Originally Posted by AgNuke1707
This is absolutely ridiculous ... TMI 1 is still operational and TMI 2 is shutdown and contained. The effective dose equivalent to the population was less than 1 mSv per person. Hardly relevant considering you get more than that from the environment every year.
Nice evasion of the point! Again, how many people want to live near a nuclear plant. Probably a few more than want to live near a coal plant, but that also isn't the point. Everyone knows the site is still operational and it usually poses no problem during operations, but the one reactor is shut down and contained. Yeah, because it is so safe. You don't talk about how close a real release was. And I'm not anti-nuke so stop saying that it is ridiculous to for me to call you on the "nukes are only clean" bandwagon.
The area around Chernobyl is indeed not great for living, but you have to put the blame for that on the Soviets and the people running the reactor. No Western country would ever authorize a reactor to be built the way Chernobyl was. Outside of Russia, when the temperature goes up in your fuel at a certain point the reactivity goes down...
Again, the technology is better now and a lot better outside the old Soviet Union, but mistakes happened and mistakes will happen and no coal plant will contaminate an entire region for 10,000 years.
Here is a good pdf for the future of nuclear power in the future. It is UK centered, but the issues are pretty clearly laid out: http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/publ...missioning.pdf
I'll tell you what, if you can jump into that pond, unload a portion of the core into your pickup and drive away, you are indeed an immortal. You WILL die before you can get away. Please don't think a terrorist is going steal a multi-ton core section releasing extraordinary amounts of radiation. Also, these ponds are INSIDE the containment building so radiation isn't released during refueling. Containment vessels of nuclear reactors are built to withstand jumbo-jet impacts...
I never said terrorists would steal material from a storage pond, dillweed, but thanks for describing the dangers. Also ponds are not inside containment buildings. At the Trojan site there is a radioactive pond sitting out in the open between a camp ground and the Columbia River and the whole thing is on a geologic fault. Reactors are inside very strong containment buildings, not the ponds and not the storage tanks at Hanford. I've worked with the public relations team of both places designing museum exhibits and such so I've been there and seen that.
Trojan was closed primarily because the steam tubes in the steam generator kept failing.
And that was one of 100 problems with it. What is your point?
There was also violent opposition during and after its construction.
And that made the plant uneconomic how? PGE did spent millions trying to stop local votes against the plant, which they successfully did and then closed it on their own a few months later. Now you and they are trying to rewrite history as if opposition was too great for the poor power plant. Typical false claim.
The NRC deemed it unsafe to operate because of the secondary equipment problems.
My point exactly. Not to mention all of the millions lost in the WWPS projects in Washington.
During operation though Trojan supplied 12% of all power to the grid in Oregon.
Yes, it was very useful. I would still support it if it could run safely and efficiently even now, since more coal and large hydro is no longer an option in the area. Again, I'm not anti-nuke. I am anti-people who think nukes solve environmental problems and then call eco-groups that point this out as evil. This photo shows how dangerous the situation is ... http://capefeare.com/snpp.gif
PGE is the operator and therefore responsible for the decom and cleaning of the site as per their license with the NRC, so no, the peoples tax money isn't going to move the core. The pressure vessel was buried at Hanford and the spent fuel casks are still at the Trojan site awaiting transport to Yucca Mountain.
And I am still paying for it as a rate payer too. But if you think PGE didn't use any government funds or government research or government subsidies or help in getting and storing the core at Hanford, you are quite misinformed. And you act as if fuel casks sitting waiting for transport to Yucca Mountain is a good thing.
I also don't quite understand your argument about it taking a lot of energy to build a nuclear plant. It takes energy to build anything ... a power plant, a skyscraper, a car ... what do you mean it takes decades for new energy to be produced? If I build two nuclear plants using electricity from the established grip, then I've added anywhere from 2000 to 2600 MW to the electric grid. Your argument about required energy makes little sense ... you don't "consume" energy, it has to be conserved.The energy required to build the plant is either expended as heat during construction or held in the potential energy of the structure itself. The reactor relseases energy from fission, which is given off as heat ... blah blah blah ... turbine turns and your get electricty from the generator coils ... its just transferred from one state to another.
Nice attempt at trying to teach me thermodynamics, but conversion to heat is the same as "consumption" for any practical purpose unless you are chemosynthetic algae. Once the steam cools to water again, what can you do with the heat? If you think nuclear power is so practical, name one nuclear plant on Earth that was build with private funds and actually paid itself off during its life time.
Nuclear power is a necessary evil in a world where we can't seem to stop accelerating our consumption of energy. I think you need to have a realistic view of what nuclear power and nuclear waste really means. There is not that much uranium in the world and it would help if power companies and the Dept. of Energy would not destroy Native American reservation lands when they try to mine it.
For anyone interested in some facts, this is a decidedly anti-nuclear site, but most of the facts are true as far as I've researched: http://www.nirs.org/factsheets/kyotonuc.htm