PDA

View Full Version : Nuclear Power



Sadbloke, missing for a while
10-10-07, 09:54
Well its been 50 years since the first major accident at windscale/sellafield, when the graphite core in the reactor almost melted, after catchng fire, radio activity was ejected over a large area, from the chimney,the filters being unable to cope.Luckily there wasnt an explosion.For 50 years nothing has been able to be done to clear the site, due to the radio activity, and work to clear the site will probably take another 50 years, at a massive cost.Is nuclear power worth it, or should we go for renewables, wind turbines, etc, the largest off shore wind farm is off the coast of liverpol, and now in production.

BHB 10.6.6
10-10-07, 10:01
Simply put nuclear power is the cleanest practical solution to our energy needs.

Milton the Sausage
10-10-07, 10:05
Hijack:http://193.63.128.5/raberry/surveyv1/welcome.aspx

Sadbloke, missing for a while
10-10-07, 10:28
Simply put nuclear power is the cleanest practical solution to our energy needs. Trawsfynydd, a large steel and concrete shell in an area of natural beuty, left , as we dont have the technology to dismantle it, and its still radio active, for thousands of years.Sadly nuclear power may appear clean, but a power station also needs power to work the safety systems and the pumps etc, so where does this power come from,if nuclear power is so good why not build a nps, at the millenium dome, that was an ill concieved idea full of hot air.

Mike! :)
10-10-07, 10:31
i'm with bhb, nuclear is the only practical way to gountill fusion becomes energy efficient anyways!

JohnG
10-10-07, 10:34
Well if you've got anything more than your PC and a 36w tube light connected to the mains you're responsible SB because that's about all you could run of renewables in the UK at present.

JohnG
10-10-07, 10:35
Fusion won't work.

Sadbloke, missing for a while
10-10-07, 10:36
Energy conservation among government offices, shops switching lights off after they shut, reduce air conditioning use,switch off computeer monitors at night, or when not used.low energy bulbs,insulation of homes and offices, the list goes on.

Mike! :)
10-10-07, 10:38
lots of nerds with big glasses reckon fusion will work, i'm hoping ITER will prove that

JohnG
10-10-07, 10:41
So I suppose you've got 50cm of insulation in the roof, double glazing, the thermostat set at 14C an efficient heating system and low energy bulbs in every socket SB?

JohnG
10-10-07, 10:43
Lots of nerds with big glasses keep saying fusion will work because it makes the politicians happy, guarantees future funding for their pointless projects and keeps them in a job. They're lying.

JohnG
10-10-07, 10:45
Has anyone on here turned on their central heating yet this year either at home or at work?

Mike! :)
10-10-07, 10:46
you're too positive sometimes, John

Sadbloke, missing for a while
10-10-07, 10:46
So I suppose you've got 50cm of insulation in the roof, double glazing, the thermostat set at 14C an efficient heating system and low energy bulbs in every socket SB? 2 floors above me,double glazed,no central heating,and low energy bulbs,so am i energy efficent,drive a diesel, ride a bike, and dont have a fridge.

Sadbloke, missing for a while
10-10-07, 10:51
Lots of nerds with big glasses keep saying fusion will work because it makes the politicians happy, guarantees future funding for their pointless projects and keeps them in a job. They're lyingsome projects will be worthwhile and some will fail, its all decided by the men in suits with absolutely no idea about experimentation or research, they just count the money and think its theres, thats the problem with british industry, lack of investment.The advanced passenger train,the leyland national bus,fusion, magnetic levitation,wind and solar power,The list goes on and on.

JohnG
10-10-07, 10:54
Realistic Mike. Politicians have been justifying the squandering of non-renewable resources for three decades with lies about fusion being just around the corner.Sounds like you live in a flat too SB which is more energy efficient than a house. I never have to turn the heating on in Gourette; it reaches 20C just from the people on the four surfaces around us heating. They must be at 25C. :-/ Sell the car and I'll send you a gold star.

