Global Nuclear Power Boom | FEED DISCUSSION

[Publius]

Seems Texas made notes after their grid collapse several years ago.
First increased capacity of gas generation. Now expanding capacity from nuclear.

 

[Torch]

Niigata’s governor met the Kashiwazaki and Kariwa mayors today regarding TEPCO’s Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant, often described as the world’s largest by capacity. Both mayors signaled willingness to accept a restart, and the governor said he “won’t take long,” with a decision possible this month. A new prefectural survey found 61% of nearby residents say restart conditions are not yet met.

View attachment 8277

https://twitter.com/x/status/1988653285331321120

Smoke and mirrors.

1: There is too much money and way too much potential power sitting idle for that state to last.

2) They have already refueled it.

3) This over engineered beast took a 6.6. Eathquake and didn’t fault out. It was simply shut down for inspections.

On the other hand, while I wish we had plants as robust here in the USA ( I grew up between the David Bessie and the Perry Nuclear Power plants which are not watch words for robust and reliable) I question the wisdom of NEEDING to build somthing so robust because it’s in a fault zone or at risk from Tidal Waves or both.

Can you Imagine attempting, in the USA, to build a NPP in the San Andreas fault zone?

 

[NuclearID]

Can you Imagine attempting, in the USA, to build a NPP in the San Andreas fault zone?

Why no one lives there in numbers that would require a NPP. Nuclear power plants have to be close to the places they are providing power. Why NPPs are always just outside of the city or burbs. You lose power the further the electricity has to travel.

Also yes I can imagine. There are new types of nuclear power plants that are quite literally meltdown proof. And of course China is beating us to that punch too.

 

[NuclearID]

There are new types of nuclear power plants that are quite literally meltdown proof. And of course China is beating us to that punch too.

 

[Torch]

Also yes I can imagine.

Well I can Imagine the real world where you would NEVER get it built there. The protesters and the politicians would never cave. It doesn’t matter that it makes sound reason, fear wins.

 

[Torch]

There are new types of nuclear power plants that are quite literally meltdown proof. And of course China is beating us to that punch too.

The French demonstrated a self moderating reactor two decades ago. The Chinese probably just got around to stealing it. What was the names of the second crew to land on the moon? Exactly.

 

[NuclearID]

The protesters

Public sentiment on nuclear power has done an entire 180. The dumb anti-nuclear power hippies of the 60's & 70's have pretty much all gone into retirement or moved on to a better life or got on board the nuclear wagon themselves.

Younger generation is quite okay with nuclear power plants and public sentiments says so and the record breaking approval of nuclear power plants everywhere including in the United States also says so.

Didn't see not a single protest when Trump made it easier to build nuclear power plants last month. Unless I missed something?

Nuclear power is the only way forward and people are finally coming around to realizing it. About time. The times have changed Torch. Along with it, the majority in public sentiment too.

 

[NuclearID]

Also years of PR campaigns on Nuclear Power has done wonders too. Media has also done a terrific job educating the public (both left and right wing media) on nuclear power and how it is the awnser to our future energy needs and energy independence.

That PR campaign is still ongoing and in full swing. Now with politicians themselves advocating for nuclear power, will only change public sentiment further more "pro" nuclear and faster.

There is very real world momentum behind nuclear power right now and there can be no denying it.

If that makes people uncomfortable I'm genuinely not sorry. only sorry some people feel that way @everyone.

 

[Torch]

If that makes people uncomfortable I'm genuinely not sorry. only sorry some people feel that way @everyone.

 

[NuclearID]

The atom is our friend. Until it becomes ionized. Lol

 

[Deleted account]

One way or another, Japan is critically dependent on nuclear power. It's a technologically advanced island state of 120 million with no natural resources to speak of (in fact, it's one of the world's largest importers of fossil fuels - which bit it hard in the ass during WW2 when oil had to be imported from the Dutch Indies in easy-to-intercept tankers). They can't directly import electricity, and can't generate it in large enough quantities any other way - so despite the stigma that still attaches to anything nuclear in Japanese culture, they're committed to building and operating NPPs.

And as far as building those in seismically active zones - all of Japan is at risk for earthquakes, and moreover, NPPs require reliable access to large quantities of water, which is why you will find most of them along the cost.

 

[StormyCat]

-snip- accidental double post

 

[StormyCat]

I don't think they were so dumb. Nuclear power -is- good, and radioactive isotopes have helped me a great deal because docs have used them in scans to help me. However, where there is great good, there is also capacity for great evil. People have seen instances where nuclear power ( accidents) and nuclear weapons ( testing and otherwise) have caused great harm to others. It's no wonder the anti-nuclear folks were/are afraid and angry. We -do- need nuclear power now, because the energy need for our many modern advancements requires much, and other methods don't seem to be working well enough. We must be careful to keep old power plants safety checked, try our best not to build them in areas where natural disasters could cause accidental releases of radiation into the water, soil, or air and guard plants from being taken advantage of by enemy combatants that would turn our "friend" the atom into a destroying angel.

