Nuclear Power for Galena?

[echobluff]

Originally Posted by User 2

.............

That post was directed to Rance...Blonde moment, my bad.

[Rance]

They were not big enough to get the publicity St Helens got. But still very humbling. Yes I had ash all over my place on more than one occasion. It's a mess.

[rotorhead]

The Alaskan rule of thumb for volcano eruptions: head straight for NAPA.

That way you can buy a couple of air-filters for the truck before they run out.

Well, that plus don't fly your 747 through the ash cloud, but EVERYONE knows that.

[Steven McColl]

Originally Posted by SueToo

good luck with your research But how sad I am to learn that a nuclear power plant might be built in Galena It is such a beautiful unspoiled place I wouldnt want it to be spoiled by a power plant

Thank-you for your comment; I am a Structural Engineer.

Do you know how a Nuclear power plant works? We all have a tendency to criticise what we do not understand.

In this case the proposal is for a Small Module Reactor, you may be interested in learning about SMR.

Kind regards,
Steven McColl
[EMAIL="smc@idl.net.au"]smc@idl.net.au[/EMAIL]

[Steven McColl]

Originally Posted by Rance

Yeah but what if it goes Chernoble? Did you know northern Sweden is polluted with radioactive material that settled onto the vegetation from the Chernoble incident... and now they can't even eat the wildlife like reindeer etc because those critters eat off the land and have become contaminated themselves. It's a pretty sad deal. And Russia just turned their backs like they had nothing to do with it. I guess we are dang lucky the wind was not blowing our way in al that mess. But Sweden is very similar to Alaska and I feel damn sorry for them. Some beautiful country has been basically ruined. Maybe this system will be more up to date and better monitored who knows...but man I'd hate to see something go wrong right here in our own state.

*************
Hi, thanks for your concern and valid comment..

The type of plant at Chernobyl was a Generation-2 Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) having a Graphite moderator. And BWR implicitly have a 'POSITIVE-feed-back-loop'. So that increases in power result in an increase in heat and vice-versa. BWR are therefore difficult to operate from a stability stand-point.

The other type of Gen 2 plant is a PWR (pressurized water reactor) - which have NEGATIVE feed back loops, where during a boiling crisis the drop in pressure of the coolant due to the boiling; results in less moderation, thereby less power output ( A passive safety system).

The proposed reactor at Galena is a more advanced design again, (a Gen. 3 Advanced Pressurised Water Reactor (APWR).

In addition, during a power failure there is no need for back up power as the absence of coolant pumps (coolant flow relying on convection through the core only) means more passive safety again.

I trust this is of assistance to your concerns,


Steven McColl
Structural Engineer [EMAIL="smc@idl.net.au"]smc@idl.net.au[/EMAIL] +61 413040640.
******************