India Nuclear News and Discussion 4 July 2011

[Sanku]

By the way -- this mythical uses of imported yellow cake comes up time and again -- after repeated intervals -- as a throw away statement without really going into details.

However, just repeating that statement wont make it true, it remains incorrect just as it was before.

[vishvak]

2) As I mentioned before -- I know the US lobby want the throrium breeders opened up for snooping as well -- but today they are not and hopefully the establishment will be able to preserve some thing from 123 disaster.

Opening up breeder for snooping in return of 123 is like opening up plant tech in return of providing coal. Not too professional at all.

To deny that Indian scientists due credit is barbaric IMO.

[Sanku]

2) As I mentioned before -- I know the US lobby want the throrium breeders opened up for snooping as well -- but today they are not and hopefully the establishment will be able to preserve some thing from 123 disaster.

Opening up breeder for snooping in return of 123 is like opening up plant tech in return of providing coal. Not too professional at all.

To deny that Indian scientists due credit is barbaric IMO.

Very well said Sir.

[vina]

The thorium reactors and breeders are not in civilian use, so that entire point is moot anyway, and they neither should be or will be, because those do not need imported Uranium in any case. Once those are up and running as hoped, the claim "we need to import neutrons" falls apart -- a very tenous claim in anycase.

The so called neutron shortage issue is only when the breeders are not up.

Ah Maharaj Ji. All that "Inglees" is making my head spin, it is more difficult that reading the Rig Veda in Sanskrit ! I cannot understand head or tail of it. So Pliss to Throw Gyaan in Mango Inglees .

So, my simple, "Non Meta Physical" mind thinks like this. Thorium is Fertile, not Fissile. It needs to be hit with a few neutrons, before it can become fissile. Right now, we don't have enough "neutrons" to both breed thorium AND support a large power program. So, the way to get around it is the 2nd stage, where the Fast Breeder program produces 400000000000000000 neutrons which will be used in Thorium reactors.

All, I am saying is you can go to the 3rd stage with imported neutrons and don't need the Fast Breeder Program , if you import.

There is the small thing called AHWR you know which folks have done work on. Build a 100 of those scaled to some 1000MWe each and we should be fine. But for that, to put the "seed" fuel, you need to import fuel, unless you want to wait for a long long time for the 40000000000000000000000000 neutrons are created in the 2nd stage.

So in trying to send imported neutrons to Breeders you are first creating a problem which in reality does not exist at all.

So yeah -- lets dispense with imported neutrons for breeders because
1) Currently breeders are mil and cant use imported neutrons
2) Once they are so mainstream that they can be opened up -- they will not need imported neutrons.

BTW, that circular logic of yours could have done Kekule and his hallucinations of snakes biting their own tail and coming up with Benzene's structure proud (difference is Kekule was a scientist, while you are an ideologue).

[Neela]

Shows the true depth of expertise when someone writes "just modeled in the computer".
Modelling in the computer does not mean you do not have physical data. To get models, you NEED physical data first.

Here is a gist:
Arrive at tentative equations based on preliminary understanding of phenomenon.
Equations have components with physical/electrical/stress parameters which can be plugged back- this is what we want to get models of.
Produce test structures and measure key parameters and put them into models.
Use models to solve equation and get results.
Do curve fitting with your theoretical equation and measured _physical_ data.
Based on correlation , update equation and/or models
Repeat until desired levels of accuracy is reached.

For key semiconductor components that go into car safety mechanisms including Electronic stability control and airbags , 1000s and 1000s of physical structures are made , key parametrs are measured at more than 300 different Operating points ( temperature, voltage and pressure). I get updated models every week [ Our compute center cooling unit consumes about Rs.1 Lakh/week worth of energy]. . And the first thing they do for all this is to do test physical structures which helps them analyze key data.

This is not theoretical science - these are established scientific practices used in almost every industry. If you cannot understand this you cannot fully understandhow this device works and the modelling behind it
From the link above:

Built just under two years, the ETC is set to accelerate all mandatory ground-based checks of many aerospace systems and sub-systems.