Sadbloke, missing for a while
10-10-07, 11:00
Sounds like you live in a flat too SB which is more energy efficient than a house. I never have to turn the heating on in Gourette; it reaches 20C just from the people on the four surfaces around us heating. They must be at 25C. :-/ Sell the car and I'll send you a gold star.True John,sadly cant carry any tools safely on a bike, and i work about 15 miles from home.The school opposite me has all the windows open whenever it gets really cold, and recently they had all the windows covered in heat reflecting silver film. what a waste of energy.

BHB 10.6.6
10-10-07, 11:12
and its still radio active, for thousands of years.So is Dartmoor 

Mister Khomenni
10-10-07, 12:23
Why won't fusion power work?  I think it will become viable if given tax breaks on the basis that it is non-polluting.

BHB 10.6.6
10-10-07, 12:33
Why won't fusion power work?because you constantly  cut yourself under the nose with the trimmer razor of death on the back...stupid fucking razor 

Errrmmm Yesss ( Dyl, 69ers still ROCK )
10-10-07, 12:45
If it wasn't for some radiation I wouldn't have my 3rd arm in just the right place,  every mans dream suckers.

BHB 10.6.6
10-10-07, 12:51
You used to stick your knob in the microwave when you were 7?

Mike! :)
10-10-07, 12:51
LMAO at BHBnicely done

serge the seal of death
10-10-07, 15:26
Sad bloke if you are going to spout rubbish about nuclear power then get your facts right, the reactors at windscale are being decommissioned and the approximatly 10 tonnes of fuel still on site will be inspected and hopefully remotly removed in the next 2 years. and yes thats reactor number 1, the damaged one. http://www.ukaea.org.uk/news/2007/25-06-07.html

X Commie
10-10-07, 15:28
We dont worry about facts on here Serge, between SB and Dylan this sometimes feels like a forum powered by 'The Sun'.

geoff biggy
10-10-07, 15:59
Imo nuclear energy is probably the most efficient way of creating electricity - but there are issues around this, it was a steep learning curve 50 years ago and hindsight is brilliant isn't it? I've toured Sellafield, not the tourist route, but a guided, behind the scenes route. It seems very safe but there may be more experiencial learning yet to be had.Renewable energy sources are a great idea. Has anyone done any work on the carbon footprint for the manufacture, erection and maintenance of windfarms etc and the offset period? Imo hydro-electric is possibly the best renewable source but not too popular - NIMBY. Look at the issues around the Severn Barrier.Energy efficient houses have there place, as do vehicles. If we work really hard we may be able to make an impact on the 2% of the global emmisions that the UK creates.Wouldn't we be better getting onto the USA, China, India, etc and giving them grief for the crap they are pouring out and poluting the planet with? Let's stop buying their cheap products, that'll hurt them! We'd all do that, wouldn't we?And while I'm ranting, we are asked to switch off "standby mode" on electrical equipment. Then why are street lights on when 95% of the population are asleep? How many "standby's" do they add up to? Have you ever flown over the UK at 2AM. It's ridiculous the amount of lights that are on. Mind you, I suppose the drug dealers would complain about working in the dark or not being able to see the sights on their Uzi so it could be dangerous.I feel good now! And I will be giving my prospective MP the same message when I see him at the weekend. He's also a friend but he'll have to have it anyway. If we don't tell them....

JohnG
10-10-07, 16:21
I suggest fusion believers critically read this. I did so after meeting Serge last summer. He's a JET operator BTW.They can maintain a vaguely stable reaction for a few seconds using lots more energy than they produce. Even the reactors planned for the foreseeable future will only run for a few minutes and they haven't even started to test ways of converting any energy they might produce above what they use into electricity.  

Errrmmm Yesss ( Dyl, 69ers still ROCK )
10-10-07, 18:34
Still along way off and only theoretical John,   might never produce more than it makes,  but it does look impressive.No point working on extracting the energy until it's got a positive output hey!!

