Quebec's Gentilly-2 nuclear plant shuts down after 29 years - Polidicks

[img]http://cbc.ca/gfx/images/news/topstories/2012/12/28/hi-gentilly2-closing-620-8col.jpg[/img] [quote]Quebec's sole nuclear power plant will cease production at 10:30 p.m. today after 29 years of generating electricity. For the next 18 months, a team of 485 workers will decommission the Gentilly-2 power plant, located near Bécancour, Que., about 150 kilometres northeast of Montreal. Murielle Masse, spokeswoman for the union that represents over 700 of the plant's employees, said temporary workers will be laid off, but have priority for other employment by Hydro-Québec. If everything goes according to plan, the nuclear plant will be dismantled over a period of 18 months, beginning in January. Workers will have to discharge the reactor's fuel, treat heavy water and deactivate several systems. The fuel and contaminated water will be transferred to holding pools for seven years. After these steps, Gentilly-2 will undergo a "sleeping" stage for 40 years. By 2062, the used fuel rods will be removed from the location and the plant will be completely taken apart. The plant's closure is expected to cost $1.8 billion over a period of more than 50 years. The plant's licence was set to expire this year and refurbishing would have come with a price tag of nearly $4.3 billion, according to Hydro-Québec. Renewing its licence would have meant the plant could operate for another 30 years. The Parti Québécois government's decision to put an end to the plant sparked outrage with the workers' union and some citizens of Bécancour. In a report sent to Le Devoir in September, the union said the price to reboot the plant would be $2.4 billion. Environmental groups applauded the government's decision to shut down the plant, but local politicians and business leaders expressed concern over the effects of the 800 jobs lost. Michel Fugère, spokesman for the Mauricie's Green Movement, said the closure is a "great gift" and represents "a big day" for all Quebecers. He pointed out that several polls suggested more than 60 per cent of the population in Quebec's Mauricie region supported the plant's closure. Jean-Denis Girard, president of the chamber of commerce in Bécancour, said the plant was safe and was producing a substantial amount of energy. Girard said he plans to actively oppose the closure until a permit is delivered for the dismantling. Girard said he would bring cost comparisons to a legislative committee showing La Romaine hydroelectric project and wind-power plants are less profitable than the nuclear plant. He said Quebec Premier Pauline Marois told him the government's decision was "economic and not ideology." According to Girard, it will take five years and lots of funds for Hydro-Québec to downgrade the plant and change its personnel.[/quote] [url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/story/2012/12/28/quebec-gentilly-2-closing.html]**SOURCE**[/url] I never like it when a plant goes off the grid but I can agree here that it's reached EOL, especially since Quebec's construction industry in the 80's wasn't all that good. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Nuclear_Generating_Station]Bruce[/url] should however be able to take over the demand.

[QUOTE]Environmental groups applauded the government's decision to shut down the plant[/QUOTE] I have never understood why environmental groups don't like Nuclear Power Plants.

[QUOTE=valkery;39018964]I have never understood why environmental groups don't like Nuclear Power Plants.[/QUOTE] Because the nuclear waste is a hazard, and they all believe that it's a nuclear disaster waiting to happen.

Does Hyrdo-Quebec have the capability to make up the shortfall? Nuclear plants produce a lot of energy.

[QUOTE=FalconKrunch;39019037]Because the nuclear waste is a hazard, and they all believe that it's a nuclear disaster waiting to happen.[/QUOTE] But burning coal is a disaster happening, and it's just a giant fire hazard. Whatever. I'm not telling you off, I'm just trying to wrap my head around it.

Let's switch to thorium guys please

[QUOTE=Tacosheller;39019100]Let's switch to thorium guys please[/QUOTE] But you cant make a bomb out of the waste.

See, this is what's supposed to happen at the end of a plant's life. It shuts down, and sails quietly into the night, instead of being lazily reviewed, continuing it's usage and going out with a bang who knows how many years after it was meant to shut down. They've got the right idea.

[QUOTE=explodingape;39019269]See, this is what's supposed to happen at the end of a plant's life. It shuts down, and sails quietly into the night, instead of being lazily reviewed, continuing it's usage and going out with a bang who knows how many years after it was meant to shut down. They've got the right idea.[/QUOTE] No, it's not what should be happening. Plants like these cost way too much time and money to set up, you are meant to regularly update the entire fiasco, not throw it away.

maybe once or twice, but eventually people end up in this rut of running the same old, decaying plants for years simply because it's cheaper. Important things get overlooked in this situation simply to save money. There's a difference between throwing them away and retiring a plant that's finished it's life. It only takes one explosion from bad planning to panic entire nations, i'd rather have new plants every thirty years than a country that's forsaken nuclear power all together.

Knowing Quebecois engineering I would not trust a 30 year old nuclear plant as far as I could throw it

[QUOTE=DaysBefore;39019067]Does Hyrdo-Quebec have the capability to make up the shortfall? Nuclear plants produce a lot of energy.[/QUOTE] No, they just woke up one morning and shut it down all of a sudden without reviewing the details of the power grid at all. It's not like this was planned for years in advance.

