• An Even Bigger Century of Nuclear Energy
    34 replies, posted
[QUOTE] China is targeting 112 to 120 GW of nuclear power by itself for 2020. McKinsey indicated that China is targeting 120 GW for 2020. So the combined China, India and Vietnam target for the next 15 years is probably over 250 GW of new build. There is a mention in the Wall Street Journal article that 46 countries could build 1000 reactors by 2030 1000 reactors for 2030 would be the high-2030 scenario from the World Nuclear Association (WNA) - Nuclear Century. The WNA lists nuclear generation targets by country. Even the high targets for China from the WNA are likely to be too low if China hits 120 GW or more by 2020, then 2030 could be 300-400 GW. If China is exporting nuclear reactors for half the price of France (40% lower for the latest reactors and even cheaper for older models) starting in 2013 then other countries could buy and build more reactors than if cheap reactors were not coming from South Korea and China. China will probably also not be as picky about which countries they build reactors. China has been able to maintain Walmart like costs for its nuclear reactor build. China and South Korea (and Russia) will be exporting what is currently an Asian nuclear boom around the world. Cheaper reactors that are built on time could solidify the orders that are currently the high end case. Korea is developing MIT uprating technology that can increase the generation from existing and future reactors. The high case from WNA with only China increased. Uprating and cheaper exports and new factory mass produced reactors could increase these numbers even more. Programmes* 2008 2030 High Capacity in GWe Argentina 1 11 Armenia 0 1 Belarus 0 5 Belgium 6 8 Brazil 2 30 Bulgaria 2 7 Canada 13 30 China 9 300 Czech Republic 7 Finland 3 7 France 63 75 Germany 20 50 Hungary 2 5 India 4 70 Iran 0 10 Japan 48 70 Lithuania/ Latvia/ Estonia 1 6 Mexico 1 20 Netherlands 1 5 Pakistan 0 20 Romania 1 10 Russia 22 80 Slovakia 2 4 Slovenia 1 1 South Africa 2 25 South Korea 18 50 Spain 7 20 Sweden 9 15 Switzerland 3 6 Ukraine 13 30 United Kingdom 11 30 United States 99 180 SUBTOTAL 367 1188 Nations Planning Nuclear 2008 2030 High Capacity in GWe Egypt 0 10 Gulf Coop 0 50 Indonesia 0 6 Kazakhstan 0 2 Nigeria 0 15 Poland 0 10 Turkey 0 15 Vietnam 0 15 SUBTOTAL 0 123 *Gulf Cooperation Council members are Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates Potential Entrants 2008 2030 High Capacity in GWe Albania 0 2 Algeria 0 5 Australia 0 10 Austria 0 3 Bangladesh 0 10 Chile 0 5 Croatia 0 2 Denmark 0 2 Greece 0 2 Iraq 0 2 Ireland 0 5 Israel 0 3 Italy 0 20 Jordan 0 7 Kenya 0 2 Malaysia/Singapore 0 10 Morocco 0 5 New Zealand 0 2 Norway 0 2 Philippines 0 10 Portugal 0 5 Serbia 0 2 Syria 0 3 Thailand 0 10 Venezuela 0 3 Other 0 4 SUBTOTAL 0 140 WORLD TOTAL 367 1450 [/QUOTE] Source: [url]http://nextbigfuture.com/2010/12/even-bigger-century-of-nuclear-energy.html[/url]
I didn't understand much but whats going to happen if it explodes?
[QUOTE=Sub-Zero;26466118]I didn't understand much[/QUOTE] You got that right.
[QUOTE=Sub-Zero;26466118]I didn't understand much but whats going to happen if it explodes?[/QUOTE] These are brand new reactors, not the understaffed kludge that Chernobyl was.
[QUOTE=Sub-Zero;26466118]I didn't understand much but whats going to happen if it explodes?[/QUOTE] But it doesn't.
Hopefully all the employees will be very well trained for their dangerous profession, and we won't have any Homer Simpsons in the duty roster. Nuclear power is VERY serious business; it's high-yield, but VERY high risk if someone isn't doing their job right.
[QUOTE=ironman17;26466622]Hopefully all the employees will be very well trained for their dangerous profession, and we won't have any Homer Simpsons in the duty roster. Nuclear power is VERY serious business; it's high-yield, but VERY high risk if someone isn't doing their job right.[/QUOTE] If someone doesn't do their job right then the reactor shuts down, it doesn't blow up, it's a power station, not a bomb.
[b]Reactors use sub-critical masses of fuel[/b], meaning they can't produce a thermonuclear explosion, even if someone managed to disable all the safety equipment. Nearly everything in a modern nuclear reaction fails safe, say the lifting equipment for the control rods break, the control rods are designed to fall into the reactor, halting the reaction.
