• Russia wants to build UK power plants
    48 replies, posted
[QUOTE]Mr Shuvalov, who met Vince Cable in London on Monday for bilateral trade talks, said he had talked to the Business Secretary about ways in which Russia could help build plants. “We discussed joint cooperation in some areas, including the construction of nuclear power plants,” said Mr Shuvalov after the talks. “The Russian side is interested in such construction and commissioning of new plants here in Great Britain in cooperation with Rolls-Royce.” Last year Rolls-Royce , which has a specialist nuclear division, signed a memorandum of understanding with Russian state-owned atomic energy corporation Rosatom to work together on potential new projects. The talks came as the Japanese firm Hitachi was finalising plans to buy Britain’s Horizon nuclear venture for £700m. The deal, which will see Hitachi pay German owners RWE and E.ON almost twice the price analysts were expecting, is expected to be announced on Tuesday together with plans to expand Horizon’s two nuclear sites at Wylfa on Anglesey and Oldbury in Gloucestershire. Separately, the Department of Business said the bilateral talks with Mr Shuvalov and his delegation had resulted in several agreements for British firms. Tensar, the manufacturing firm, is to build a plant in St Petersburg in a £12m project that will safeguard 150 jobs in Blackburn, Lancashire. Meanwhile, Stoneguard signed a £60m deal to build a waste processing facility in Novosibirsk. Mr Cable said: “Britain’s trade with Russia is rapidly expanding and the opportunities will only continue to grow as its economy opens up further to trade and investment. Important steps like Russia’s accession to the World Trade Organisation earlier this year are making it easier for UK firms to do business there.” Russia is the UK’s 14th biggest export market, with British exports up 39pc in 2011 to £4.78bn.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/nuclearpower/9641582/Russia-offers-to-build-Britains-nuclear-power-stations.html"]telegraph[/URL] [QUOTE]Russia wants to build nuclear power plants in the UK, First Deputy Prime Minister Igor Shuvalov said on Monday. Shuvalov’s statement came after the Russian-British inter-governmental committee on trade and investment wrapped up its ninth session at the Queen Elizabeth II conference hall in London. “We discussed joint cooperation in some areas, including the construction of nuclear power plants. The Russian side is interested in such construction and commissioning of new plants here in Great Britain in cooperation with Rolls-Royce,” Shuvalov said. The United Kingdom operates 16 nuclear reactors at nine nuclear power plants, generating about one sixth of the UK’s electricity. In October 2010, the British government gave the green light to building up to eight new nuclear power plants in the country. The committee also discussed “some aspects of oil production cooperation,” the development of Russia’s Skolkovo hi-tech fund and also the support of small and medium business with the participation of entrepreneurs, investors and sectoral specialists from both countries. Russia is one of the UK’s three most rapidly developing trade and investment partners, and there are very few concrete disagreements between Russia and UK in the economic sphere, Business Secretary Vince Cable said.[/QUOTE] [URL="http://en.rian.ru/business/20121029/177020115.html"]rian[/URL] What could possibly go wrong?
[t]http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/chernobyl_25th_anniversary/bp2.jpg[/t] Woops!
If anyone were to build power plants in the UK, I'd want it to be the Japanese.
Well why not?
Gotta love how anyone who posts anything about chernobyl, knows literally zero shit about it and why it happens, and probably can't even point out its location on a map.
Chernobyl was more a case of incompetence/recklessness on part of the employees themselves. Albeit something as potentially dangerous as a nuclear power plant should probably have a few more fail-safes to prevent that sort of thing. But if nothing else Chernobyl gave Russian nuclear authorities a great object lesson on what [I]not[/I] to do when managing nuclear reactors. If nothing else I'm sure the Brits will inspect everything very carefully.
Russia builds nuclear power plants all over the world, they seem to be safe and reliable designs. After all they have alot of experience.
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;38246066]Chernobyl was more a case of incompetence/recklessness on part of the employees themselves. Albeit something as potentially dangerous as a nuclear power plant should probably have a few more fail-safes to prevent that sort of thing. But if nothing else Chernobyl gave Russian nuclear authorities a great object lesson on what [I]not[/I] to do when managing nuclear reactors. If nothing else I'm sure the Brits will inspect everything very carefully.[/QUOTE] Chernobyl had more than enough safety meassures, the problem was that they turned all of them fucking off.