[img]http://cbc.ca/gfx/images/news/topstories/2012/12/28/hi-gentilly2-closing-620-8col.jpg[/img] Reminds me of a motherboard for some reason, with the silos being capacitors and the big white thing being the cpu chip

[QUOTE=michaeldim;39019466]No, they just woke up one morning and shut it down all of a sudden without reviewing the details of the power grid at all. It's not like this was planned for years in advance.[/QUOTE] The french are a highly unpredictable people

[QUOTE=valkery;39019094]But burning coal is a disaster happening, and it's just a giant fire hazard. Whatever. I'm not telling you off, I'm just trying to wrap my head around it.[/QUOTE] Actually Quebec gets like 98% of its electrecity from hydroelectric dams [editline]29th December 2012[/editline] this thread will turn into bashing french people ... again

[QUOTE=PaChIrA;39019499][IMG]http://cbc.ca/gfx/images/news/topstories/2012/12/28/hi-gentilly2-closing-620-8col.jpg[/IMG] Reminds me of a motherboard for some reason, with the silos being capacitors and the big white thing being the cpu chip[/QUOTE] "It's now safe to turn off your reactor."

[QUOTE=wanksta11;39019518]Actually Quebec gets like 98% of its electrecity from hydroelectric dams [editline]29th December 2012[/editline] this thread will turn into bashing french people ... again[/QUOTE] Is coo', we're used to it.

[QUOTE=wanksta11;39019518]this thread will turn into bashing french people ... again[/QUOTE] It's only been one guy, don't get too hasty.

[QUOTE=DaysBefore;39019821]It's only been one guy, don't get too hasty.[/QUOTE] I am quebecois, I'm just being sarcastic [editline]29th December 2012[/editline] Granted I sort of meant it about the engineering thing, there's been an impressive number of bridge and overpass collapses recently and it doesn't bode well for 1970's/80's engineering standards

[QUOTE=wanksta11;39019518]Actually Quebec gets like 98% of its electrecity from hydroelectric dams [editline]29th December 2012[/editline] this thread will turn into bashing french people ... again[/QUOTE] Yeah, I was just going to say about how Quebec was great when it came to hydroelectric power. The Quiet Revolution was great in that regard.

[QUOTE=FalconKrunch;39019037]Because the nuclear waste is a hazard, and they all believe that it's a nuclear disaster waiting to happen.[/QUOTE] Its actually quite funny, they campaign for the plant to be shut down and to make up for the lost power generation you have to import energy/generate more and the fastest route to that is by burning coal, that is going on with Japan at the moment.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;39019429]Knowing Quebecois engineering I would not trust a 30 year old nuclear plant as far as I could throw it[/QUOTE] hey man im studying engineering in quebec

At least the people there are skilled workers, so they'll be able to find jobs relatively fast.

[QUOTE=Tacosheller;39019100]Let's switch to thorium guys please[/QUOTE] Fusion would be better, and research has shown it's not far off. [editline]30th December 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=hypno-toad;39019429]Knowing Quebecois engineering I would not trust a 30 year old nuclear plant as far as I could throw it[/QUOTE] Are you a engineer?

[QUOTE=SpaceGhost;39022674]Fusion would be better, and research has shown it's not far off. [/QUOTE] We've been saying that for the last 30 years. Dig to the reality that it will probably another century before we see units producing power that aren't proof of concept.

We dont need nuclear power, Only with our Hydro Electricity we can answer to the demand easily. We even export it to usa and other provinces.

[QUOTE=explodingape;39019369]maybe once or twice, but eventually people end up in this rut of running the same old, decaying plants for years simply because it's cheaper. Important things get overlooked in this situation simply to save money. There's a difference between throwing them away and retiring a plant that's finished it's life. It only takes one explosion from bad planning to panic entire nations, i'd rather have new plants every thirty years than a country that's forsaken nuclear power all together.[/QUOTE] Could they not renovate this while it is no longer running and then make it operational again once it is up to standard instead of building a new one some time down the line? [editline]30th December 2012[/editline] Never mind, I missed the bit where it said it will take 40 years before they can even move the fuel rods.

[QUOTE=valkery;39019094]But burning coal is a disaster happening, and it's just a giant fire hazard. Whatever. I'm not telling you off, I'm just trying to wrap my head around it.[/QUOTE] I suppose they prefer it when we burn coal and let the waste float up into the atmosphere?

[QUOTE=valkery;39019094]But burning coal is a disaster happening, and it's just a giant fire hazard. Whatever. I'm not telling you off, I'm just trying to wrap my head around it.[/QUOTE] The majority of Canada uses hydro-electric dams. Coal isn't a huge source of power here like it is in the U.S.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;39019891]I am quebecois, I'm just being sarcastic [editline]29th December 2012[/editline] Granted I sort of meant it about the engineering thing, there's been an impressive number of bridge and overpass collapses recently and it doesn't bode well for 1970's/80's engineering standards[/QUOTE] Most of these bridges collapsing are in the Montreal area, and we all know who gets these construction contracts over there? My dad worked on some recent overpasses/bridges watching thing whatever, and most of the guys are italians. Montreal sucks anyway, hate that place with so much passion.