Notices
Current Events, News, Politics Keep the politics here.

Nuclear agency approves first nuclear reactors since 1978

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 9, 2012 | 07:52 PM
  #1  
Enginerd's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,451
Total Cats: 77
Thumbs up Nuclear agency approves first nuclear reactors since 1978

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washing...ove/53027204/1

Discuss.
Old Feb 9, 2012 | 07:54 PM
  #2  
gearhead_318's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,966
Total Cats: 21
From: SoCal
Default

Waiting for Joe to post...
Old Feb 12, 2012 | 11:27 PM
  #3  
Joe Perez's Avatar
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 34,402
Total Cats: 7,523
From: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Default




Originally Posted by Gearhead_318
Waiting for Joe to post...
Am I really that predictable?

I was certain that the Fukushima incident would set back US nuclear power another 30 years just like TMI. But this is very exciting news, and hopefully, the shape of things to come.

To be honest, I'd wished that the US would adopt something more like the CANDU reactor model (which is capable of operating on a variety of fuels, including spent fuel from PWR/BWR reactors and the warheads of dismantled nuclear weapons) however the AP-1000 is still a very good design, and all of its systems have been proven in existing GenIII facilities, contrary to what Mr. Stephen Smith claims.
Attached Thumbnails Nuclear agency approves first nuclear reactors since 1978-lxyw6.jpg  
Old Feb 12, 2012 | 11:49 PM
  #4  
gearhead_318's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,966
Total Cats: 21
From: SoCal
Default

Yes you are. And I'm just glad that peoples retardation did not get in the way of nuclear power in America.
Old Feb 13, 2012 | 01:03 AM
  #5  
Faeflora's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 8,682
Total Cats: 130
From: Los Angeles, CA
Default

amazing.

The USA might stay a second world country.
Old Feb 13, 2012 | 01:15 AM
  #6  
elesjuan's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (11)
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,360
Total Cats: 43
From: Overland Park, Kansas
Default

Now if we could just get a ------- oil refinery...
Old Feb 13, 2012 | 01:48 AM
  #7  
dc2696's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,202
Total Cats: 21
From: Edmonton Ab, Canada
Default

Buy uranium stocks.
Old Feb 16, 2012 | 09:28 AM
  #8  
Scrappy Jack's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
From: Central Florida
Question

Originally Posted by elesjuan
Now if we could just get a ------- oil refinery...
What do you mean? The USA has a pretty fair number of oil refineries.

List of US oil refineries
Old Feb 16, 2012 | 09:35 AM
  #9  
Stein's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (46)
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,729
Total Cats: 166
From: Nebraska
Default

Originally Posted by Scrappy Jack
What do you mean? The USA has a pretty fair number of oil refineries.

List of US oil refineries
Yeah, but none built in the last 30 or so years. We need more. I wish they would just build one in ND, then they wouldn't have to pipe oil all the way to the gulf, only to turn around and truck it back up.
Old Feb 16, 2012 | 12:10 PM
  #10  
Enginerd's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,451
Total Cats: 77
Default

Permits are hard to come by to build a new facility anywhere. Rather than build new, most oil refining companies double, triple, quadruple the size or the existing facilities...hence the desire to build a pipeline from Canada to Houston. Its more economical to send product to Houston.

I'm happy for new nuclear.
Old Feb 16, 2012 | 03:36 PM
  #11  
Scrappy Jack's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
From: Central Florida
Default

Originally Posted by Stein
Yeah, but none built in the last 30 or so years. We need more. I wish they would just build one in ND, then they wouldn't have to pipe oil all the way to the gulf, only to turn around and truck it back up.
Originally Posted by cymx5
Permits are hard to come by to build a new facility anywhere. Rather than build new, most oil refining companies double, triple, quadruple the size or the existing facilities...hence the desire to build a pipeline from Canada to Houston. Its more economical to send product to Houston.
Ah, 10-4 on the new construction aspect (assuming it's true; I haven't bothered to confirm but sounds more than plausible). I would think most of the pipelines would be headed for Cushing, but it would seem to make sense to have some additional capacity in ND.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Joe Perez
Current Events, News, Politics
8
Sep 30, 2015 04:41 PM
mgeoffriau
Current Events, News, Politics
19
Nov 21, 2010 01:15 AM
Joe Perez
Current Events, News, Politics
48
Sep 7, 2010 01:10 PM
Braineack
Insert BS here
26
Jul 14, 2010 05:40 PM
thasac
DIY Turbo Discussion
8
Mar 31, 2010 10:55 AM




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:09 PM.