As I've posted before.. Despite it's perceived danger, Nuclear power is one of the safest forms of power generation [Deaths per TW/h].. [quote] Sources: [url]http://www.oecd-nea.org/ndd/reports/2010/nea6862-comparing-risks.pdf[/url] [url]http://www-958.ibm.com/software/data/cognos/manyeyes/datasets/deaths-per-twh-for-all-energy-sour/versions/1[/url] [url]http://seekerblog.com/2011/03/30/externe-comparing-nuclear-health-and-environmental-effects/[/url] [url]http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/lifetime-deaths-per-twh-from-energy.html[/url] [/quote]
As long as it's based on the CANDU reactor design. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_CANDU_Reactor[/url]
[QUOTE=Bradyns;38246092]As I've posted before.. Despite it's perceived danger, Nuclear power is one of the safest forms of power generation [Deaths per TW/h]..[/QUOTE] We could probably have had enough research into nuclear fusion to have gotten it already if it wasn't for all those cunts shouting about shit they don't know about.
[QUOTE=Crimor;38246024]Gotta love how anyone who posts anything about chernobyl, knows literally zero shit about it and why it happens, and probably can't even point out its location on a map.[/QUOTE] I was just making a joke actually, not implying that this will be at all the case. And I've always been very interesting in Chernobyl, so I'm not exactly ill informed about it.
[QUOTE=Bradyns;38246092]As I've posted before.. Despite it's perceived danger, Nuclear power is one of the safest forms of power generation [Deaths per TW/h]..[/QUOTE] Yeah good luck getting it through the thick heads of the ignorant masses.
Its worth noting that Chernobyl was still running up until 2000, when it was decommissioned. Its the plant staffs stupidity and lack of knowledge that caused the problem.
[QUOTE=Van-man;38246093]As long as it's based on the CANDU reactor design. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_CANDU_Reactor[/url][/QUOTE] I am pretty sure that if they choose a Russian design, it will be a [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VVER]VVER[/url], but the article sounds like Rolls Royce might want to do their own thing and Russians will just help, so it might be an entirely new reactor.
[QUOTE=Crimor;38246089]Chernobyl had more than enough safety meassures, the problem was that they turned all of them fucking off.[/QUOTE] Not exactly a great fail-safe if somebody can so easily override them to do a test.
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;38246066]Chernobyl was more a case of incompetence/recklessness on part of the employees themselves. Albeit something as potentially dangerous as a nuclear power plant should probably have a few more fail-safes to prevent that sort of thing. But if nothing else Chernobyl gave Russian nuclear authorities a great object lesson on what [I]not[/I] to do when managing nuclear reactors. If nothing else I'm sure the Brits will inspect everything very carefully.[/QUOTE] Hey now, don't go blaming it on the crew. Skeleton crews are usually low on manpower as it is, and the second things started to go wrong, they didn't have enough hands on board to deal with the situation because they weren't allocated the manpower necessary to bring it down in the event of a meltdown/failure of safety systems.
[QUOTE=Rastadogg5;38245818][t]http://inapcache.boston.com/universal/site_graphics/blogs/bigpicture/chernobyl_25th_anniversary/bp2.jpg[/t] Woops![/QUOTE] Good thing that was just one incident, in the Soviet Union (now in Ukraine, not Russia), 30 years ago. [QUOTE=laserguided;38246191]Its worth noting that Chernobyl was still running up until 2000, when it was decommissioned. Its the plant staffs stupidity and lack of knowledge that caused the problem.[/QUOTE] It was shut down on one of my birthdays :D [editline]30th October 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Crimor;38246024]Gotta love how anyone who posts anything about chernobyl, knows literally zero shit about it and why it happens, and probably can't even point out its location on a map.[/QUOTE] Most people think it is in Russia so you're probably right.
