Posted on 02/08/2014 4:13:24 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Near Winslow? Is it still there?
The peanut farmer killed molten salt along with breeder reactors didn’t he?
The ORNL Salt reactor could not be recharged easily and could not get rid of the spent contaminants. Didn’t work need to be done to make the filling and cleaning of the salt medium continuous rather than batch?
If it sounds too good to be true, it is.
The total loss of cooling power at Fukushima resulted from a bad decision. Even after the coolant loop shutdown from the tsunami damage, there was still cooling power left - the shutdown reactor could have been flooded with seawater. Rather than immediately flood with seawater to prevent the meltdown, the decision was delayed because to do so would have permanently disabled the reactors. Probably the seawater flooding should have been enabled by the scram and initiated by the coolant loop shutdown, rather than subject to a fallible decision chain.
>> Also, another benefit of nuclear power is ultra-high speed data and cable transmission. Imagine paying $29.99/month for T-1 speed internet service.
>
> That would suck. T1 is only 1.544 megabits per second. I’m paying $30 a month for a 30mbits/sec download speed.
Maybe he meant T3 or T4? (see bandwidth-chart: http://www.lageman.com/bandwidth.htm )
I’m also not sure how nuclear power speeds up our internet, maybe that is just one of those “free unlimitless power” things.
The cluster-FAIL@Fukushima started decades ago, at the moment the utility accepted a reactor design that stored the spent fuel on top of the reactor.
I am not “afraid” of nuclear power, but for a variety of reasons including unnecessary risks like the way spent fuel is dealt with (and with no national storage facility), not to mention the immense capital costs and open-ended liability, I can’t wait until most of the existing plants in the US are mothballed/entombed.
Go Liquid fluoride thorium reactor! Go LENR!
I'd think that by having towns locally providing power we could (a) take down the power-transmission (and telephone) lines [for recycling] and (b) re-purposing the telephone/power lines for optical-lines.
Thanks 2ndDivisionVet.
Isn't it funny how these screwups always seem to appear at the tail end of a series of choices that taken individually, seemed perfectly reasonable to the decision makers at the time??
Investment cost = $ 2000 M/520 MWe = $4000/kWe or the same as for the traditional nuclear power plants. http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2012/ph241/schultz2/
they have to reduce that to less than $3000/kW (perhaps to 2 500) to be competitive.
California just invested in several large PV arrays at $5/W ($5k/kW). Nuclear is less expensive than Alternate Energy.
Yes, but you have to beat coal powered plants.
Production cost see page 28 SCANA provided their all-in cost estimates for nuclear ($76/MWh), natural gas ($81/MWh), coal ($117/MWh), offshore wind ($292/MWh) and solar ($437/MWh)
A very informative link that raises some questions about the design http://www.energyfromthorium.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4303
LOL - Good one hadaclueonce...
BUILDING A SAFER, CLEANER NUCLEAR REACTOR
LESLIE DEWAN AND MARK MASSIE ARE REVIVING THE NUCLEAR DREAM
Paul Kvinta
Posted May 19, 2015
http://www.popsci.com/leslie-dewan-and-mark-massie-are-reviving-nuclear-dream
Note: this topic is from 2/08/2014. I pinged you last year, this is a re-ping because there's an update (above). Thanks 2ndDivisionVet.
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.