This "computer modeling only" can predict component failures much much more accurately than one can imagine.
Not only that - degradation of key physical parameters CAN and ARE being modelled too. Heck we can even introduce randomness into the process too and check reliability - this is the Monte Carlo analysis.

Poster would do well by just sticking to back of the envelope kindergarten stuff

[vina]

On reprocessing -- although ostensibly we have reprocessing rights -- our current establishment is not set up towards reprocessing of spent fuel from LWR, since that has not been a thrust area of the domestic program.

I am not sure what magic Jinn is required or how LWR spent fuel is different from the PHWR spent fuel and why that can't be reprocessed in India's existing facilities. The both are uranium fuels and have to separate out PU, on the face of it, it seems possible.

I don't know enough about it. There are far more knowledgeable folks here on this thread that could answer it better on why it can/can't be done. So I will leave it at that.

Now to get reprocessing facilities up and running in any meaningful sense (for LWR used fuel) we need reprocessing tech from outside -- which they are not giving.

So, what, ask THEM to reprocess the fuel for you and send back only what you need ! Saves you the trouble of keeping low level garbage. They can keep the garbage / separated wastes , if they wont sell the separation plants.

See, this kind of mentality predates the clean civil vs military separation. Once that separation is done , there is no need insist that the separation be done in India.

[Sanku]

Ah Maharaj Ji. All that "Inglees" is making my head spin, it is more difficult that reading the Rig Veda in Sanskrit ! I cannot understand head or tail of it. So Pliss to Throw Gyaan in Mango Inglees .

I see, to make it very simple for you.

All, I am saying is you can go to the 3rd stage with imported neutrons and don't need the Fast Breeder Program , if you import.

You cant.

That should suffice, because any more, will make your head spin (the answers are already given btw so if you try you will get it -- I advice not responding to the message but spending the time in actually trying to understand even if it makes your head spin for some time)

[Sanku]

I am not sure what magic Jinn is required or how LWR spent fuel is different from the PHWR spent fuel and why that can't be reprocessed in India's existing facilities. The both are uranium fuels and have to separate out PU, on the face of it, it seems possible.

Well Vina, there are resources available which you can find.

So, what, ask THEM to reprocess the fuel for you and send back only what you need ! Saves you the trouble of keeping low level garbage. They can keep the garbage / separated wastes , if they wont sell the separation plants.

Well that is not happening, Japan is still saddeled with decades of waste which its friends dont want back. So while that is nice solution -- unfortunately has shown to be completely impossible in real life.

In any case if we are sending the waste back that basically puts paid to the claim that we have more nuclear material right. -- So that will mean that other than short term fueling of specific reactors, we cant do anything else with it.

Again, net net -- basically importing yellow cake is not a help but a headache.

[Sanku]

Shows the true depth of expertise when someone writes "just modeled in the computer".

I think Pok - II settled the question of over dependence on simulations.

Simulations are all very nice -- but until the physical prototypes are tested -- they are not real.

Period.

(that remains the case from "simple" electonic chips -- to car crash systems -- to airflow modelling -- to nuclear weapons)

Sure simulations cut down cost and effort in prototyping and design -- but in Engineering -- only real world test in making the road meet the rubber.

[Neela]

Shows the true depth of expertise when someone writes "just modeled in the computer".

I think Pok - II settled the question of over dependence on simulations.
Simulations are all very nice -- but until the physical prototypes are tested -- they are not real.
Period.
(that remains the case from "simple" electonic chips -- to car crash systems -- to airflow modelling -- to nuclear weapons)
Sure simulations cut down cost and effort in prototyping and design -- but in Engineering -- only real world test in making the road meet the rubber.

Has no clue but can do cliches.

[Sanku]

quote="Neela">>Shows the true depth of expertise when someone writes "just modeled in the computer".

I think Pok - II settled the question of over dependence on simulations.
Simulations are all very nice -- but until the physical prototypes are tested -- they are not real.
Period.
(that remains the case from "simple" electonic chips -- to car crash systems -- to airflow modelling -- to nuclear weapons)
Sure simulations cut down cost and effort in prototyping and design -- but in Engineering -- only real world test in making the road meet the rubber.

