German public now favors extending life of Nuclear power plants

[Dinoburner]

Yeah, pallets in the US aren't "treated" like lumber. The only risk when burning is nails.

Passing a magnet thru the ashes will solve the nail problem.

 

[OVERKILL]

Interesting. I really need to read up on this.

Re: islanding. That wouldn’t really be an option for a Rx that was SCRAMMED or SD and couldn’t immediately be brought back online to self-sustaining (idle), right? Do these Rx’s use decay heat to produce enough power to run pumps for a period of time?

Correct, if you were to SCRAM then you wouldn't be able to island. Of course if it's a multi unit plant and you didn't SCRAM all the units, then even if you did take down a couple, you could bring them back. But if you've got other units running, then I'm not sure of the value of idling additional units. It takes a couple of days to recover from a poison-out, so you do try and avoid that if possible.

Our plants don't SCRAM on a loss of transmission (US plants do), they just island (except Pickering, it doesn't have steam bypass, so it can only idle for a short period before having to be shutdown).

On second thought, I guess chemistry samples could be drawn, so they would at least know whether contaminants like chlorides were a concern. If the emergency affected power to run pumps, but not the ability to feed and bleed, potential corrosion could be mitigated.

If lake water needs to be injected, then I would guess that things are really bad and recovery isn’t much of a consideration short-term.

Yeah, that mirrors my thoughts on the matter.

 

[gathermewool]

Correct, if you were to SCRAM then you wouldn't be able to island. Of course if it's a multi unit plant and you didn't SCRAM all the units, then even if you did take down a couple, you could bring them back. But if you've got other units running, then I'm not sure of the value of idling additional units. It takes a couple of days to recover from a poison-out, so you do try and avoid that if possible.

Our plants don't SCRAM on a loss of transmission (US plants do), they just island (except Pickering, it doesn't have steam bypass, so it can only idle for a short period before having to be shutdown).

Yeah, that mirrors my thoughts on the matter.

Thank you, very insightful.

My main concern remains: the main points of radiological emergency response aren’t alway cut and dry. If we can’t give an answer with 100% certainty, then what is the general public to think? That‘s the hurdle. Even I minimized the impact of Fukoshima when asked by friends and family. I would never have guessed they’d have their EDGs below the level of the sea wall, for example. Without any experience with commercial nukes, that blew my mind!

So, even if the general public is told that a Rx is 100% safe and can passively cool the Rx in a worst-case emergency indefinitely, why would anyone believe that? I mean, I wouldn’t unless I was able to evaluate the design myself, and I consider myself at least a little bit knowledgeable on the subject.

 

[2strokeNorthstar]

Passing a magnet thru the ashes will solve the nail problem.

I wish you would tell everyone else that. The desert is full of nails from idiots burning pallets then leaving

 

[IndyIan]

I'm not familiar with how pallet wood is treated but burning furniture or treated wood can release arsenic, formaldehydes, and other toxins into air.

For sure, most pallets are just raw wood, so pretty safe other than they burn quite fast. Most of the bad stuff in treated wood actually stays in the ash, but a big fire can send that ash into the air as well.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

And that's exactly what happened in Japan, because their regulator was a body where the operators were on the board, so self interest was clearly a problem. The grandfathering legislation (don't need to make what would otherwise be necessary updates due to the age of the facility) is what doomed Fukushima Daiichi. GE had told them the generators should be moved to behind the plant. Not done. Newer plants were required to have higher sea walls, also not done.

In Canada, the nuclear regulating body is part of the Federal government. It's wholly independent and none of its staff work in any capacity with the organizations they are regulating. This ensures objectivity and eliminates any potential for industry capture. This should be standard.

But there is a lot of dialog between the regulators and the regulated no? In the US a lot of top positions are political appointees and it's not uncommon for the appointed to have experience and/or an opinion of the industry they're being asked to regulate. In any case basically it boils down to trust, and because USG has such a mixed record in that regard nuclear faces such an uphill battle.

 

[OVERKILL]

But there is a lot of dialog between the regulators and the regulated no? In the US a lot of top positions are political appointees and it's not uncommon for the appointed to have experience and/or an opinion of the industry they're being asked to regulate. In any case basically it boils down to trust, and because USG has such a mixed record in that regard nuclear faces such an uphill battle.

Yeah, it's a bit different in Canada as we have separate Crown entities that aren't supposed to be at all politically affiliated/influenced, which the CNSC falls under. But absolutely, you want them to have experience in the industry they are regulating, but not actively involved in that industry, as that presents an opportunity for conflict of interest.