Sadbloke, missing for a while
10-10-07, 19:45
SERGE, MY POINTS WHERE TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM A PROGRAME ON BBC2 ON MONDAY NIGHT ABOUT WINDSCALE THE FIRST REACTORS THAT ALMOST WENT CRITICAL,(sorry about the capitals , button sticks down), and the time sthis week,caused by thee fuel cylinders being altered in design and not working in the designed way.Nuclear power is only as safe as the person checking the dials, pushing the buttons.Oh and whats a JET operator, as stated earlier, while i like Dyl, i wouldnt want to be assosiated with some of his theories, but yet again hes very well read.The press release was written by the people who actually run sellafield, just like ford writing a report on a new car.

Errrmmm Yesss ( Dyl, 69ers still ROCK )
10-10-07, 19:52
Nuclear power is only as safe as the person checking the dials, pushing the buttons.you realise computers do all the monitoring these days and adjustments. ??

Sadbloke, missing for a while
10-10-07, 20:13
Nuclear power is only as safe as the person checking the dials, pushing the buttons.you realise computers do all the monitoring these days and adjustments. ??THIs won DOWSENT dou THWat.

Nobby
10-10-07, 20:17
IIRC Dylan did some programming a while back for BNF's safety systems - be afraid, BE VERY AFRAID

Errrmmm Yesss ( Dyl, 69ers still ROCK )
10-10-07, 20:23
Not safety systems,  that sounds like input into the reactor,  just office boring staff NGC crap sadly Technology has improved since the 2 or 3 accidents that have happened happened,  okay still a chance of disaster,  that russian 1 and the after effects are truely sickening,  but them freezing to death is also pretty sickening.

Sadbloke, missing for a while
10-10-07, 20:25
IIRC Dylan did some programming a while back for BNF's safety systems BRITISH NATIONAL FRONT.What happened to the kids with the glow around them that advertised Ready Brek, theyd be handy in the dark nights now theyve grown up, they looked as if theyd been iradiated.

Nobby
10-10-07, 20:29
Oh dear SB - British Nuclear Fuels have nowt to do with either the National Front or the British National Party...

Sadbloke, missing for a while
10-10-07, 20:35
wondered why the bnf had a safety system.

Errrmmm Yesss ( Dyl, 69ers still ROCK )
10-10-07, 20:37
BNP and BNF could would both solve the energy issue by burning coloured people.Talking about coloured people,  at a client today they had 2 stunning Asian girls, both bright,  1 really bright,  dunno if the 1 was my clients Daughter or GF though,  can't tell.SMOKING HOT!!!!!!

Mister Khomenni
11-10-07, 09:21
re fusion power - it might be that fusion reactors need to be a hundred or even a thousand times as good as they are now to be viable, but those sorts of improvements in technology are realisable, look at the improvements made in computers and aeronautical engineering, easily a factor of a thousand in thirty years in computers.

goldfish boy
11-10-07, 12:49
Sad to say that I've spent a lot of time working on safety systems for the nuclear industry - what else would you do when you're not riding.  The technology thats been available the last 10 years is fantastic and can be made to make these nuclear power plants very safe.  Problem is that most of these plants were built before that.  Whats more scary is when you realise just how good we actually are in the UK at running these plants safely, thanks to the NII and HSE.  Even in the US they are rubbish at it (should that be a suprise ?) let alone all these eastern bloc and third world countries.  Did you ever see the programme about the water cooled nps in somewhere like Romania where the cooling water came from the local river - the one that was drying up.  Be afraid, be very afraid.

tekk
11-10-07, 13:13
"Simply put nuclear power is the cleanest practical solution to our energy needs."Needs or wants? 

Montgomery Wick
11-10-07, 14:01
I was going to comment....but sadly what's the point? So-called alternative fuels are derivatives of the oil indrusty, not replacements cf. 'The Future' thread.and its still radio active, for thousands of years.So is Dartmoor Spoken like a true geologist!