Why the fuck not use that money on research into Fusion power?
[QUOTE=ironman17;26466622]Hopefully all the employees will be very well trained for their dangerous profession, and we won't have any Homer Simpsons in the duty roster. Nuclear power is VERY serious business; it's high-yield, but VERY high risk if someone isn't doing their job right.[/QUOTE]Modern ones are designed to shut down if someone so much as sneezes at the reactor. Chernobyl had all it's safety mechanisms specifically disabled by the staff, and they were doing a rather stupid test. [QUOTE=imadaman;26466894]Why the fuck not use that money on research into Fusion power?[/QUOTE]They need this power sooner than fusion will become available. They could throw some more money at it, but it wouldn't speed up fusion research a great deal.
ITT: People talk like they know shit about nuclear reactors(referring to people who think it's dangerous or will explode)
[QUOTE=Sub-Zero;26466118]I didn't understand much but whats going to happen if it explodes?[/QUOTE] This isn't 1986, nothing is going to explode.
[QUOTE=BrainDeath;26466700]If someone doesn't do their job right then the reactor shuts down, it doesn't blow up, it's a power station, not a bomb.[/QUOTE] Someone's never played Red Alert.
I live within a hundred miles of a nuclear power plant. One day a backup pump broke, the entire plant got shut down for until it was fixed. A back up pump, not a primary pump. Nuclear Power plants are safer than you guys think.
Safest, cleanest form of energy production we have right now. The US should really lift the restrictions and expenses required and let companies build some...it costs half a million dollars just to get the PERMITS to begin construction of a nuclear plant in the US.
[QUOTE=Ridge;26468218][B]Safest, cleanest form of energy production we have right now.[/B] The US should really lift the restrictions and expenses required and let companies build some...it costs half a million dollars just to get the PERMITS to begin construction of a nuclear plant in the US.[/QUOTE] [B]Solar Power.[/B]
[QUOTE=imadaman;26468921][B]Solar Power.[/B][/QUOTE] the processes used to refine the materials used to make solar and hydrogen cells are very damaging to the environment, as well as the construction process itself
[QUOTE=imadaman;26468921][B]Solar Power.[/B][/QUOTE] Not space efficient, only works 1/2 the time, and only in some areas.
Nuclear Waste? [editline]3rd December 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=LF9000;26469236]Not space efficient, only works 1/2 the time, and only in some areas.[/QUOTE] Only talked about safest and cleanest :v:
[QUOTE=Sub-Zero;26466118]I didn't understand much but whats going to happen if it explodes?[/QUOTE] A Nuclear Apocalypse, Duh.
On a semi-related topic, a few years ago, France made us (Bulgaria) close our nuclear power plant, because we were selling cheaper energy than them (France has the most nuclear plants in Europe). It was closed because it was deemed unsafe. Our power plant was built in the 1980's, 75% of theirs are built after the second world war. Just putting it out there. That's the thing I hate the EU for.
[QUOTE=imadaman;26469286]Nuclear Waste? [editline]3rd December 2010[/editline] Only talked about safest and cleanest :v:[/QUOTE] Newer reactors in France actually use nuclear waste and get more power out of them.
Damn you could power like 20 time traveling Delorean's with that much power.
[QUOTE=Stopper;26469455]On a semi-related topic, a few years ago, France made us (Bulgaria) close our nuclear power plant, because we were selling cheaper energy than them (France has the most nuclear plants in Europe). It was closed because it was deemed unsafe. Our power plant was built in the 1980's, 75% of theirs are built after the second world war. Just putting it out there. That's the thing I hate the EU for.[/QUOTE] So you hate the EU simply because they have outdated power generators aka outdated Nuclear Plants?
[QUOTE=Sub-Zero;26466118]I didn't understand much but whats going to happen if it explodes?[/QUOTE] Well hopefully, you'll be close enough that it take you out.
[QUOTE=tier56;26469864]So you hate the EU simply because they have outdated power generators aka outdated Nuclear Plants?[/QUOTE] No, I hate them because they closed up our power plant so that we wouldn't steal the market from them :downs:
[QUOTE=DaApocalypse;26469770]Damn you could power like 20 time traveling Delorean's with that much power.[/QUOTE] To bad we don't have Flux capacitors that actually work.
[QUOTE=Dr Smashy;26467811]Someone's never played Red Alert.[/QUOTE] That's what happens when you put commies and nuclear power in the same space, why do you thing chernobyl happened?
[QUOTE=Stopper;26469888]No, I hate them because they closed up our power plant so that we wouldn't steal the market from them :downs:[/QUOTE] Thanks for specifying.
[QUOTE=tier56;26469901]To bad we don't have Flux capacitors that actually work.[/QUOTE] Flux capacitor is a silly word, inductance and capacitance are pretty much opposites.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.