Has no clue but can do cliches.

You have to get away from the habit of attacking others when you dont have anything else to say.

[alexis]

Alexis, the thread had got diverted into the economics of NPP, now since most economic data from Indian production of electricity is hard to come by (since the sector is in govt hands and performance numbers are somewhat hidden due to cross subsidization etc) the discussion had veered around to US where the numbers are more open.

It was limited point in that context -- that US finds extremely difficult to economically justify the NPP sector (a number of people focus on different areas, some fuel cost, some infra costs, some decommissioning costs) -- but moral of the story is that US, where the numbers are available -- the current setup is economically nonviable.

Sanku,

Please refer to these links:
http://www.igcar.gov.in/nuclear/alagh.htm
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/ind ... 565745.ece

Granted these are old links; however they clearly point to the right direction.
For US, please refer http://205.254.135.7/oiaf/aeo/electrici ... ation.html

This is the link for an article posted by another poster. This link shows that for US, the cost of nuclear power is 114 USD/MWh or 11.4 cents/unit. This translates to Rs. 6.27/unit @ Rs.55/USD. This is quite competitive with respect gas fired plants and solar power plants. It is quite possible that cost of setting up nuclear power plants in India are lower and that is why the links above point to lower cost of generation.

Wind power is quite competitive but quite unpredictable and needs pro-active grid management and redundant capacities which has its own associated costs.

[Varoon Shekhar]

http://flonnet.com/stories/20120713291303800.htm

Good article, with info, as well as upbeat sounding attitude! BTW, What is this indigenous LWR in Kalpakkam?

[Sanku]

http://flonnet.com/stories/20120713291303800.htm

Good article, with info, as well as upbeat sounding attitude! BTW, What is this indigenous LWR in Kalpakkam?

Excellent interview, I especially liked the very very non-committal tone about imported LWR and their sites and significant focus on domestic programs.

Given that Dr Sinha comes from the work done on multiple projects of the 3-cycle program, I hope the program pushes ahead even faster under him.

Varoon S -- I understand the indigenous LWR is a scaled down version of a LWR, which served as a prototype for the reactor which went into Arihant. The interview also refers to the same.

[Sanku]

It is quite possible that cost of setting up nuclear power plants in India are lower and that is why the links above point to lower cost of generation..

Thanks for the links alexis. I believe the first one has been posted/discussed previously as well. I do agree that the costs of nuclear plants in India should be lower, however that would need that a significant part if not all of the NPP is Indian. Prof Alag's article, apart from being old has another issue, it is pre 123.

The 123 and the need to import LWRs which has queered the pitch in India in terms of costing of nuclear power -- for that unfortunately we have little prior experience as well and therefore a large alternate eco-system would need be created (as opposed to PWRs) -- adding to costs, even if not showing up directly as reactor costs.

In any case it would be good to see such articles from GoI institutions with costing clearly worked out -- such exercises would go a long way in building trust through transparency and build even further support for the domestic nuclear program.

[Theo_Fidel]

Sanku,

You don't build future energy supplies on 'potential technology'. The main reason we are in this pickle is GOI lavishly funded 3-stage thinking it would be online by now and nothing else would be needed. The plan was to have 48,000 by year 2000 IIRC. DAE openly admits it might be another 30 years now for the full Thorium based 3-stage. This is not due to U availability. As an engineer there are fundamental physical barriers in the way of 3-stage as well.

This is the main frustration Engineers and Scientist types have with each other. For scientist types all things are possible since the glory belongs to them. For engineer types, the focus is on numbers and making things work since all the blame falls on them. You can see the same dynamic in the conversation between KLP and myself. For KLP all things are possible, there is always yet another technocratic solution out there. When even UG level simple math fails to hold up he immediately resorts to galli's and decrying the fact that reality is holding up the man in a hurry. There is always a better membrane, though my opinion is that running afoul of EREOI so dramatically probably indicates that these are fundamental physical barriers we are running into that will not be overcome, at least with the conventional U-235 cycle.

