and these guys run nuclear power stations....
in [UK Motorcycles]
|
From: M J Carley on 8 Dec 2009 07:35 In the referenced article, "'Hog" <sm911SPAM(a)hotmailCHIPS.co.uk> writes: >M J Carley wrote: >> Hardly a neutral source. Do they mention that no civil nuclear power >> station, anywhere, ever, has been built without a public subsidy? Has >> anyone ever built a reactor on-time, on budget? >Your points are valid however they have also operated for twice their >original design lives. >The financial and logistical problems faced by Nuclear are Political. >The concepts and viability are rock solid. OK there is one other >problem. The engineering and planning overheads are so enormous >there are very few players and the industry is like a drifting >supertanker. New thinking and new technology are hard to adopt. Concepts and viability are not solid: the newest reactor in the world (in Finland) is three and a half years behind schedule and 50% over budget. Nobody has yet worked out how to make the things properly. >www.aw-energy.com That does look nice. The osmotic plant in Norway is sweet: http://www.statkraft.com/energy-sources/osmotic-power/ -- Si deve tornare alle basi: Marx ed i Clash. Michael Carley: http://people.bath.ac.uk/ensmjc/
From: Leszek Karlik on 8 Dec 2009 07:52 On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 10:33:26 +0100, M J Carley <ensmjc(a)bath.ac.uk> wrote: [...] >> http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf02.html > Hardly a neutral source. Do they mention that no civil nuclear power > station, anywhere, ever, has been built without a public subsidy? Seeing as nuclear power is not something that should be let freely on the private market it's not really that surprising. How many highway projects or other large infrastructure investments are built without a public subsidy anyway? > Has anyone ever built a reactor on-time, on budget? Of course. I've read of French and Japanese reactors for certain. New Chinese plants also seem to be progressing as planned (maybe because they're being built by the French ;-)). -- Leszek 'Leslie' Karlik
From: Andy Bonwick on 8 Dec 2009 08:01 On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 12:35:50 GMT, ensmjc(a)bath.ac.uk (M J Carley) wrote: snip> >Concepts and viability are not solid: the newest reactor in the world >(in Finland) is three and a half years behind schedule and 50% over >budget. Nobody has yet worked out how to make the things properly. > People know how to make nuclear reactors work, the problem is making them work safely at a low cost.
From: 'Hog on 8 Dec 2009 08:09 Andy Bonwick wrote: > On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 12:35:50 GMT, ensmjc(a)bath.ac.uk (M J Carley) wrote: > > snip> > >> Concepts and viability are not solid: the newest reactor in the world >> (in Finland) is three and a half years behind schedule and 50% over >> budget. Nobody has yet worked out how to make the things properly. >> > People know how to make nuclear reactors work, the problem is making > them work safely at a low cost. One could argue the toss endlessly about the subject but I do think that with the right political environment it would be possible. But you *still* need the right industrial entity, a conglomerate of companies, to make it happen. Therin lies a huge challenge. Bit like making the railways work. For that reason I don't think we have a good solution other than letting the Frogs do it. Sadly that means PWR. A compromise design. Difficult high cost maintenance and exceptionally difficult decommissioning. Truth is, doesn't actually have to be that way. Deep sea oil exploration and production proved that incredibly difficult challenges can be handled and huge new technology changes incorporated. And that industry has proved huge projects can be done within reasonable budgets and timescales. -- 'Hog '06 ST4-S '96 Bastard12 '89 R100RS '81 XS650 '78 RD400 '81 R65 Outfit
From: M J Carley on 8 Dec 2009 08:17
In the referenced article, Andy Bonwick <nospam(a)bonwick.me.uk> writes: >On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 12:35:50 GMT, ensmjc(a)bath.ac.uk (M J Carley) wrote: > >snip> > >>Concepts and viability are not solid: the newest reactor in the world >>(in Finland) is three and a half years behind schedule and 50% over >>budget. Nobody has yet worked out how to make the things properly. >> >People know how to make nuclear reactors work, the problem is making >them work safely at a low cost. The problem is making them work safely at a *known* cost. -- Si deve tornare alle basi: Marx ed i Clash. Michael Carley: http://people.bath.ac.uk/ensmjc/ |