On Nuclear Energy, Cooling and the Steam Cycle

It's June, so it's time to trot out the old charge that Summer heat waves are going to shut down nuclear power plants around the world. This time, the story appeared in the Globe and Mail, so I guess I ought to link to Lisa Stiles-Shell's original rebuttal.

Then again, I wonder why we haven't seen more attention paid to the performance of wind power during California's heat wave last Summer.

Comments

Joffan said…

I assume this article: Will France be caught with its plants down? is the one you're referring to.

I'd think the other thermal plants are affected also but they are hardly in a position to publicize it. Given the rest of their compliance culture, they probably just run their outlet water over the heat limit and pay the fine.

June 22, 2007 at 11:49 AM

Anonymous said…

In Lisa Stiles rebuttal she includes the option:
"--Invent a thermodynamic cycle better than the ones the world's best minds have come up with in the past two centuries or so"

This:
http://vortexengine.ca/index.shtml
*might* turn out to be just that.
The very short explanation is that it's a way to use the upper atmosphere as the cold end for a bottoming cycle. Ie: it's NOT a perpetual motion machine of either kind, but a way to improve the efficiency of any thermal engine, by lowering the temperature of the cold heat sink.

June 23, 2007 at 10:11 AM

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin...

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap...

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

NEI Nuclear Notes

Search This Blog