serge the seal of death
12-10-07, 07:51
Hello all So quick insider guide to fusion, 1) will ITER work, yes and no, we have lots of meetings here and conferances that alot of my work mates go on to discuss the design of ITER and the current thinking is that ITER will not work, there are being lots of design alterations and as with all these things as it is a research reactor not all the components that are on machines around the world can be combined to give one super machine, The body running ITER do not want to have what is called disruptions, where plasma becomes unstable and reaches the walls of the vessel, very damaging, and the do not want Elms, sudden spikes in plasma, and so they are not going to run the machine in HV mode, high voltage, which from our experence at jet gives the most powerfull but most difficult to control plasmas. So ITER will work, make larger hotter plasmas and give loads of useful info on the worlds largest plasmas,  As a note ITER is costing around 5 billion euros, i think i saw somewhere that the planned seven estury tidal power plant is 50 billion pounds.2) there are already detailed plans for DEMO, the first fusion power station, what makes plasmas easier to heat, control and eventually self sustaining is size of the reactor, the bigger it is the more mass the plasma has and so can continue its own heating once it has become a plasma, again ITER has been scaled down and so may not be able to acheive this.Basically its a bit of a Build it and lets see what it can do, my guess with enough money fusion could be here within 15 years, but massive international scientific bodys have to much politics and money men controling them and what is needed is a very focused effort to build the best once ITER has shown what it can and can not do. 

tekk
12-10-07, 07:55
So we get fusion, unlimited power etc........What on earth do we actually need with all that power? 

X Commie
12-10-07, 07:58
What on earth do we actually need with all that power? To deliver, not read and delete SPAM?

JohnG
12-10-07, 08:15
What do you think of this comment Serge. It's not a quote just a comment provoked by following the fusion saga for 30 years.Each increase in size of fusion reactor in an attempt to produce a larger more stable plasma reveals a host of new headaches while failing to solve the problems it was built to. I'm pretty sure that if the Yanks thought that they had the technology to build a commercial reactor today they would - whatever the cost. They'd do it just for the prestige and propaganda like putting a man on the moon.

X Commie
12-10-07, 08:42
Each increase in size of fusion reactor in an attempt to produce a larger more stable plasma reveals a host of new headaches while failing to solve the problems it was built to.Welcome to science and engineering.Its our ability to tackle and sove problems that sets us apart from the monkeys.I'm pretty sure that if the Yanks thought that they had the technology to build a commercial reactor today they would - whatever the cost. They'd do it just for the prestige and propaganda like putting a man on the moon.Why when so many of those in charge take so much form the oil industry. I am sure it cant be done, but with enough will and incentive I am sure it could have been achievable by now. 

tekk
12-10-07, 11:20
Everyone loves the idea of the next techno-magic-bullet round the corner, especially the yanks. But.... I think sometimes it stops people taking responsibility for the benefits they enjoy from the coal being burnt right now, to run these computers etc. "yeah don't worry, we'll have fusion soon"  hmmm didn't they say nuclear would be 'too cheap to meter'?

Errrmmm Yesss ( Dyl, 69ers still ROCK )
12-10-07, 11:37
John,  the Yanks would only do it,  IF they could pinch some scientist from someone else who's almost cracked it,  admitting defeat on the subject would worse than doing it,  PR wise for them.

Eddie: thesis=123p
12-10-07, 11:43
But the yanks are going to take twice as long to go back to the moon as when they did it the first time!reason: there isn't the political will to make it happen properly, and this includes them reusing most of the shuttle tech to recreate a saturn VThere isn't the political motivation for them to produce a fusion reactor, and I don't think there will be until the oil really starts to dry out and all of a sudden there will be a real motivation for them.I personally am of the opinion that nuclear can be a viable option. Everyone is basing their assesment of nuclear power on the current reactors, most of which are reaching the end of their design life, were built in the 60's and 70's, and had little automation. Consider the improvements that have been made in industry monitoring through the use of computers, apply this to nuclear stations (and yes I am aware that a lot of them have had computers added, but they weren't designed with computer monitoring in mind) and you have what will be a relatively safe method of power generation.I hold out hopes for fusion, but it is a complex process and one that we are only starting to scratch the surface of, so I think that it will be a while before we see viable ractors, but we are moving in that direction. 

Errrmmm Yesss ( Dyl, 69ers still ROCK )
12-10-07, 11:47
Why not get a really big extension lead and plug it into the sun So the Sun proves it's possible,  but you might need a Sun sized reactor,  possible and plausible are entire different things.

