PowerSwitch Main Page
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Moorside Watch

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Nuclear Power
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
biffvernon



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 18609
Location: Lincolnshire

PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2016 9:47 pm    Post subject: Moorside Watch Reply with quote

While attention has been towards Hinkley C, oop north Toshiba (aka Nugen) have been quietly planning to build three Wiestinghouse AP1000 nuclear reactors with a combined output of some 3.6GW, scheduled to operate from 2024.

http://www.nugeneration.com/our_site.html

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/stop-moorside-biggest-nuclear-development-in-europe
_________________
http://biffvernon.blogspot.co.uk/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
johnhemming2



Joined: 30 Jun 2015
Posts: 1684

PostPosted: Fri Feb 05, 2016 11:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

the petition people wrote:
The difference is that these reactors burn the uranium for longer and harder. The resulting radioactive wastes are much hotter and have to be cooled for decades longer.


Like ... er ... evidence please.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
biffvernon



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 18609
Location: Lincolnshire

PostPosted: Sat Feb 06, 2016 4:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

None from me; sounds a bit non-scientific. Maybe it comes from the design feature which allows the AP1000 to produce a smaller volume of more highly radioactive waste than its predecessors. This is seen as an operational advantage, a selling point by Westinghouse.
_________________
http://biffvernon.blogspot.co.uk/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
fuzzy



Joined: 29 Nov 2013
Posts: 427
Location: The Marches, UK

PostPosted: Sat Feb 06, 2016 7:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Last slide bottom right. It 'can' survive 72 hrs in a Fukupshima scenario [no power]. After that, you move to Alaska.

http://www.westinghousenuclear.com/New-Plants/AP1000-PWR/Safety

Decay heat is ~.003 x 3400000000 = 10.2MW after 7 days! This is good apparently.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
biffvernon



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 18609
Location: Lincolnshire

PostPosted: Sun Feb 07, 2016 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes that 72 hour figure caused my eyebrow to twitch. It is certainly not what I call fail-safe. More like disaster waiting to happen (for three days).
_________________
http://biffvernon.blogspot.co.uk/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
biffvernon



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 18609
Location: Lincolnshire

PostPosted: Mon Feb 08, 2016 10:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

It'll be OK, they're going to make it look nice.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/moorside-developers-launch-competition-to-design-visually-beautiful-nuclear-power-station-a6859311.html
_________________
http://biffvernon.blogspot.co.uk/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Nuclear Power All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group