Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 398 posts

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#141

Post by badloginagain »

Spooky23 wrote: post #103
Nrsolis wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you have a different definition of the word "emit" than I do. Nuclear waste is stable, does not migrate when handled properly in containment pools, and can be reprocessed if required. All existing spent nuclear fuel in the united states is stored on-site. It's been that way since the beginning of the industry. In contrast, particulate and greenhouse gas (including CO2) emissions from coal-fired plants migrate…

>Nuclear waste is stable So long as it's stored in stable geologic formations, or controlled by stable human institutions. Where "stable" is a period of time longer than human history in many cases. >does not migrate when handled properly in containment pools Which are dependent on active management and security indefinitely. This is challenging as the service life of the plant where the pool is located and revenue i…

> Which is also a proliferation risk.

Obviously you haven't looked into the cost of enriching nuclear waste. It is prohibitively high for all but dedicated nation-state actors, who if have the technology to enrich radioactive materials to weapon-grade material aren't going to use nuclear waste.

Worst case for proliferation is being used in a dirty bomb, which just kind of spreads the waste across a limited area. Even then you're looking at alpha-emitting particles that won't cause any radioactive damage unless you ingest it. Take a shower and you'll be fine.

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#142

Post by clxsi »

MichaelApproved wrote: post #76
tonmoy wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you implying installing something backwards is catastrophically dangerous?

I'm saying it catastrophically destroys my trust in the industry. You're saying that you trust an industry that... > In 2008, the San Onofre plant received multiple citations over issues such as failed emergency generators, improperly wired batteries and falsified fire safety data. In its annual review of 2011, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) identified improvements but noted that in the area of human perform…

There's a history of human error and negligence within the industry. That history of errors and negligence is why I am against (nuclear, coal, gas, wind, solar, tidal, hydro) power.

In case it wasn't clear, my point is that this history of errors and negligence is present in literally every industry. Literally all of them.

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#143

Post by akvadrako »

philipkglass wrote: post #97
freehunter wrote: post #4

I find the headline weird, "a blow to nuclear power". I feel like nuclear power is possibly the most attacked form of energy that exists, and that includes coal and petroleum, both of which are still heavily used despite any public outcry. Westinghouse has made some bad deals, sure, but the real "blow to nuclear power" has been the massive refusal by both citizens and governments to build new plants, and the few nota…

I don't know if you have been following this saga over the past few years, but the reason that they're going bankrupt is they got several orders for new AP1000 reactors, but couldn't deliver on their planned budgets and schedules . (4 reactors under construction in China, 4 under construction in the United States, zero of them on schedule.) Was it a court injunction that put the Vogtle project behind schedule? Local…

I don't know the specifics, but a big reason nuclear is more expensive is regulations. There are so many regulations it's safer per megawatt than even wind or solar.

Thus your argument does not support your conclusion, since regulations come from outside the industry.

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#144

Post by nabla9 »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #124
nabla9 wrote: post #60

Westinghouse had severe technical problems with AP1000 and it's not alone. French nuclear reactor builder Areva was restructured after they could not get their new EPR reactors ready on time. Their flagship project Olkiluoto 3 is nine years late and several billions of euros over budget. Chinese are building reactors as fast as they can. They are buying reactors designs from all main manufacturers. There are 21 react…

Calder Hall in the UK was only three weeks late, opening in 1956. I wonder why we find it more difficult now, is it more thorough standards perhaps?

First Magnox reactors had very low efficiency < 20% and their electricity production was not competitive. Their main use was to produce plutonium for weapons.

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#145

Post by Chathamization »

vidarh wrote: post #115
MichaelApproved wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the public is too science illiterate to understand that nuclear isn't anywhere as big of a deal by comparison. Science illiteracy has nothing to do with it. The industry has a history of non-trivial reasons for mistrust. Regarding coal plant deaths, I'm not in favor of coal either. The sooner we can move away from fossil the better.

In the meantime, in real world nuclear decommissioning currently increases the dependence on fossil fuels, and so every nuclear plant decommissioned in practice has a significant cost in lost lives from fossil fuels. E.g. Germany's rush towards decommissioning after Fukushima has had a massively detrimental effect in Europe for this reason. The death toll as a direct result of fearmongering against nuclear is by this…

> E.g. Germany's rush towards decommissioning after Fukushima has had a massively detrimental effect in Europe for this reason.

This says that German emissions from electricity generation were down, but that was offset by heating increases from a cold winter and emissions from increased good transportation:

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/germany-reiterates-g20-...

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#146

Post by wonderous »

striking wrote: post #108
wonderous wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes the URL is different, but the canonical URL is the same. Not concerned about the votes, just curious if the topic of canonical URLs, clusters, etc. had come up.

You raise an interesting point. I'd recommend shooting the HN team an email about making use of canonical URLs for de-duping. mailto:hn@ycombinator.com

Thanks. I'm aware of the HN support email, not interested in private dialogs; whole topic of being open, accessible, referenable, etc. is a different topic, and not something I'm looking to cover in the thread unless it's requested.

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#147

Post by samstave »

killjoywashere wrote: post #5

The real concern here is making sure the existing nuclear plants have a clear glide slope toward end-of-life. Nuclear power is an extremely tight community. On the nuclear carrier I was on (powered by Westinghouse plants), there was a valve (a valve!) malfunctioning and the tech rep flown out from the company took one look at it and said "This bit's in backward". "How do you know?" "I designed it". Which means the sa…

This is one of the best annecdotal posts I have ever read on the internet.

My grandfather was a nuke eng for GE his entire career, built Hanford - he is the reason I got into what I do...

He died of cancer as they didnt quite yet know that radiation was a problem for human health when they started out...

My dads best friend was sec energy under reagan....

I am speechless with respect to how moronic this admin is to nuclear everything

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#149

Post by jartelt »

The nuclear industry was already having big issues, so I do not see this bankruptcy changing things much. The decline of nuclear wasn't even related to safety concerns, which I believe are largely exaggerated. Currently operating nuclear plants are losing money and needed to be bailed out in Illinois and New York because they cannot produce power for a low enough price. With that in mind, who wants to spend >$1B to build a new nuclear plant that will likely take >10 years to get permitted and built? For the industry to grow, there needs to be a big change in technology to decrease the capital costs needed to build plants and to decrease plant operating costs. If you cost more than a natural gas plant, you are not going to have much luck in today's market.

Re: Westinghouse Files for Bankruptcy, in Blow to Nuclear Power

#150

Post by caoilte »

novalis78 wrote: post #56
freehunter wrote: post #4

I find the headline weird, "a blow to nuclear power". I feel like nuclear power is possibly the most attacked form of energy that exists, and that includes coal and petroleum, both of which are still heavily used despite any public outcry. Westinghouse has made some bad deals, sure, but the real "blow to nuclear power" has been the massive refusal by both citizens and governments to build new plants, and the few nota…

Can't wait for an Elon Musk type investor tackle Thorium based Molten Salt reactors. The public opposition to nuclear needs to be changed with positive counter examples.

Won't happen. Why get energy from incredibly rare and cumbersome isotopes when the sun shines every day?
Post reply on HN