JohnG
12-10-07, 12:06
#dumb question time#What I find astonishing about stars is how long it takes them to burn through their hydrogen fuel. When you consider that temperatures and pressures are high enough to even futher up the periodic table what regulates the combustion rate in a star?

Eddie: thesis=123p
12-10-07, 12:39
AAAAAAAAAAAH!John, you asked the right person.You would be surprised just how big the sun is. You could make 1,000,000 Earths out of the mass of the sun, or 1000 jupiers (rough order of magnitude numbers). There is a huge amount of mass there so no matter what it will take a long time to burn through it all.However, the sun ususally only burns about 1% of its mass, but that is still the mass of 10,000 Earths of pure hydrogen - a lot. Also, it actually isn't really hot enough or dense enough at the centre of the sun to allow fusion, the energies aren't sufficient to overcome the coulomb repulsion between the protons. How fusion actually happens is through quantum tunelling. As a particle can also be described as a wave, it essentially exists in all places at all times, so there is a very small probability that it will exist right next to another proton in the sun. At the energies at the centre of the sun, this probability is just high enough to allow sufficient fusion to maintain the sun as a stable body.To fuse anything above helium, you need much higher temperatures than at the centre of the sun. These only occur either in the centres of extremely massive stars (10+ times the mass of our sun), or in the cores or red giants (the outside is a lot cooler because it has expanded away from the core, the core has actually contracted and so is hotter and denser). In any case, the furthest that we can go with stable fusion in the centre of a star is Iron.All elements heavier than iron, about 150 in total, are produced from massive stars that have undergone a supernova. There is a massive collapse which releases collosal amounts of gravitational potential energy ( the order of magnitude of all the light produce by an entire galaxy) which allows fusion to higher mass elements via the r and p processes.short answer, they aren't actually hot enough or dense enough for fusion, but they achieve it by quantum tunelling and so it is quantum probabilities that regulate the combustion rate within stars 

Eddie: thesis=123p
12-10-07, 12:39
ps: definitely not a dumb question, the full understanding and physics is approx 2nd/3rd year degree level

JohnG
12-10-07, 12:45
I did the layer burning model, different types of stars and supernovas in Geology but hadn't understood why the fuel was so slow burning. Now I have. Ta Eddie.

tekk
12-10-07, 13:04
Heavy stuff! great explanation, I think I can sort of get my head round that...a bit!

X Commie
12-10-07, 13:04
My brain just fused.

Eddie: thesis=123p
12-10-07, 13:21
John, no worries, finally my degree and phd are having a use cheers tekk, its nice to know that sometimes I can explain things in a way that people can get it

Errrmmm Yesss ( Dyl, 69ers still ROCK )
12-10-07, 13:24
So the Suns not hot enough or dense enough to actually be a fusion reaction,  and when it does reach the state I imagine thats when it goes Nova explodes and destroys everything around it.So Fusion has just became a no fecking chance and if they ever do make it the odds are it'll destroy the solar system anyway, great!!

Eddie: thesis=123p
12-10-07, 13:28
nope, not quiteFusion reactors get plasmas to temperatures far higher than in the sun because they can't achieve the levels of pressure and density found inside the sun. That is why they require multi-Tesla magnetic toroids to contain the plasma, at the temperatures that they reach, if it touched the actual physical container it would vapourise it.As far as I understand it, and I'm sure Serge can correct me on this if I've got it wrong, but if a fusion reaction in a reactor got out of control, the plasma would destroy the containment vessel, but then its dissipation as it escaped the vessel would drop its temperatures so quickly that the reaction would shut down pretty damn fast, a kind of inbuily shut-off - the problem being it would reck the reactor in the process. 

