PDA

View Full Version : US approves first nuclear power station reactors since 1978



Little-Acorn
02-09-2012, 01:32 PM
Kudoes to the Obama administration. After thirty years of fear and paranoia spearheaded by various enviro-whacko groups, the govt has finally gotten back on track for building nuclear power stations. For more than 50 years, fewer people have been killed or injured by nuclear power, than by ANY other source, including hydroelectric, geothermal, solar, and windmills.

The Obama administration has done the right thing. For a change. My hat is off to them.

I do wonder about the statement in the article that says the govt encourages use of "pre-approved" designs rather than "custom" designs. Doesn't that mean they will be using OLDER designs, and shutting out modifications that might make the reactors safer in the event of earthquakes, floods, etc.? New designs have been worked on since Japan's Fukushima reactor problems after a big earthquake cause tsunamis that knocked out the reactors and caused major leaks. Does this policy mean that those newer designs will NOT be used?

Still, it's good to see them finally making the (overall) right move. Hopefully the issues of safety will not be discouraged for long.

-----------------------------------------------------

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-02-09/us-nuclear-reactors-approve/53027204/1

U.S. approves 1st nuclear reactors since 1978

by Mary Ann Chastain
Updated 7m ago

WASHINGTON (AP) – The first new U.S. nuclear power plant in a generation won federal approval Thursday.


By Mary Ann Chastain, 2010 AP photo

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved Southern Co.'s request to build two nuclear reactors in the southern state of Georgia.

STORY: Regulators approve nuclear reactor design
The NRC last approved construction of a nuclear plant in 1978, a year before a partial meltdown of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania raised fears of a radiation release and brought new reactor orders nearly to a halt.

The NRC approved a new reactor design for the Georgia plant in December. Utility companies in Florida and the Carolinas also plan new reactors that use the same design by Westinghouse Electric Co.

The planned reactors are remnants of a once-anticipated building boom that the power industry dubbed the "nuclear renaissance."

President Obama has offered the Georgia project $8.3 billion in federal loan guarantees as part of its pledge to expand nuclear power.

Obama and other proponents say greater use of nuclear power could cut U.S. reliance on fossil fuels and create energy without producing emissions blamed for global warming. A new government permit process strongly encourages utilities to use pre-approved reactor designs rather than building custom models, a strategy intended to make construction easier and less expensive.

ConHog
02-09-2012, 01:49 PM
We should build a mammoth sized reactor in the Grand Canyon. One big enough to produce power for at least 20 states. Any accidents would be confined to the Grand Canyon area so that casualties could be kept to a minimum.

Nukeman
02-09-2012, 02:36 PM
We should build a mammoth sized reactor in the Grand Canyon. One big enough to produce power for at least 20 states. Any accidents would be confined to the Grand Canyon area so that casualties could be kept to a minimum.
Or you build mutliple "Thorium" reactors. those are basicly self regulating, they dont melt down, and NO byproduct material for weapons, Not to mention that thorium is more plentiful than Uranium and does NOT need to be enriched....

Safe reactors hmm why would we want to build those!?!?!?!?!?!?

Little-Acorn
02-09-2012, 03:20 PM
I've read some about thorium reactors. Any reason we havn't built them, aside from ThePowersThatBeDontLikeThemForEvilReasons?

BTW, noo-clee-ar is correct. :-)

Nukeman
02-12-2012, 04:14 PM
I've read some about thorium reactors. Any reason we havn't built them, aside from ThePowersThatBeDontLikeThemForEvilReasons?

BTW, noo-clee-ar is correct. :-)Because if they built them they would have to ADMITT that nuclear power is .... *gasp*.... SAFE.. Lord knows we cant have that floating around now can we.... Geez jsut imagine safe nuclear power... who woulda thunk it!!!

LuvRPgrl
02-12-2012, 06:25 PM
Kudoes to the Obama administration. After thirty years of fear and paranoia spearheaded by various enviro-whacko groups, the govt has finally gotten back on track for building nuclear power stations. For more than 50 years, fewer people have been killed or injured by nuclear power, than by ANY other source, including hydroelectric, geothermal, solar, and windmills.

The Obama administration has done the right thing. For a change. My hat is off to them.

I do wonder about the statement in the article that says the govt encourages use of "pre-approved" designs rather than "custom" designs. Doesn't that mean they will be using OLDER designs, and shutting out modifications that might make the reactors safer in the event of earthquakes, floods, etc.? New designs have been worked on since Japan's Fukushima reactor problems after a big earthquake cause tsunamis that knocked out the reactors and caused major leaks. Does this policy mean that those newer designs will NOT be used?

Still, it's good to see them finally making the (overall) right move. Hopefully the issues of safety will not be discouraged for long.

-----------------------------------------------------

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2012-02-09/us-nuclear-reactors-approve/53027204/1

U.S. approves 1st nuclear reactors since 1978

by Mary Ann Chastain
Updated 7m ago

WASHINGTON (AP) – The first new U.S. nuclear power plant in a generation won federal approval Thursday.


By Mary Ann Chastain, 2010 AP photo

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved Southern Co.'s request to build two nuclear reactors in the southern state of Georgia.

STORY: Regulators approve nuclear reactor design
The NRC last approved construction of a nuclear plant in 1978, a year before a partial meltdown of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania raised fears of a radiation release and brought new reactor orders nearly to a halt.

The NRC approved a new reactor design for the Georgia plant in December. Utility companies in Florida and the Carolinas also plan new reactors that use the same design by Westinghouse Electric Co.

The planned reactors are remnants of a once-anticipated building boom that the power industry dubbed the "nuclear renaissance."

President Obama has offered the Georgia project $8.3 billion in federal loan guarantees as part of its pledge to expand nuclear power.

Obama and other proponents say greater use of nuclear power could cut U.S. reliance on fossil fuels and create energy without producing emissions blamed for global warming. A new government permit process strongly encourages utilities to use pre-approved reactor designs rather than building custom models, a strategy intended to make construction easier and less expensive.

you post this just as san diego counties nuke plant in san onofre has an accident leading to the leaking of dangerous amonia? gases

avatar4321
02-13-2012, 03:36 AM
Or you build mutliple "Thorium" reactors. those are basicly self regulating, they dont melt down, and NO byproduct material for weapons, Not to mention that thorium is more plentiful than Uranium and does NOT need to be enriched....

Safe reactors hmm why would we want to build those!?!?!?!?!?!?

Ive honestly never heard of thorium reactors. I need to do some research there.

I do have to say Im a bit surprised that the administration allowed this to happen.Kudos on finally doing something for the American people.

Of course, they might reverse things after the election.

Nukeman
02-13-2012, 08:13 AM
you post this just as san diego counties nuke plant in san onofre has an accident leading to the leaking of dangerous amonia? gasesSo whats the point?? We dont stop production of cars every time one of them crashes do we. We dont stop using coal fired electric generation everytime one of those emits toxic fumes do we?? I guess I don't see where you're going with this thought process...

LuvRPgrl
02-13-2012, 12:48 PM
So whats the point?? We dont stop production of cars every time one of them crashes do we. We dont stop using coal fired electric generation everytime one of those emits toxic fumes do we?? I guess I don't see where you're going with this thought process...

the point was to make everyone smile, or laugh. LITTLE A is actually much closer to San Onofre then I sm:laugh:
I am in favor of more nuke plants, or therioum, or whatever.

I also think we should stop using any and all of our own supplies, and import as much as possible