Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Petz who wrote (55129)	9/14/2001 1:09:30 AM
From: ptanner	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 275872

Petz, Re: "I never understood why every nuclear power plant ever designed seems to be unique." Well, because the utilities kept wanting to build bigger plants even while the smaller ones were under construction, let alone de-bugging and allowing the opportunity to apply the lessons learned. And of course since it was a "new" field everyone had their own ideas. At least from my nuclear engineering course 15 years ago. Plus litigation/regulations snarl the whole design/bidding/construction process so that it is, IMHO virtually impossible for anyone to fully understand even a set of design plans for the construction of a high school building (a 200 sheet set of plans plus maybe two thousand pages of inconsistent specifications then awarding to the lowest bidder). The use of standardized and highly tested designs (high temperature gas reactors, for example, which cannot meltdown - they just get very hot in full failure mode) would certainly streamline the process. However, the site permitting process (NIMBY) would be very burdensome. The sites that were approved but not built might be more readily developed. There would also need to be a clear commitment to handling of the high volume of low-level radioactive waste and the relatively modest amount of extremely hazardous material. Has Yucca mountain been resolved yet? Even without the nuclear power industry the federal government still faces a huge challenge from the byproducts of the nuclear weapons programs. A typical coal fire plant emits more radiation and vastly greater impacts in general to the environment than a nuclear plant but the subject of risk is extremely subjective. -PT

To: Petz who wrote (55129)	9/14/2001 7:42:21 AM
From: rsi_boy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

The standardized nuclear plant exists. It's Canada's CANDU reactor, a design that is used throughout Canada and has been exported to several other nations. ieee.ca

To: Petz who wrote (55129)	9/14/2001 7:49:38 PM
From: hmaly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

John Re..Design and propose constuction of cookie-cutter small--to-medium-size nuclear power plants. Kind of like Intel's copy-exactly policy.<<<<<<< Ask and ye shall receive. http://www.msnbc.com/news/604057.asp msnbc.com msnbc.com; This is the design which I feel has the best chance of reinvigorating the industry. Exelon is trying to build a prototype in South Africa.

To: Petz who wrote (55129)	9/15/2001 12:27:30 AM
From: burn2learn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

One reason for the need to improve on reactor design is CRUD. Plants get build using the best known materials and design known to date. As you introduce new variables with any design you get new learning’s. I major cost to reactor plants to overhaul and repair. Repair jobs are mapped in man-rem, a job in a particular high radiation area will give X amount of radiation exposure...this is known by conducting radiation surveys. The only way you can combat the radiation is TIME, DISTANCE, and SHIELDING. Reduce the amount of time each QUALIFIED man stays in an area (limit exposure to each person), work at maximum distance from high rad spot, and use shielding (lead, water, ect). Each has a huge cost. You have to have X amount of qualified radiation Workers to complete ONE job, this does not include the people not qualified to do maintenance...just stand watch, time keep ect. Downtime is extended due to several factors..waiting for short lived activity to decay, cool down of high temp / high pressure reactor plants and of course QA. Quality and safety always job one. Designs that limit plant materials from eroding and becoming activated in the rad flux is key. Designing a plant that does not produce activated corrosion and erosion material that also ha s a long half-life is key. All plants have low flow areas were this material will deposit....this will lead to high radiation areas and increased maintenance cost and extended downtime. We are not working on your car, your house...this work is an art of itself. Mike...yes I've been exposed to a few rem lifetime