Errrmmm Yesss ( Dyl, 69ers still ROCK )
12-10-07, 13:35
If you can get the reaction,  big enough to sustain itself it could also flash over after the vessel is gone with enough power to make a rather large solar system ending bang.Does it need the container,  once it's self sustained ??  answer is who knows,  haven't got it self sustained yet!!If you wake up 1 morning to find you've been incinerated,  then maybe Serge did get it working

Mike! :)
12-10-07, 13:45
i seem to remember something about heat and ideal gases and something elseall i know is that the stuff inside although rather warm, has such little density, it indeed, could bone the reactor, it would cool down so quickly, it wouldn't have enough energy to do a lot more

Eddie: thesis=123p
12-10-07, 13:48
The reaction can only be made big enough to sustain itself if it is held within the container, it will never be truly self sustaining without external influence until you reach a minimum mass of approximately 0.1-0.2 solar mass (100,000 times the mass of the Earth) so its pretty obvious that we are never going to make something that massive. Even jupiter isn't massive enough to form a self-sustaining fusion reaction so there is no need to worry about it getting out of hand and wiping out the Earth. As soon as the reaction is uncontained, it will dissipate and the plasma will both cool and become too diffuse for any continued reaction, so no, there will be no doomsday wiping out of the Earth by fusion reactors.

X Commie
12-10-07, 13:50
Phew. Can the outside of the reactors be used as a kind of inside-out tandoori oven for naan making?

Errrmmm Yesss ( Dyl, 69ers still ROCK )
12-10-07, 13:57
Thats the Theory Eddie,   do you want to be in the next room or even in the solar system when they come to test it,  is the question

Eddie: thesis=123p
12-10-07, 14:00
YEP!I've studied physics long enough and tested it in enough situations that I trust it and would trust it with my life. I'd stand in the control room when they started up the reactor if I could, just to say I was there, and wouldn't have any worries about the universe being wiped out or anything much more than the reactor if the containment field failed. 

X Commie
12-10-07, 14:01
But would you be enjoying a freshly made naan?

Eddie: thesis=123p
12-10-07, 14:19
Probably the fastest baked naan in the world!

Errrmmm Yesss ( Dyl, 69ers still ROCK )
12-10-07, 15:07
Most expensive to, but when you need a fresh naan and quick sometimes you've just got to do it!!I've studied humans enough to know they screw up more often than not,  pyhsics is perfect,  but out understanding is very very limited.

Eddie: thesis=123p
12-10-07, 15:38
Simple Gas Laws, we've understood them since 1809 and in all that time we have understood them.As the plasma expands, it cools therefore the reaction stops 

X Commie
12-10-07, 15:42
They way deoderant is cold.

Errrmmm Yesss ( Dyl, 69ers still ROCK )
12-10-07, 15:55
Can you guarantee you won't have to add a BUT.... Don't do X or the Solar system will explode ??? can you 100% !!!

X Commie
12-10-07, 15:57
Dylan, you have previously professed that Aliens visited us and gave us (amongst other things) DVD technology.Do you think these aliens would let us go ahead and destroy not only our own, but also their universe? 

Eddie: thesis=123p
12-10-07, 15:59
Dylan - yes I canI can firmly, 100% guarantee that the creation of a fusion reactor on Earth will not blow up the solar system, no BUTS! 

Sadbloke, missing for a while
12-10-07, 18:24
If we banned the use of hair straighteners, hair dryers,and all associated womens toys we would save loads of energy, and if we could harness all the hot air expelled on bike magic, by most of at some time, we would have hot running water all day.

Errrmmm Yesss ( Dyl, 69ers still ROCK )
12-10-07, 22:45
Solar System and Universe is abit of a difference!!Eddie,  bet your life on it But then woman wouldn't look as good SB,  they have no other function in life,  so atleast leave them that hey!!

serge the seal of death
15-10-07, 11:22
dylan the temperature of our plasma is 6 million degrees.if it cools the the reaction stops, its that simple, we can get it that hot through a massive vacuum and huge magnetic field holding the particals away from the sides of the reactor, and the outside wall of the reactor does not get hot. so no naan bread i am afraid, although it would probably be contaminated with tritium if we did.

X Commie
15-10-07, 11:26
tritium naan. Is that the one with coconut and honey in it?

Errrmmm Yesss ( Dyl, 69ers still ROCK )
15-10-07, 11:41
i'm sorry but messing around with something 6Million Degrees,  does not sound safe,  but it does sound fun,  so solar system ending or not I'd still have a mess.Bet I could get it to 7mil with some home grown Mod's