Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
On June 19, 2006 NRG Energy filed a Letter Of Intent with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build two 1,358-MWe Advanced Boiling Water Reactors (ABWRs) at the South Texas Project site.[8] South Texas Project Partners CPS Energy and Austin Power and Light were not involved in the initial Letter of Intent and development plans.
On September 24, 2007, NRG Energy filed a full application with the NRC to build two Toshiba ABWRs at the South Texas Project site.[8] This was the first full application to be submitted to the NRC since the year 1979. This proposed expansion of the South Texas Project will generate an additional 2,700 MW of electrical generating capacity, which will ultimately double the capacity of the current site.[9] The total estimated cost of constructing the two reactors is $10 billion, or $13 billion with financing, according to Steve Bartley, interim general manager at CPS Energy.[10] In October 2009 main contractor, Toshiba, has informed CPS Energy that cost would be "substantially greater," possibly up to $4 billion more.[11]
=======================
That really seems silly in light of our reduced demand for electricity (and Oil) over the last two years.
But we do agree that there are some SERIOUS long-term problems with the existing fleet.
The claims for the wonder of "baseload" power from Nukes (or Coal) tends to be way over-rated. We have decades of surplus baseload power (power which is produced without regard demand, all day, all night), when the only new power needed for some decades ahead would be daily peak (the hot part of the day when Sun is causing US to all use our Air Conditioning at the same time.)
In practice there is already so much surplus baseload power in the night already that folks have went to extreme measures to try to bring into the useful daytime. Here is a sample >>> Ludington Pumped Storage | Consumers Energy
Turns out that Solar Thermal -- without storage -- hits the daily Peak Use straight on. As far as the claim of the Mojave Desert -- which is about 25,000 sq miles -- It would take less than half of that (but in practice would likely be spread across rooftops and highways all across the country instead of just one desert). Math says somewhere around 10,000 square miles would not just replace the Nukes, but most Oil for all ground transportation, as well.
Baseload is exactly what it says,the base (minimum) load.As regards that one plant you mention,they could possibly skirt the licensing if they decommision the existing facility.In order to achieve true efficiencies in any power application,generation must be centralized.Fragmenting production can only be achieved by SUBSIDIZING,the very thing you abhor.Problem we have is the transmission of electrical loads over long distances,its simply not efficient.Power sources must at least be regional.Mojave power will work great for the Southwest,Texas,California and Northern Mexico,but you will still need plants in the Northeast,since cheap nat gas is available in Pennsylvania and W.Virginia,that seems an efficient and feasible source of power there.Great plains,with limited water sources are ideal for wind.Great Lakes you have already spoken to in your post.Pacific Northwest,geothermal????Furthermore,all of the above sources use alot of U.S. technology,I say this as I'm sitting next to two 3.5 Megawatt Solar (Caterpillar) Gas Turbines,built in the U.S.A. with Ideal Generators,built in Mansfield ,Ohio.What we need is the political courage to make energy independence something other than a sound bite.JMHO
Baseload is exactly what it says,the base (minimum) load.As regards that one plant you mention,they could possibly skirt the licensing if they decommision the existing facility.
or just acknowledge it is a dumb idea and stop.
Quote:
In order to achieve true efficiencies in any power application,generation must be centralized.Fragmenting production can only be achieved by SUBSIDIZING,
Sorry to fact-check you there, but that is total nonsense -- I R a Research, Design and Build Engineer in this field.
Centralized Generation is useful for Centralized Billing. THAT (billing and corporate cash flow) is what Central Plant modeling is all about. If the cost of Transmission and Distribution were removed from power generation, it would be about 1/3 of what it is. Means that distributed local generation can cost 3 times as much as a Central Plant and still be the faster, better, cheaper option.
Quote:
the very thing you abhor.
Not abhorring anything either way. Just saying that if we keep dumping money into dumb things -- e.g. Nukes -- we are going to have more (and more) of the dumb things. Older version from a farming era is -- You Reap What You Sew.
Quote:
Problem we have is the transmission of electrical loads over long distances,its simply not efficient.Power sources must at least be regional.Mojave power will work great for the Southwest,Texas,California and Northern Mexico . . . .
No one is arguing that either way. The whole Mojave part was a strawman of your own creation in this discussion.
Quote:
but you will still need plants in the Northeast,since cheap nat gas is available in Pennsylvania and W.Virginia,that seems an efficient and feasible source of power there.
Electric Power is surplus everywhere.
Quote:
Great plains,with limited water sources are ideal for wind.Great Lakes you have already spoken to in your post.
Already surplus, there, too.
Quote:
Pacific Northwest,geothermal????
Northwest already tends to be surplus with Hydro.
Quote:
Furthermore,all of the above sources use alot of U.S. technology,I say this as I'm sitting next to two 3.5 Megawatt Solar (Caterpillar) Gas Turbines,built in the U.S.A. with Ideal Generators,built in Mansfield ,Ohio.What we need is the political courage to make energy independence something other than a sound bite.JMHO
And of course, practical knowledge and thinking instead of cliches.