The classic example is what happened to India at Singhbum. India ended up depending on a nuclear program with 0.06% uranium ore. Any engineer could have sat down and showed the scientist types that this probably indicates that India should not bet its future on nuclear power. But the scientist always insists that some future tech will free the power of Thorium, etc, etc, etc. In hindsight this could have reduced the overconfidence in Indian circles that put us in the NPT out house and crippled our nuclear program. Of course now some one will come and say that this is galli's for scientists and blogger types should not talk about the complex processes they don't understand.

But I notice there is yet no plan to replace the sh$t from the ground medieval technology (read coal) from high flying nuclear types. But apparently that is strawman argument now. What!

[vina]

You don't build future energy supplies on 'potential technology'

Fair enough. In that case, you shouldn't be pushing Solar either, in the expectation that efficiencies will rise in the future and make it viable!

[Theo_Fidel]

You don't build future energy supplies on 'potential technology'

Fair enough. In that case, you shouldn't be pushing Solar either, in the expectation that efficiencies will rise in the future and make it viable!

I don't think I have ever claimed efficiency rise is necessary to make it viable. If it comes well and good but present 22%-24% is more than adequate. I have said that as PV commodetizes prices will continue to drop. Right now the bean counters say there is no barrier to $0.30 per watt panels. That would make it the lost cost power for those who can access it and package it appropriately for their grid. In fact it might soon become the only really viable option for those prepared for the transition. Esp. with the recent coal problems or if shale does not pan out. U-235 once thru, naah!

[Sanku]

Sanku,

You don't build future energy supplies on 'potential technology'. The main reason we are in this pickle is GOI lavishly funded 3-stage thinking it would be online by now and nothing else would be needed. The plan was to have 48,000 by year 2000 IIRC.

Well Theo, to be frank GoI has had all manners of projections, the 5 year plan commission numbers are of course legendary right. I think it itself has fair amount of healthy sceptism in its own numbers. at least the babus have. (This is not unlike projections from other govt including US of A, like we saw in eia numbers)

However I do not think that India ever bet the cart on nuclear technology. Seriously speaking Till 123 was sold to the faith-fools on the basis of "ever lasting free and cheep electricity, with a reactor in every back yard (I remember one worthy claiming 200 reactors in 20 years were just around the corner)" -- there was never ever a "Nuclear or bust" for electricity sales pitch.

The critical issues during 2000 NDA regime (the last decent Govt New Delhi had) -- the key issues in Electricity field were, distribution losses, increasing efficiency of thermal plants (better coal pre-processing, etc), pollution control through fly ash precipitation etc and Ultra-mega plants -- ALL THERMAL PP issues.

All this "my heart beats for European thoughts and we should toe their line in emission saga" and "Nuclear is here hallelujah" are all brand new tactics to divert attention from non performance and new found chumminess with Nuclear companies in US.

[chaanakya]

.... the key issues in Electricity field were, distribution losses, increasing efficiency of thermal plants (better coal pre-processing, etc), pollution control through fly ash precipitation etc and Ultra-mega plants -- ALL THERMAL PP issues.

They are still the key issues for India and will remain so for many years to come.

[Theo_Fidel]

Sanku san,

It is very much prevailing thinking amongst the GOI technocratic crowd. To a man they have told me we don't need coal because you know we got Thorium. Parthsarathy in his book "Science & Technology with IG" says the very same thing, that repeatedly he had to deal with Sarabhais attempts to inflate the amount of Nuke power that can be available and the desire from the the technocrats to make this 'the' solution. When I point out present day technocrats that others have tried it and failed, most have given me a blank stare. IMO most are not aware that Thorium research has been conducted by a dozen or so different groups and most of the components of the 3-stage itself have been tested and abandoned by others. They simply still don't know. India is persisting with failed technology due to the faulty consensus amongst out technocrats. IIRC when DAE put out that 48,000 MWhr claim amongst others, they projected total power capacity at 80,000 MWhr. Sounds pretty dominant to me.

Recall the entire discussion about 4000GWH of capacity and how nuclear power supply is need for that. Or the execrable subsequent 'nation did not sacrifice enough' to build like the French argument after that.

