Skip to main content

Nuclear Makes A Worldwide Comeback: Der Spiegel

Spiegel on Nuclear Energy[Intentional?] Typo aside, a great package on nuclear energy, The Atomic Age Enters a New Dawn, has just gone online over at Der Spiegel.

Other pieces include:
(Hat tip to Notes reader Joe on the heads-up.)

Comments

Anonymous said…
I'm not that sure that 'The US goes NUCULAR' is a typo :)
-t7-
kb said…
Who knew that the editors at Der Spiegel would dip their collective toe in the pool of funny?

BTW The issue will be available on newsstands [in DC, anyway] Monday.
Bill said…
Some odd statements in the Der Spiegel article:

"No nuclear reactors have been built in the United States since the 1979 accident at Three Mile Island. ... A number have recently been approved ..."

Somebody's getting ahead of themselves.

"... regulators and energy companies plan to agree on two or three standard reactor models, which would mean that new nuclear power plants would essentially be constructed as prefabricated units."

'Built to an established design' isn't the usual meaning of "prefabricated".
Matthew B said…
No nuclear reactors have been built in the United States since the 1979 accident at Three Mile Island

By my quick tally, I count 50 of the 104 US reactors going online after 1979.
djysrv said…
The piece on Turkey's plans for a nuclear power plant missed a few key items that are in plain sight. The first is that Turkey plans to be a regional exporter of electricity once the first two of three planned reactors are online. Second, turkey's nuclear energy tender almost didn't get out the door, not because of environmental opposition, or earthquake risks, but because of the "byzantine" government process of assembling and approving the paperwork.

http://djysrv.blogspot.com/2008/01/turkey-plans-5-gwe-8-billion-nuclear.html

http://djysrv.blogspot.com/2008/06/turkey-to-build-second-nuclear-plant.html
Anonymous said…
Do you NEI guys only report news that makes you glow in the dark?

FitzPatrick in upstate NY is at 50% power for feedpump seal problems - AGAIN! How many times has this been? When are they going to get the feedpump seal problem finally fixed? Oh, I forgot, the guy who went to germany on a mission to do this - Oscar Limpias - become the head of their engineering org. Promote those who can't do.

And VY is down to 23% because of cooling tower problems - AGAIN! Not enough to have a crumble coioling tower cell the other year. Now we're going to repeat the event.

And the NRC is sending a special team to VY:

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/news/2008/08-045i.html

What do you folks at NEI Nuclear Notes and Adams Atomic Engines have to say about this?

Profitable?

Maybe for the anti-nukes!
David Bradish said…
What do you folks at NEI Nuclear Notes and Adams Atomic Engines have to say about this?

Oh my gosh, two reactors derated power for maintenance, what are we to do? I guess nuclear reactors really are unreliable. I'll go tell my communications division to abandon all of our messages that state nuclear plants are reliable. Oh wait, according to the data (pdf), Fitzpatrick and Vermont Yankee have a 95% and 99% capacity factor so far this year. What do you have to say about that?
Anonymous said…
David Bradish, Davis Besse was INPO 1 before the hole in the head. All that needs to happen is for one - just one - aging PWR or BWR to screw up. Looks like Fitz and VY are doing good jobs of that with respect to feedpump seals and cooling towers. My goodness - if you can't fix a feedpump seal after 10+ years, then exactly how to you expect to manage a nuke plant? The clock is ticking. One mistake - just one more Davis Besse.
Anonymous said…
All that needs to happen is for one - just one - aging PWR or BWR to screw up.

The anti's have been waiting for the "screw up" that would be the end of nuclear. The public has become bored with that line of reasoning since nothing has happened. You'll be on your deathbed bitter thinking it'll happen, it'll happen I know it will...

Popular posts from this blog

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…