I don't believe speculation of possible impending events validates the claim that the US has had a financial collapse either.
Dunno if you follow any of the present modeling for Collapse Theory? It is not an "is" or "is not" sort of thing. More like a case of degrees or levels. The caution for any collapse is how far it goes before the condition is arrested.
Looking ahead at the weak areas allows one to see potential paths and further failure in advance, and the creation of plans to arrest the collapse.
Just running some numbers,if we were truly going for a green society in the next ten or so years as Phillip T. wants us to envision.Using 2008 numbers, we have a peak summer electrical load of 750,000 MwH (Megawatt hour) load.A 1,000,000 MwH generating capacity,with about an 80-85% availability factor.This leaves us with about 50-100,000 MwH overabundance.EXCEPT,if we decide to go electric in the transportation field.Assuming,from industry sources,that an electric car uses .25 KwH per mile,Americans drive 3 TRILLION miles a year,365 days/24 hours a day,we would need 85,616 Mwh of generation to charge those batteries.Factors such as a smart grid technology would certainly help efficiency.But Americans having been driving 3% more per year for many years,any grid upgrades would plateau,our love of the open road probably won't,nor will as our voracious appetite for electronic gadgetry wane.Power usage stats come from governments website Energy Information Administration - EIA - Official Energy Statistics from the U.S. Government.
Just running some numbers,if we were truly going for a green society in the next ten or so years as Phillip T. wants us to envision.
Well, you did not hear me say anything like that. I tend to consider the whole "green" thing "marketing" nonsense used by and for idiots -- jmho.
Quote:
Using 2008 numbers . . .
As if it were 2008. You are a couple of years out of date . . . but please continue . . .
Quote:
we have a peak summer electrical load of 750,000 MwH (Megawatt hour) load.A 1,000,000 MwH generating capacity,with about an 80-85% availability factor.This leaves us with about 50-100,000 MwH overabundance.EXCEPT,if we decide to go electric in the transportation field.Assuming,from industry sources,that an electric car uses .25 KwH per mile,Americans drive 3 TRILLION miles a year,365 days/24 hours a day,we would need 85,616 Mwh of generation to charge those batteries.Factors such as a smart grid technology would certainly help efficiency.But Americans having been driving 3% more per year for many years,any grid upgrades would plateau,our love of the open road probably won't,nor will as our voracious appetite for electronic gadgetry wane.Power usage stats come from governments website Energy Information Administration - EIA - Official Energy Statistics from the U.S. Government.
Meanwhile that string of nonsense aside, and back to the real world . . .
In fact, we have been driving less and less over the last two years, and electrical power use is down, as well. Also per the EIA . . .
Overall we are down about 5% over the last two years, and other than just plain goofy "keep smiling" projections they are slapping on for 2010 (which are total BS) things are likely to head deeper.
The only growth available for anything -- whether Renewable or Conventional is as replacement for existing. All I am saying is that if we are going to do any upgrades/repairs/replacements -- it might as well be Renewable. But the stuff about never-ending growth, and the all that Biz School Capitalism crap is just that -- crap.
Denial is First. Acceptance will come along a little later.
Peak oil certainly took money and tranferred it to other producing countries but it didn't cause this recession. We peaked in the 70's in this country and of course the economy changed. It took until 2003 for my area to have a robust economy after the 70s recession. After the 70's efining was modernized and the result was it tool 2000 employeees to run a refinery that previous emplyed 4000 roguhly. The epansion goign on now will double the potuput with 400 more employees. There are projects to oflaod imported crude to the added capacity of 800'000 barrels a day. Besdies that pipeline will feed sand tars form canada which those same refineries can process then.It does take much think to see with project over output capacity what will happen with many older refieries in the wrong areas of the coutnry.
Electric usage will rise,people will drive more,and nobody will put up any uglya**ed solar collector towers,find a different line of work Phil!!!! LOL@U
Overall we are down about 5% over the last two years, and other than just plain goofy "keep smiling" projections they are slapping on for 2010 (which are total BS) things are likely to head deeper.
The only growth available for anything -- whether Renewable or Conventional is as replacement for existing. All I am saying is that if we are going to do any upgrades/repairs/replacements -- it might as well be Renewable. But the stuff about never-ending growth, and the all that Biz School Capitalism crap is just that -- crap.
Denial is First. Acceptance will come along a little later.
Con Edison reported the highest electrical usage for the week of June 13th since 1989,guess "peak electricity" ain't behind us yet, Phil T.!!!!
The main thign is that we are no longer in control of crude oil sales. our droppig usage is negatated by rising unsage in such countries as china and india. The future with alterantives is goignto be even mroe expensive than crude and then you have to rpalce all the prodcuts besides fuel gotten from crude.Even then its going to take 50 years its said to logistically make a real impact on crude usage.Electricity is a much easier thing to solve as Frances who didn't stop nuclear power like we did make 70% of its need from it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