[Sanku]

Sanku san,

It is very much prevailing thinking amongst the GOI technocratic crowd. To a man they have told me we don't need coal because you know we got Thorium..

Theo-ji; if I may say, you are grossly over-estimating the influence this fairly small circle has in GoI.

No Sir, I do not think we can pin GoI's actions (or inactions) on this group -- barring in very specific fields.

[Theo_Fidel]

In which case Sanku-san we had no plan at all.

[Sanku]

In which case Sanku-san we had no plan at all.

Theo-ji and that comes as a surprise to you?

[KLP Dubey]

This is the main frustration Engineers and Scientist types have with each other. For scientist types all things are possible since the glory belongs to them. For engineer types, the focus is on numbers and making things work since all the blame falls on them. You can see the same dynamic in the conversation between KLP and myself. For KLP all things are possible, there is always yet another technocratic solution out there. When even UG level simple math fails to hold up he immediately resorts to galli's and decrying the fact that reality is holding up the man in a hurry. There is always a better membrane, though my opinion is that running afoul of EREOI so dramatically probably indicates that these are fundamental physical barriers we are running into that will not be overcome, at least with the conventional U-235 cycle.

For the record:

1) I am an engineer.

2) I have 15 years of R&D experience, based upon which I am providing you factual information, which is no longer in the realm of possibility but much further along.

3) You have never remotely "disproved" any of my statements, and I have fully rebutted all your invalid statements which are based on lack of knowledge. You simply ignore what I have told you because it interferes with your fanaticism.

4) I am not making arguments or cases for "possibilities". Neither am I here to plead a case - I am here to help inform the discussion. I am providing for the sake of this discussion, information on the type of technologies that are much further along. it would be good to have a discussion on the implications of such technology, rather than keep on blabbering about your high-school-level calculation. You must very naive to think anyone serious (or "in-the-know") about this would supply you the details on the internet. For that reason, I supplied you publicly available information using which an intelligent and technically literate person can reach a better understanding. You don't seem to be able to do that - or you don't want to - instead you just keep saturating the thread with propaganda and a boorish exhibition of how sharp an engineer you are.

5) I make serious statements only in the areas of my expertise - read the Code of Ethics of the professional society of whatever engineering discipline you belong to. I am 200% sure you have no background in those areas of expertise I am talking about. Just being an engineer doesn't qualify you to comment on, or disparage, the expertise of other scientists/engineers. Don't think you can pull off that nonsense. I could saturate every page on this thread with sophomoric calculations related to nuclear, PV, coal, gas etc and build a propaganda machine out of it. But real technology - especially for transformational rather than incremental goals - is much more complex and subtle. In some sense, "breakthrough" technologies are all about beating the "tyranny of numbers" (which are based on previous levels of knowledge/capability). I tried to illustrate this for you with the Sherwood plot. You don't listen.

6) What membrane ? I didn't say anything about a membrane for U extraction. Nobody would use a membrane for this process (the driving force is much too low). Sorbents are the systems of choice. They work. You don't know.

KL

[Theo_Fidel]

KLP,

I thought you had mentioned you were a research type. My mistake. Welcome to the much maligned fraternity. Now...

You are mixing up adsorption vs membrane technology (desalination?) in your posts. You are also ignoring the scale which I gently pointed out but you continue to ignore. Humans are bad, no, terrible at scale and energy use. Also more efficient membrane/fabric/granule/whatwever only complicates the amount of water you need to get through the system.

It is odd you bring up engineering ethics, right now I'm sitting on an arbitration board trying to determine that very thing, story for another day.

John Mccarthy had calculated that Uranium from ocean makes sense with breeder but not so much with U235 once through. With breeders all sorts of things become possible, like mining granite. The question is of the human effort needed to extract the U, scale very much matters here. In itself this makes the process commercially questionable if not unviable for U-235 once thru.

BTW Japan is now into seaweed based extraction per a comment from someone I talked to.

[Theo_Fidel]

One more item. At $40 per lb 4% U-235 costs roughly 2 cents a kw. This is just for fuel. The problem for these more expensive extractions schemes is alternate energy sources are closing in on the energy costs for Nuclear.

