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

301–310 of 398 posts

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

#301

Post by candiodari »

vkou wrote: post #292
lostlogin wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a little dishonest to state a casualty rate when the spent, toxic fuel going to be deadly for a few hundred thousand years yet. That problem is so very far from solved, and it's a massive problem.

It's also dishonest to claim (Without any qualifications) that spent nuclear fuel will be deadly for hundreds of thousands of years. Which isotopes? Deadly in what amounts? How many people do you expect our spent fuel will kill over the next ~100 years? ~1000 years? ~100,000 years? How many people do you expect coal pollution/AGW will kill over the next ~100 years? ~1000 years? How many people will hydro dam disaster…

Whilst we do know for sure that solar and wind have an accident rate per install. This is going to kill more people than spent nuclear fuel, which of course does not seem to matter. Turns out installing large pieces of glass high up on buildings is not the safest occupation on the planet.

If you calculate out the total amount of victims for this, it turns out that even if we melt down a nuclear plant in every capital on the planet, solar will still kill more people than nuclear would under those circumstances.

So the reasoning here eludes me: perhaps it's that people don't understand nuclear so it must be bad ? It's how we got to Trump ...

TLDR: public opinion takes an idea. It declares it a bad idea. Comes up with much worse ideas for it's given criteria and enforces conformance to those ideas. Solar and wind both kill more people than nuclear, short term and long term.

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

#302

Post by caf »

opo wrote: post #260
lostlogin wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a little dishonest to state a casualty rate when the spent, toxic fuel going to be deadly for a few hundred thousand years yet. That problem is so very far from solved, and it's a massive problem.

The original poster was talking about the possibility of human error (particularly the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station) so it was not "a little dishonest" to focus on the deaths from power sources that one could attribute to human error. >...when the spent, toxic fuel going to be deadly for a few hundred thousand years yet. Right now waste can and should be recycled which would reduce the amount of waste. https…

Soon it will be possible to use most of the waste as fuel:

The industry has literally been saying this for more than 50 years.

The practical barrier to reprocessing and burning spent fuel isn't technical or political: it's economic. Fresh Uranium is just too cheap for reprocessed waste to compete.

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

#303

Post by ekun »

putsteadywere wrote: post #253
akvadrako wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

"There are so many regulations it's safer per megawatt than even wind or solar." This surprised me! So I Googled it. Is this your source? It is Wikipedia's source. Who are the 440 people dying per trillion kWh of rooftop solar? (note: this is rooftop solar; utility solar statistics aren't included in the below source) [0]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-d... [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/w…

I was under the impression that the deaths from solar are from mining the resources to produce the panels which doesn't happen in the US.

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

#304

Post by agentultra »

ben_jones wrote: post #183
killjoywashere wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ones I know, ex-Navy, are living pretty high on the hog.

There most be an increasing amount of hardware/software with egregious business value (hundred million+) with a decreasing number of surviving/available designers etc. Rationally if these people were required to fix or maintain such systems their yearly value would be in the millions wouldn't it? For some reason I get the feeling that such people are not paid in the millions. Maybe double or triple a traditional sala…

A colleague of mine was involved in verifying the software that controlls the shut-down procedures of the Darlington [0] plant. Now he's working on proofs of block-chain ciphers of some sort or another. I don't believe he's quite rich but he can certainly be rather selective of job opportunities.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darlington_Nuclear_Generating_...

update: added link

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

#305

Post by terminado »

badloginagain wrote: post #110
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…

Living in a world where technology seems outdated after 3-4 years, having reactors reliably serving up power for several decades is kind of amazing. On the other hand, this does keep the number of people in the industry small. Sure, demonization of the power source, and regulatory standards that inhibit the development of new technologies also help, but it seems like this would be a problem regardless. I've always wo…

Personally, I feel as though modern acceptable standards of near-immediate obsolescence as normal are kind of depressing and abnormal.

Seeing technology become outdated after 3-4 years is kind of amazing in all the wrong ways.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that what we're really seeing is explosive advances, and to think about being stuck where we were 3-4 years ago, frozen in time, without permission to advance is a horrible thought.

But at the same time, I hate not being about to used something I paid thousands of dollars for, less than five years later, because I scratched a CD-ROM, and downloads for compatible upgraded drivers are not supported.

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

#306

Post by jrnichols »

DonHopkins wrote: post #222
1propionyl wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like an opportunity for some enterprising Valley folk to disrupt nuclear! I can't wait for Nucly, the only reactor control panel for iOS and Android.

AirIMBY lets you rent out your back yard as a nuclear waste disposal site.

Or do what SMUD near Sacramento, CA did...

it's a public park!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rancho_Seco_Nuclear_Generating...

(it's actually a nice area and the lake is decent.)

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

#307

Post by philipkglass »

ekun wrote: post #303
putsteadywere wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"There are so many regulations it's safer per megawatt than even wind or solar." This surprised me! So I Googled it. Is this your source? It is Wikipedia's source. Who are the 440 people dying per trillion kWh of rooftop solar? (note: this is rooftop solar; utility solar statistics aren't included in the below source) [0]: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-d... [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/w…

I was under the impression that the deaths from solar are from mining the resources to produce the panels which doesn't happen in the US.

More than 90% of world PV module production is based on refined crystalline silicon, and the United States is a top producer of refined silicon. (Silicon "ore", silica rich rock, is hyperabundant; refining rather than mining is the bottleneck.)

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

#308

Post by fnordfnordfnord »

masklinn wrote: post #264
kesselvon wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Westinghouse is a Japanese subsidiary now. It's basically a move to GTFO out of the nuclear power market

> It's basically a move to GTFO out of the nuclear power market Except the losses come from the construction of new reactors (the AP1000 for the Vogtle and Summer plants), not the operation of them.

Westinghouse's business model was to try to break even on construction and make money servicing and selling fuel rod assemblies.

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

#309

Post by fnordfnordfnord »

caoilte wrote: post #150
novalis78 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Thorium isn't rare. You probably have enough in your lawn to supply your lifetime energy needs. Also, it's a waste product of rare earths mining, and there's a United States stockpile of 3.2 million kg of thorium nitrate that nobody knows what to do with.

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

#310

Post by mikeash »

badloginagain wrote: post #218
1propionyl wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like an opportunity for some enterprising Valley folk to disrupt nuclear! I can't wait for Nucly, the only reactor control panel for iOS and Android.

In all seriousness, there have been attempts at startups looking to disrupt the nuclear industry. It's hit several problems, in the form of bad science and harsh regulation. Apparently hacking plutonium is not easily accomplished.

Sounds like they need to adopt the Uber model. Regulations causing you trouble? Just ignore them!
Post reply on HN