[QUOTE=Crimor;38246024]Gotta love how anyone who posts anything about chernobyl, knows literally zero shit about it and why it happens, and probably can't even point out its location on a map.[/QUOTE] Eh. Just like anything else, be it space exploration, aviation, automobiles or even Nuclear Power, it's all one big trial by error. Aviation is pretty safe but only because of so many accidents over 100 years. Every car is intentionally put through many accidents to make them as safe as possible, and NPP's are no different. The only thing here is the shit's so expensive, large and destructive you can't really do anything but practice forseen circumstances. It's usually the unforseen that have problems and no procedure for Chernobyl had incompetent mistakes during tests, Three Mile Island had idiots refusing to classify the problem the right way leading to a sort of Misdiagnosis, and Fukishima was kicked in the nuts by god himself twice. Kyshtym happened in the early 50's, when this was brand new. These are the only large accidents I know of, though, and if anything, prove that NPP's are safe and sturdy. It's the human error that's the problem, just like in Auto accidents and aviation
[QUOTE=Crimor;38246024]Gotta love how anyone who posts anything about chernobyl, knows literally zero shit about it and why it happens, and probably can't even point out its location on a map.[/QUOTE] pretty sure it was a joke........
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;38246248]Not exactly a great fail-safe if somebody can so easily override them to do a test.[/QUOTE] But at the very least, you've got to admit that the problem lies more in the people running the plant rather than in the power itself. With the right people, nuclear power could take us into the right kind of future.
God damn I'm tired of explaining how nuclear fission and fusion works in every thread about this kinda shit, just look back on the threads of the japanese fission reacter that went balls up(Which would have taken out ANY other fission reactor on the god damn planet, the forces thrown at it was insane) and read me and a few others posts about how this shit works, we went into great detail there. I swear I'll throw the next idiot who thinks chernobyl is in russia into a god damn tokamak.
[QUOTE=dcalde78;38245862]If anyone were to build power plants in the UK, I'd want it to be the Japanese.[/QUOTE] Fuck no, France are the best at making Nuclear power plants they have hundreds.
[QUOTE=hypno-toad;38246066]Chernobyl was more a case of incompetence/recklessness on part of the employees themselves. Albeit something as potentially dangerous as a nuclear power plant should probably have a few more fail-safes to prevent that sort of thing. But if nothing else Chernobyl gave Russian nuclear authorities a great object lesson on what [I]not[/I] to do when managing nuclear reactors. If nothing else I'm sure the Brits will inspect everything very carefully.[/QUOTE] Blaming the employees is exactly what the Soviet Government did. The regular employees did nothing wrong while the supervisors were idiots. The whole disaster wouldn't have happened if it wasn't for a massive design fault that the government KNEW ABOUT but didn't tell the employees because they didn't want anything soviet made to appear flawed in any way, the same design fault almost caused a disaster just months before. There's a really good British Docudrama about it if anyone is interested. [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3SKOj8LGhk&list=PLA8A7EC964D6F719E&feature=plcp[/url]
Didn't they use a material covering the rods which accelerates reaction? Something stupid like that.
It seems some will be built by the Japanese. So the mentioned deal was already signed by now. [URL]http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/oct/30/hitachi-next-generation-british-nuclear-plants[/URL]
Didn't they learn quite a lot about nuclear safety from Chernobyl? I don't know if it's true, but somebody said that modern plants are so safe, partly because of lessons learnt from the stupid experiments they ran at Chernobyl. A lot can be discovered from poking something until it breaks.
[QUOTE=Canary;38246727]Didn't they use a material covering the rods which accelerates reaction? Something stupid like that.[/QUOTE] They had Graphite on the first few inches and when it went in water was displaced increasing rate of reaction, when the rods all dropped in there was a power surge which smashed some of the control rods and the debris jammed the others where only the graphite was stuck in the water.
[QUOTE=st0rmforce;38246772]Didn't they learn quite a lot about nuclear safety from Chernobyl? I don't know if it's true, but somebody said that modern plants are so safe, partly because of lessons learnt from the stupid experiments they ran at Chernobyl. A lot can be discovered from poking something until it breaks.[/QUOTE] Yeah, of course I wish it would never have happened, but we learned so much about how to work around meltdowns and stop shit from spreading.
[QUOTE=st0rmforce;38246772]Didn't they learn quite a lot about nuclear safety from Chernobyl? I don't know if it's true, but somebody said that modern plants are so safe, partly because of lessons learnt from the stupid experiments they ran at Chernobyl. A lot can be discovered from poking something until it breaks.[/QUOTE] Chernobyl was an already outdated reactor design no longer used in the West even at the time of it's introduction.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.