[arnab]

Arnab you are slightly confused here if I may say so please. The first confusion is between the terms data and projections -- actually this confusion is endemic, the people are using projections as data points where are data points are known events and projections are extrapolation based on the same.

Projections are not data, projections are based on data.

And current data shows that the projections of nuclear industry staying at par -- are hopelessly optimistic -- what Amit did was to use projections to make a claim, which I showed were optimistic by pointing out the inherent assumptions, the assumptions themselves being true only in a very optimistic picture.

Saar your astrological predictions unless backed by some data and methodology are a pointless noise to this discussion For instance you are claiming that a decline in the 'share' of nuclear power from 20% to 18% is proof that the US nuke sector is in terminal decline. I am saying you are wrong because you do not factor in the fact that the 'size of the pie' is increasing.


Let us take an illustrative example:

Say in your first year on BRF you made 100 posts, of which 20 could be classified as hot air (being charitable here) - this means there is 20% hot air content in your posts. Now in your second year you made 200 posts and 36 of them were classified as hot air (which is 18%). So even though your 'share' of hot air content has reduced from 20% to 18%, your hot air posts have grown by 80 per cent ! Savvy? so this is certainly not a terminal decline. And this is what the EIA nuke data/projection indicates.

Now OTOH if you had made the same number of posts (100) in your second year with only 18 hot air posts. one could claim that the share has declined to 18% and growth has declined by 2 % . This 'may' be indicative of a terminal decline, or it may not since a one year change is certainly not indicative of a trend.

[arnab]

But I notice there is yet no plan to replace the sh$t from the ground medieval technology (read coal) from high flying nuclear types. But apparently that is strawman argument now. What!

Theo Saar - I don't get it. You keep repeating this as the benchmark for power generation. Yet you push for solar energy (currently getting a 70% subsidy from GOI) - Can Solar replace coal?

Second, you claim GOI technocrats misguidedly focused on nuclear energy as a messiah at the cost of other alternatives (including more coal - which you say is bad but what to do onlee). Can you provide examples? Was Coal India denied capital or opportunities to open up mines. Was hydel pushed to the backburner because of nukes? Was R&D funding in alternative energy not provided? In fact if anything - the present GOI and Dr Kakodkar (MWWOW) was accused by certain folks in this forum for not providing enough funds to the domestic nuke industry. Yet these two groups are now actively patting each others backs!! Politics does make some strange bedfellows I must say

Even today the nuke initiatives that are being attempted are being stymied by fearmongering and vested interests. You have supported the nuke protests yourself on this forum (and even defended the actions of the Church in this regard). And then you complain that nuke has not delivered. So you defend the anti-nuke platform on the basis of irrational fear, costs and an inability to achieve a benchmark set by you (replace coal completely). It has been repeatedly proved that coal plants emit more radiation, kill more people and are more costly than nuclear plants (when you include all externalities). Yet you are willing to live with all of these as long as nuke power is not pursued. That is the cop out I guess.

[amit]

Let us take an illustrative example:

Say in your first year on BRF you made 100 posts, of which 20 could be classified as hot air (being charitable here) - this means there is 20% hot air content in your posts. Now in your second year you made 200 posts and 36 of them were classified as hot air (which is 18%). So even though your 'share' of hot air content has reduced from 20% to 18%, your hot air posts have grown by 80 per cent ! Savvy? so this is certainly not a terminal decline. And this is what the EIA nuke data/projection indicates.

Now OTOH if you had made the same number of posts (100) in your second year with only 18 hot air posts. one could claim that the share has declined to 18% and growth has declined by 2 % . This 'may' be indicative of a terminal decline, or it may not since a one year change is certainly not indicative of a trend.

^^^^


I'v tried to explain to Sanku ji that the numbers in his own link show this:

In 2010 US produced 807 billion KwH of nuclear power these projections show that in 2035 it would produce 893 billion KwH of nuclear power. For a dead industry that seems quite a lot na?

But what to do, he thinks the projected decline from 20 per cent to 18 per cent is a firm number but everything else is just projections and so not worth discussing.

