Goodbye 100w, 75w Incandescent Lamps

Page 6 of 16  
Pete C. wrote: ...

Au contraire, me boy... :)
One can design/build a reactor w/ a breeding ratio > unity even today. Carter, unfortunately, canceled the large-scale demonstration project at Oak Ridge along w/ the (previously mentioned more fully in another response) marvelously short-sighted decision to ban reprocessing/recycling of commercial fuel in the US.
The latter of those two decisions is still, unfortunately, in effect so the only practical alternative available is the current "standard design" advanced LWR's of the W and GE design. Unfortunately, also, the long hiatus forced the other US vendors (CE and B&W) plus virtually all of the manufacturing capability to close. :(
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

there was something in the news recently about the 1st new license being issued for a new nucelar power plant. IIRC,they have streamlined the process considerably.
also,that new pebble-bed reactor technology really looks promising.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Streamline is a relative term (g)>

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jim Yanik wrote:

No, it was the first new _application_ filed for a license. The "streamlined" process of review is expected to take 4 years or so before the issuing of an actual construction license.
TVA was the filing utility for a unit at the existing Bellefonte site in AL (where there's a 1000 MWe abandoned unit at greater than 95% complete, quit work on in the "upgrade mania" after TMI owing to unconstrained cost growth).
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kurt Ullman wrote:

A YEAR? Think FIVE YEARS and ten years to build it.
A few years ago a gas-fired plant was proposed in my area. It would have a 3/4 mile long discharge canal connecting the cooling basin to the bay.
The environmentalists went nuts. "THERMAL POLLUTION" they cried. It would kill all the marine life from Houston south to Mexico and 100 miles into the Gulf! Four years of to-ing and fro-ing before construction began.
Plant eventually got built. Now the discharge canal is lined shoulder to shoulder with fishermen. Seems as if the marine critters that like warmer water (mostly shrimp) head for the canal. The fish who like to eat shrimp follow. Creatures who don't like warm water move away - to Canada, I guess.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
HeyBub wrote:

That points out one of the major issues with our broken legal system - the fact that the eco-loons making the false claims and filing the frivolous lawsuits are never held liable for the harm they cause. If they were held liable for their proven false claims their plague would soon end and the true sane environmentalists would regain some credibility.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Pete C. wrote:

In case you didn't notice, the corporate loons are never held accountable for damage THEY do based on falsehoods about all the good and minimal harm their pet projects will do. Just look at how many SuperFund sites there are. Some of the companies manage to just walk away. Others go bankrupt (even as the people in charge start another company to repeat the cycle).
--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form snipped-for-privacy@prodigy.net.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

A pox on both their houses, and two wrongs do not make a right! Find a way to punish those who damage our economy by knowingly making false statements as to the environment no matter what side they are on or think they may be helping!
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Never being held accountable and sometimes manage to just walk away are two very different things. In superfund cases, the EPA in most cases has extracted money from the companies responsible. They do it when it's clear who is responsible, they are in business and have assets. The problem is with many of these superfund sites, eg dump sites, the dumping had been going on for decades and many of the companies involved no longer exist. In other cases, the legal system has extracted huge amounts from corporations for the mistakes they made. John Mansville wound up bankrupt after paying out claims for asbestos. The tobacco companies paid billions to settle their claims. The point Pete C made about environmental groups generally being able to make false claims, use the legal system to block projects and then walking away with no consequences is a valid one.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Never being held accountable and sometimes manage to just walk away are two very different things. In superfund cases, the EPA in most cases has extracted money from the companies responsible. They do it when it's clear who is responsible, they are in business and have assets. The problem is with many of these superfund sites, eg dump sites, the dumping had been going on for decades and many of the companies involved no longer exist. In other cases, the legal system has extracted huge amounts from corporations for the mistakes they made. John Mansville wound up bankrupt after paying out claims for asbestos. The tobacco companies paid billions to settle their claims. The point Pete C made about environmental groups generally being able to make false claims, use the legal system to block projects and then walking away with no consequences is a valid one.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
GE has never fulfilled its agreement to clean up the mess it made of the Hudson, and Jack Welch is not in prison. I will give you no further information about the issue. You know how to research it. Good luck.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You have an amazing nack for skipping the entire point of a discussion thread and coming up with a reply that adds nothing. We all know a lot of companies have been held responsible for their actions and have paid out huge sums for cleanup, damages, etc. And we know some, in one way or another, have not.
Now, if you want to refute the thread, then address Pete C's comments and provide us with all the examples where environmental groups that level false allegations, block projects, cause companies and society costs through delays or projects never get built at all are ever held responsible and made to pay damages.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

I suggest that the two are similar in magnitude. After all, there haven't been all that many projects blocked -- just delayed. But the corporate follies will be with us for decades in many cases.
--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form snipped-for-privacy@prodigy.net.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Delays of projects are expensive. One big example: A lot of nuclear plants had construction drawn out by delays in the 1970's when interest rates were at high levels, and after that the antinukers blamed the nukes for their electricity being expensive.
- Don Klipstein ( snipped-for-privacy@misty.com)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ya know, sometimes the antinukers have a point that they don't mention explicitly because they shouldn't have to if the audience is intelligent enough. This is the point: Politicians will approve just about ANYTHING if someone lines their pockets sufficiently. For all we know, Yucca Mountain could be sitting on top of an enormous aquifer that nobody's tapped yet. We'd never know it until Western states decided to tap into it and found it was contaminated.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I went to Google just to be a smart ass and say they don't know. Turns out they do know. http://www.epa.gov/radiation/yucca/about.html Highlights, the radiation storage is better than 1000 feet above the aquifer. Googling "Yucca Mountain" and aquifer yields all sorts of neat stuff.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Like I said....enough money.....
Local town & city councils are the training grounds for bribery. This is where they learn to approve little things like shopping plazas that nobody wants or needs, or more famous disasters like Rochester's fast ferry debacle, which was to transport "all those tourists" back & forth to Toronto. Problem: No business plan, no surveys to find out if there were customers who'd use the service. Result: Went belly up in less than two years. Both customers rode the ferry a few times, and the thrill was gone. But, it was approved because politicians were paid to approve it. No venture capitalist would work this way, but they're smarter, and their own money is involved.
If you think the same types of politicians don't get involved with projects that could kill people, you are high.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 26 Dec 2007 06:02:11 +0000 (UTC), snipped-for-privacy@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote:

Nuke Power plants get built directly adjacent to major waterways. That's how they cool the reactor.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Hush, Don. You're late to class, and you're wrong. Read Kurt's response, which came before yours.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
JoeSpareBedroom wrote: ...

You _DO_ know that Yucca Mountain is a "monitored, retrievable storage facility" don't you? The spent fuel will be incased and in the storage tunnels in such a fashion it can be continually observed and even retrieved for recycling.
Which, of course, if it weren't for the extremist greens, is what would have been done for the last 40 years and the whole exercise would have been avoided as well as the reduction in C emissions by the replacement of most of the older, less-efficient coal-fired units having been retired in favor of nuclear and the massive buildup of natural gas-fired generation facilities would not have happened or at least been constrained to required rapid-response peak generation cycling units rather than baseload generation capacity.
All in all, a _very_ expensive and ill-considered result for environmental advancement.
--
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.