The NRC in the US is a bit different from the CNSC (which is generally viewed as being impartial, fair and safety focused) in that it is generally viewed as being stocked with anti-nuclear folks, highly partisan, and exists to impede new nuclear projects from ever coming to fruition. At the rate it approves things, that's not really that off in terms of a take. And you are right, it's staffed by appointees with political affiliation:

Former NRC Commissioners

Former NRC Commissioners

www.nrc.gov

And whose motivations or reason for being on there are questionable. For example, Jaczko:

Gregory B. Jaczko, Chairman

www.nrc.gov

While at the NRC, he voted against the opening of new nuclear plants and an inspector general report found that he unilaterally and improperly sought to block the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository project from advancing. After leaving the NRC, Jaczko called for a global ban on nuclear power.

Gregory Jaczko - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

He had no experience in the industry, so why was he appointed to run the NRC?

In Canada:

Commission members

www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca

You'll note no mention of political affiliation in any of the appointments, but the President worked for Ontario Hydro (back when it existed) as well as OPG (which owns all of Ontario's nuclear plants).

The Governor in Council represents the Crown (King, formerly Queen) through the Governor General. It's supposed to be a non-partisan position, but of course the recommendation for who holds that position is made by whomever is Prime Minister. That said, these people are often not politicians, Julie Payette, our former GG, was an astronaut for example.

 

[Snagglefoot]

Likely of interest to many here. The German public is now overall in favor of extending Nuclear Power. Likely the key take away - italics my paraphrase - quote from the article - due to energy issues cause by the war in Ukraine "Previously, the majority of the public was in favor of the nuclear phaseout in the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster; now over 80% are in favor of extending the lifespan of Germany's existing nuclear reactors."

In Unexpected Swing, Germany’s Public Now Favors Nuclear Power | OilPrice.com

Russia’s war in Ukraine is forcing a rethink of energy security not only in Germany but also by the entire continent, and nuclear power is one of the winners

oilprice.com

Hmmm. Might be too late.

 

[4WD]

Yeah, it's a bit different in Canada as we have separate Crown entities that aren't supposed to be at all politically affiliated/influenced, which the CNSC falls under. But absolutely, you want them to have experience in the industry they are regulating, but not actively involved in that industry, as that presents an opportunity for conflict of interest.

The NRC in the US is a bit different from the CNSC (which is generally viewed as being impartial, fair and safety focused) in that it is generally viewed as being stocked with anti-nuclear folks, highly partisan, and exists to impede new nuclear projects from ever coming to fruition. At the rate it approves things, that's not really that off in terms of a take. And you are right, it's staffed by appointees with political affiliation:

Former NRC Commissioners

Former NRC Commissioners

www.nrc.gov

And whose motivations or reason for being on there are questionable. For example, Jaczko:

Gregory B. Jaczko, Chairman

www.nrc.gov

Gregory Jaczko - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

He had no experience in the industry, so why was he appointed to run the NRC?

In Canada:

Commission members

www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca

You'll note no mention of political affiliation in any of the appointments, but the President worked for Ontario Hydro (back when it existed) as well as OPG (which owns all of Ontario's nuclear plants).

The Governor in Council represents the Crown (King, formerly Queen) through the Governor General. It's supposed to be a non-partisan position, but of course the recommendation for who holds that position is made by whomever is Prime Minister. That said, these people are often not politicians, Julie Payette, our former GG, was an astronaut for example.

For sure - but why single him out ?
We may as well move to using the Walmart receipt checkers - they’d at least keep folks more honest …

 

[alarmguy]

Well, most of us received their electricity bills (some went up way over 300%) and there is an other 40% on top of that coming our way.
And we already had the highest prices worldwide before, since they shut down a ton of nuklear and coal power stations before.

So at a certain price point, folks are a bit less enthusiastic to "save the world" now ;-)

OMG, based on your posts I had to look up your rates, in USD = 52 cents kWh in Germany.

The public in general is unable to rationally exam, calculate and independently make decisions without regard to emotion generated in the press and by politicians.
The majority of the human race sometimes is its now worst enemy.
Here in North Carolina I am paying a fixed 24 hour rate of 10 Cents kWh I actually thought it was higher @ 13 cents but from what I understand, since we are a non profit electric utility rates can vary depending on the power plant we are buying from. I have the option to try to save even more by electing to have peak usage rates which I might visit next year once I know how much energy our new home uses. The night time ultra low rate is less than 5 cents kWr if I go that route.

Im not picking on Germany, many US states are much the same, even the one that is the biggest promoter of saving the planet from carbon emissions yet closing down their last Nuclear plant.

Here is the second half of the graph, I notice Canada wasnt in the figures

 

[OVERKILL]

OMG, based on your posts I had to look up your rates, in USD = 52 cents kWh in Germany.

The public in general is unable to rationally exam, calculate and independently make decisions without regard to emotion generated in the press and by politicians.
The majority of the human race sometimes is its now worst enemy.
Here in North Carolina I am paying a fixed 24 hour rate of 10 Cents kWh I actually thought it was higher @ 13 cents but from what I understand, since we are a non profit electric utility rates can vary depending on the power plant we are buying from. I have the option to try to save even more by electing to have peak usage rates which I might visit next year once I know how much energy our new home uses. The night time ultra low rate is less than 5 cents kWr if I go that route.