[vina]

Okay. The problem with all the renewable stuff (Solar, Wind), suffer from pretty LOW capacity factors. For eg, Solar in Sunny Arizona generates around 20% of it's nameplate capacity , wind max in say Denmark maxes out at 40%.

While it is okay to say that Wind/Solar generated XXXX GW and that replaces XXXXGW of conventional power, that is not really true. What it does mean that the XXXX GW of conventional capacity must be lying around as reserve for the 80% time that Solar is NOT generating or the 60 to 80% time Wind is NOT generating. So, the only thing you displace is the fuel cost of generation. This makes sense in fully depreciated power plants where the capital cost has been paid for and the only costs now are the variable (nearly 100% fuel) costs and that too only 20% of the time (solar) or at best 40% of the time for wind! So there you are. All that massive investment saves 20% to 40% of the fuel that would have otherwise been burnt in the best case scenario. This is perfect with countries where there is enough installed capacity existing to back down,slow growth of envisaged demand and capital is not expensive (read US, Europe, Japan etc).

This does not make sense in a country like India with exploding energy demand, with new plants coming up, a huge demand supply gap and expensive capital to build plants that cannot generate 80% of the time (solar) or 60% of the time (wind). We need plants that have high capacity factor (for most efficient use of investment) are efficient and have the base load capacity for a highly efficient and dependable grid.

Now, Nuke, has been running at 90% upwards capacity factor in the US for the past decade according to wiki! That is the kind of thing we need.

So, even if solar or wind is on a KWh basis competitive with Nuke (it is not), the capacity factor of nearly 4 times higher in nukes will tilt the scale decisively in favor of Nukes. Now if you point at the capacity factor of the Indian plants and say they are not 90% historically, well, we did have a fuel shortage problem.

And oh. The wiki entry Nuclear Power in India says that

Despite these impediments the capacity factor of Indian reactors was at 79% in the year 2011-12 as against 71% in 2010-11. Nine out of Twenty Indian reactors recorded an unprecedented 97% Capacity factor during 2011-12. With the imported Uranium from France, the 220 MW Kakrapar 2 PHWR reactors recorded 99% capacity factor during 2011-12. The Availability factor for the year 2011-12 was at 89%.

So, there goes Maharaj Ji's cool aid about in Rig Vedaesque Inglees about how import does not do this or that. If you are importing fuel for even indigenous PHWR reactors to get to 99% capacity factors, there surely is a case to import fuel.

So I ask Maharaj again. Why three ? Theen Kyon ? Why, What and What Phor this theen ? Why Djinn Magik number theen?

[SaiK]

all renewable alternative energy sources can't generate 24x7x365 basis, except perhaps geothermal.

[amit]

all renewable alternative energy sources can't generate 24x7x365 basis, except perhaps geothermal.

Boss,

Sometimes even something as obvious as what you wrote can be lost due to entrenched POVs.

[vina]

Some of the stats from here are amazing. Stats. US Nuke Plants

1) Nukes are by FAR the largest source of clean power
2) close to 72% of vermont's power is nuke
3) New Jersey' is 52% .
4) S. Carolina is 51%

Amazing. The steroetyped New Joisey of oil refineries and toxic waste industrial dumps and cheap gas and energy has 52% Nuke contrary to all stereo. You would have thought they were firing gas away until kingdom come!
Illinois, CT, NH have around 40 to 50% . Amazing.

Capacity factors have steadily increased despite old plants (the last new nuke was 1996, oldest 1969 or so) to 89% in 2011!

[KLP Dubey]

You are mixing up adsorption vs membrane technology (desalination?) in your posts.

I am not mixing up anything - you are when you read my posts. When I referred to U extraction, I talked about adsorption. When I referring to water desalination, I talked about membranes. There was no confusion.

You are also ignoring the scale which I gently pointed out but you continue to ignore. Humans are bad, no, terrible at scale and energy use. Also more efficient membrane/fabric/granule/whatwever only complicates the amount of water you need to get through the system.

Great! Thanks for the education and "gentle reminders". I never knew that from working on these problems for a decade in close collaboration with industry. You are indeed a one-man engineering consultancy.

