No Nukes" T-shirt and all that time I was thinking "No Nukes" was the name of a super rock band that featured Jackson Browne, Bruce Springsteen and a host of others.

I'm not young anymore.

And what's this big thing about Bonnie Raitt? She's been a critic's darling for like 30 years now and I think her music is godawful. And I'm saying that as a blues fan too.

[mike70]

The idea is great, but the siting is not good. Put all nuclear plants in the deserts of Wy, Nv, NM, or MT, well away from cities. We now have nearly lossless superconductor cable that can transfer the electricity to whatever power grid needs it, all we need is high temperature superconductor interconnects. New superconducting cable has a core of stainless steel and is strong enough to withstand watever stresses it encounters (I was the first one to deposit fully superconducting thin films on stainless steel.)

As a side benefit, we can bury the cables (reduces heating) and run maglev trains atop the cables.

Sometimes we Americans are dumber than we should be.

[ConorMacNessa]

In the U.S.A., deaths inside a nuclear reactor are slightly behind deaths in cars driven by Ted Kennedy. TMI killed no one with the possible exeption of guys who lost their jobs in its wake. Chernobyl only illustrates what will happen in a command economy supervised by a totalitarian government. It has no relevance to anything in the U.S.

Time to fire the nukes up - they're safe.

[rottndog]

Nucs have to be near a water source.

[BlazingArizona]

How does the Navy do the decommissioning?

If i were running things, it would start with Michael Moore bending over...

[T Ruth]

We now have nearly lossless superconductor cable that can transfer the electricity to whatever power grid needs it, all we need is high temperature superconductor interconnects. New superconducting cable has a core of stainless steel and is strong enough to withstand watever stresses it encounters (I was the first one to deposit fully superconducting thin films on stainless steel.)

I seem to recall that President Bush recently said that we are very near tremendous leaps in energy technology. Your information is one example; the developments (both already realized and on the drawing board) in battery technology and energy storage technology is another. I think the President is right.

I would like to see plug-in electric vehicles with batteries recharged by nuclear power -- the reduction in demand for oil would decimate the price of oil and remove funding from the terrorists. I think this scenario is plausible, but probably twenty years down the road.

[BlazingArizona]

Put all nuclear plants in the deserts of Wy, Nv, NM, or MT, well away from cities.

Instead of waiting for superconductive cable technology, use our existing site at the edge of Phoenix, currently running three reactors. There is room for another fifteen or so units. Just connect to the existing grid for regional reliability, then send us all the jobs those reactors can create.