Im not picking on Germany, many US states are much the same, even the one that is the biggest promoter of saving the planet from carbon emissions yet closing down their last Nuclear plant.

View attachment 151553
Here is the second half of the graph, I notice Canada wasnt in the figures
View attachment 151555

This one includes Canada:

Electricity prices around the world | GlobalPetrolPrices.com

Electricity prices, June 2023: The chart shows the price of electricity for households and businesses in over 100 countries. The prices are per kWh and include all items in the electricity bill such as the distribution and energy cost, various environmental and fuel cost charges and taxes...

www.globalpetrolprices.com

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

OMG, based on your posts I had to look up your rates, in USD = 52 cents kWh in Germany.

The public in general is unable to rationally exam, calculate and independently make decisions without regard to emotion generated in the press and by politicians.
The majority of the human race sometimes is its now worst enemy.
Here in North Carolina I am paying a fixed 24 hour rate of 10 Cents kWh I actually thought it was higher @ 13 cents but from what I understand, since we are a non profit electric utility rates can vary depending on the power plant we are buying from. I have the option to try to save even more by electing to have peak usage rates which I might visit next year once I know how much energy our new home uses. The night time ultra low rate is less than 5 cents kWr if I go that route.

Im not picking on Germany, many US states are much the same, even the one that is the biggest promoter of saving the planet from carbon emissions yet closing down their last Nuclear plant.

View attachment 151553
Here is the second half of the graph, I notice Canada wasnt in the figures
View attachment 151555

Keep in mind that Germany has a heating dominated climate and air conditioning is rare. In addition homes are smaller and built to a higher standard with regards to air leakage and levels of insulation.

For comparison here's per capita electricity usage.
US 12,314 kWh
Germany 6,971 kWh

 

[gathermewool]

There's also trust issue which the public has with regards to the behavior of private sector. In some countries industry is lacking in that department. Ex, Fukushima Nuclear Reactor, VW Dieselgate. Multi billion dollar cost overruns at Vogtle for Units 3 and 4.

Great point, thank you.

 

[Lapham3]

This one includes Canada:

Electricity prices around the world | GlobalPetrolPrices.com

Electricity prices, June 2023: The chart shows the price of electricity for households and businesses in over 100 countries. The prices are per kWh and include all items in the electricity bill such as the distribution and energy cost, various environmental and fuel cost charges and taxes...

www.globalpetrolprices.com

View attachment 151565

It seems to me that you folks have more hydro helping out.

 

[NiwradND]

Germany tried going with green energy, but they didn't tear down their coal plants, when they figured out that solar and wind doesn't work for continous electricity they fired their coal back up. In the USA, when we shut a coal plant down, we can't tear it down fast enough. Once we realize green energy is not going to be enough, there is no solid back up.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Germany tried going with green energy, but they didn't tear down their coal plants, when they figured out that solar and wind doesn't work for continous electricity they fired their coal back up. In the USA, when we shut a coal plant down, we can't tear it down fast enough. Once we realize green energy is not going to be enough, there is no solid back up.

In the US coal plants can and have been converted to burn NatGas. Germany is keeping coal on standby for obvious reasons.

 

[mk378]

In the US, natural gas does not need to be imported and costs less per BTU than coal. There's no reason for us to keep old coal plants that can't be converted.

 

[SC Maintenance]

In the US, natural gas does not need to be imported and costs less per BTU than coal. There's no reason for us to keep old coal plants that can't be converted.

Not the entire story. We used to flare a lot of gas in the Bakken but I think that is down to a very low amount now, like 6% was the last number I heard. So there is no magical free large source of nat gas available anymore - unless I am mistaken. Also, you can drill purely nat gas wells but there normally associated with oil well or at least part of an overall normal oil field management - some producing gas and some oil. So if we were to use much less oil - for example if everyone wants to drive EV's - then we will either need to find a way to produce a lot more natural gas on its own - or use coal, or we will need a huge jump in battery tech to allow grid level storage of renewables.

I don't think the fat lady has sung on coal just yet.

 

[OVERKILL]

It seems to me that you folks have more hydro helping out.

We do have some very good hydro resources as well. Quebec is almost entirely powered by Hydro, Ontario is 25% Hydro, 60% nuclear, Manitoba and BC are also majority hydro.

 

[PandaBear]

Germany tried going with green energy, but they didn't tear down their coal plants, when they figured out that solar and wind doesn't work for continous electricity they fired their coal back up. In the USA, when we shut a coal plant down, we can't tear it down fast enough. Once we realize green energy is not going to be enough, there is no solid back up.

It is the natural gas special interests that tear down the coal, not renewable.