It would also be good to have a way to reduce nuclear waste, to find a way of storing it more safely, or even turning it into something usable. Finding some way of recycling it into other helpful products.

 

[NuclearID]

It would also be good to have a way to reduce nuclear waste, to find a way of storing it more safely, or even turning it into something usable. Finding some way of recycling it into other helpful products.

France can, and already does, recycle it's nuclear waste. Majority of it infact.

I encourage you to watch this video posted below to see how France already recycles majority of its nuclear waste.

Either gets recycled into new nuclear fuel or made harmless enough to dispose of the other little bits they cannot turn into fuel again.

Sadly it requires state/government funding, as recycling nuclear fuel is not profitable enough for private business or enterprises. So the recycling must be heavily funded or subsidized by the government. Why only France does it.

 

[StormyCat]

That's fantastic! It's too bad we can't seem to follow suit.

 

[Torch]

I Brake for D38

That's fantastic! It's too bad we can't seem to follow suit.

We do. Sorta.

The US Military had DAP .50 caliber in small quantities, boatloads of DU 25mm and 30mm. Most people are aware of the 105 and 120 DU Main Gun ammunition. It all worked well except the .50 BMG which, while I saw it, and held it, was never around when it was used. (Seems similar in purpose to current API)

I’m told there was a lot of 20mm DU but never saw it (R2D2 Phalanx?)

Brads used it. Brads are awesome, therefore DAP is awesome…

A-10 30mm perfection defined.


Anyway the USA recycled about 350 tons in 1991, and maybe 1200+ Tons in GWOT.

All we need is more war and DU stocks will be depleted enough we will have to use <shudder> tungsten.

Depleted Uranium Penetrator Rounds

Do Tungsten Penetrators Work Better Than Depleted Uranium? – Refractory Molybdenum

www.molybdenum42.com

 

[NuclearID]

Why only France does it.

Should of added... at any meaningful scale*. Let alone recycling actual spent fuel into new fuel and also sells recycled spent fuel to other countries. Only France does that at any meaningful scale.

But again it's mostly because it is not a profitable business to recycle spent nuclear fuel into new nuclear fuel and it needs to be heavily subsidized by the government which most governments around the world are not willing to do they'd rather just bury it or let it sit at the nuclear site because it's cheaper

 

[NuclearID]

Make sense they (UAE) would take up the nuclear mantle of middle east. At least for civilian use. They been talking about moving away from fossil fuels. This is what that step looks like. Besides the tourist industry.

 

[NuclearID]

Feel sorry for the German people who have to deal with this backwards logic from their government, making policy on feelings/opinions and not facts.

Now you’re stuck with sporadic, wildly fluctuating energy prices while your next door neighbor, France, has some of the most stable power prices around. It wouldn’t be like this if Germany had kept its nuclear reactors online. You likely wouldn’t have needed to lean so hard on imported Russian gas either. Ffs. "Anti nuclear” environmentalists seriously need a reality check slap to the face, maybe that will wake them up.

What is even more stupid is that you now import nuclear energy from France. talk about a snake eatings its own tail.

 

[NuclearID]

The problem of Iran could be solved very quickly by getting off oil. Move to a different fuel, OPEC dies, and Iran has no funding. Neither does Russia, so solve a lot of that problem as well.

This is why I’m a big supporter of renewable energy, and an even bigger supporter of nuclear energy. We need to get off all of it. Why keep risking our economy on something so volatile and so easy for dictators and terrorists alike to manipulate?

If the American energy grid and transportation system were largely electric and powered mainly by nuclear, with wind and solar adding support, this current crisis would not hit nearly as hard outside of a few niche areas like aluminum. Even there, we get much of that from places like Greenland rather than the Middle East, so the overall impact on us would be limited.

The left frames renewables the wrong way. They focus on climate change, but that argument clearly does not move most or the right people. What actually gets attention is energy independence. That is what policymakers take seriously when the issue is presented as reducing dependence on a volatile and easily manipulated global energy market. We should have moved toward nuclear and renewables a long time ago.

If I remember correctly, powering the entire U.S. grid with nuclear would not require some impossible number of plants. If I remember would be somewhere around 100 to 150 new plants would need to be built, possibly far fewer with newer and larger reactor designs.

If the money and political will were there, the U.S. could become entirely nuclear in just a short few decades.