tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post2262628241826417254..comments2024-03-07T02:00:01.582-05:00Comments on NEI Nuclear Notes: Analysis of BREDL’s/Mangano’s Vogtle Health ClaimsUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-17127665422071496312007-09-17T19:31:00.000-04:002007-09-17T19:31:00.000-04:00Capacity factor numbers depend on whether you're u...Capacity factor numbers depend on whether you're using reactor output in Megawatts thermal (MWth), or generator output in Megawatts electric (MWe). The relationship between the two is not constant, as it depends on the efficiency of the entire steam cycle, including rejection of waste heat to the environment. In some places (like the southern US), plants can operate more efficiently in winter than in summer due to changes in temperature, humidity, etc. That's why summer capacity is often slightly lower than nameplate. At one plant I worked at, that lower capacity was referred to as "Maximum Dependable Capability", or MDC. If your MDC is the basis for the capacity factors you publish, then it's possible to have annual capacity factors >100%, for instance if you have a mild summer and/or a longer, colder winter.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-45261352055141686602007-09-17T13:54:00.000-04:002007-09-17T13:54:00.000-04:00Luke,Capacity factors exceeding 100% are really a ...Luke,<BR/><BR/>Capacity factors exceeding 100% are really a matter of which capacity numbers the plant refers to. I would bet that the capacities used for determining the capacity factors in the link are the summer capacities as opposed to nameplate capacity. <BR/><BR/>Summer capacities are always lower than the nameplate and are generally what's used in all of EIA's figures. I've never seen capacity factors higher than 100% using nameplate capacity. One could argue which is better to use and I'm sure it could go either way. <BR/><BR/>But since EIA uses summer capacities, I'm sure that's what Southern is doing as well.<BR/><BR/>Hope that helps.David Bradishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02439638522932781068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-30702316234749256642007-09-17T13:25:00.000-04:002007-09-17T13:25:00.000-04:00Capacity factors above 100% mean a plant is operat...Capacity factors above 100% mean a plant is operating at effiencies above design. Reactor core power is maintained at or below the licensed power limit but, due to better than design performance in the plant equipment, a larger amount of electricity is produced. All this is a good thing, not a bad thing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-26063562334602968932007-09-17T11:47:00.000-04:002007-09-17T11:47:00.000-04:00Well, nice work on rebutting Mangano, but i'm afra...Well, nice work on rebutting Mangano, but i'm afraid I have little else to say that you haven't already said.<BR/><BR/>There's something else, unrelated, that I'm interested in, however.<BR/><BR/>Reading Southern's page about the Vogtle plant, that you linked to, they're talking about capacity factors exceeding 100% - 100.37%, 102.4%, etc. I don't suppose you'd be able to explain what a capacity factor in excess of 100% means? Does that mean that it's operating at a power output exceeding designed output? Interesting.Lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05092902410659259688noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-17105257519989593432007-09-17T10:45:00.000-04:002007-09-17T10:45:00.000-04:00Thanks.Thanks.David Bradishhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02439638522932781068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10911751.post-66464238139698403382007-09-16T22:22:00.000-04:002007-09-16T22:22:00.000-04:00David, Your rebuttal is a nice piece of work. The...David, <BR/><BR/>Your rebuttal is a nice piece of work. The next question is how can we get it equal airtime?<BR/><BR/>JohnAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com