KL

[KLP Dubey]

Amazing. The steroetyped New Joisey of oil refineries and toxic waste industrial dumps and cheap gas and energy has 52% Nuke contrary to all stereo. You would have thought they were firing gas away until kingdom come!
Illinois, CT, NH have around 40 to 50% . Amazing.

Capacity factors have steadily increased despite old plants (the last new nuke was 1996, oldest 1969 or so) to 89% in 2011!

It's a no-contest. Coal mining and combustion is a necessary evil, but rapidly becoming an unnecessary one. This is what it looks like in India:

http://www.tompietrasik.com/2010/03/07/ ... and-india/

http://www.google.com/imgres?um=1&hl=en ... zBQ&zoom=1

http://neyveli.jbss.in/Aboutnlc.asp

Thousands of workers exposed day in and day out to all sorts of nasty hazards. Not to speak of the humongous amounts of SO2 and NOx that coal-fired plants belch out.

A shift to natural gas will mitigate so many of these problems, but will only buy some time. In the short/medium-term nuclear power must be a much higher fraction of the energy portfolio (in deployment, development, and research). In the longer-term, it is the only sure shot we have.

KL

[Amber G.]

Kailash Chandra Purohit takes over as NPCIL head

[Amber G.]

PS: Horror of horrors the Japanese have started to fire up their nuclear power plants? Real shocker. .....

I am sure you know that per news reports .. Hitachi just made a forecast ....
Hitachi plans to more than double revenue from its nuclear power business within the next decade...

also ..
British businesses remain hungry for nuclear

The appetite of UK business leaders for new nuclear generating capacity has not diminished, despite the Fukushima accident, a poll conducted by the Institute of Directors (IoD) of its members shows. The IoD has published a report calling nuclear energy a "clean, cheap and safe" way of generating electricity.

[Sanku]

Let us take an illustrative example:

Say in your first year on BRF you made 100 posts, of which 20 could be classified as hot air (being charitable here) - this means there is 20% hot air content in your posts. Now in your second year you made 200 posts and 36 of them were classified as hot air (which is 18%). So even though your 'share' of hot air content has reduced from 20% to 18%, your hot air posts have grown by 80 per cent ! Savvy? so this is certainly not a terminal decline. And this is what the EIA nuke data/projection indicates.

Now OTOH if you had made the same number of posts (100) in your second year with only 18 hot air posts. one could claim that the share has declined to 18% and growth has declined by 2 % . This 'may' be indicative of a terminal decline, or it may not since a one year change is certainly not indicative of a trend.

^^^^


I'v tried to explain to Sanku ji that the numbers in his own link show this:

In 2010 US produced 807 billion KwH of nuclear power these projections show that in 2035 it would produce 893 billion KwH of nuclear power. For a dead industry that seems quite a lot na?

But what to do, he thinks the projected decline from 20 per cent to 18 per cent is a firm number but everything else is just projections and so not worth discussing.

I think you guys are on the wrong thread, if not the forum itself.

For silly uninformed jokes -- and making silly snide comments -- there are other foras on the net where you will certainly add value.

[amit]

PS: Horror of horrors the Japanese have started to fire up their nuclear power plants? Real shocker. .....

I am sure you know that per news reports .. Hitachi just made a forecast ....
Hitachi plans to more than double revenue from its nuclear power business within the next decade...

For those who are interested here's the report about Hitachi.

Hitachi to double nuclear-plant business by '21

The Japanese plant maker has set a sales target of Y360 million in the financial year ending March 2021 compared with Y160 million in the year ended this past March, a company spokesman told Dow Jones Newswires by telephone.

Of the Y360 million, it expects roughly half will come from overseas versus very little at the end of last fiscal year, he added.

Please note the bolded part. Y180 million from overseas sales also means the same amount of domestic sales, na? The guys running Hitachi must either be stupid or they don't read the BRF Nuke Dhaga. Hasn't the resident expert here already pronounced that Nuclear power industry dead in Japan, just as he has now proclaimed nuke power dead in the US despite it producing 806 billion KwH of power in 2010?

Heh ho, we should open a management consultancy here with a rider, advice for free but only if there's no liability clauses attached.