woolie Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 Not exactly a point of architectural interest in Houston, per se, but definitely a wonder of engineering. NRG Energy has proposed to build two Advanced Boiling Water Reactors, based on designs from GE/Westinghouse, at the STP site in Matagorda Co. If approved and issued the Combined Operating License, construction will begin in 2010 and finish in 2014 or so, at a cost of approximately $5 billion. A number of distinguishing facts about this build: - First application for new reactors in over 20 years - First to apply under the new "Combined Operating License" process, which simplifies the EIS/Safety review process - First ABWR design in the United States; six are currently in existence in Japan and Taiwan, two of which have been operating for a decade - First reactor to use an "off the shelf," pre-approved design that will be partially prefabricated and then installed on site - ABWR is a simplified, 2-loop system that reduces the complexity of the plant, decreases the number of pipes and welds required, and lowers cost and construction time Additionally, a number of factors make the STP site ideal for expansion: - Facility originally designed for 4 units - Cooling infrastructure in place - Switching yard built to handle load - Local community and elected officials supports expansion NRG has filed a letter of intent for units 3 + 4, and will submit the complete COL license application later this calendar year. On Wednesday, in Bay City, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) held a public hearing to discuss the new COL license process and to take input from the public over the new plant. Except for a few representatives from anti-Nuclear environmental organizations who drove down from Austin, most of the 180+ people assembled at the meeting appeared to be in strong support of the new plant. Here's to 2500 megawatts of clean energy for Texas, and the high technology and valuable skills it brings with it! I will update this thread over the multi-year coarse of the project's construction. -- mods: you can move it to a different forum if you feel absolutely necessary, but I think this will be one of the most important construction projects in our region in the coming years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jax Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 I wonder why they don't build Candu reactors here in the USA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 I wonder why they don't build Candu reactors here in the USA.Any particular reason why we should? I looked at the link and there wasn't any stated benefits to CANDU over other forms. What are the advantages?Also, I found this list of CANDU reactors interesting: * Canada - 18 (+2 refurbishing, +5 decommissioned) * South Korea - 4 * China - 2 * India - 2 (+13 CANDU-derivatives in use, +3 CANDU-derivatives under construction) * Argentina - 1 * Romania - 2 (+3 under construction, currently dormant) * Pakistan - 1No France? Few countries know as much about nuclear reactors as France. I wonder why they never go on board. Ditto Japan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolie Posted June 30, 2007 Author Share Posted June 30, 2007 Any particular reason why we should? I looked at the link and there wasn't any stated benefits to CANDU over other forms. What are the advantages?CANDU reactors are a very interesting design and have a number of very interesting properties, mostly fuel-cycle related:- They run on unenriched, 'natural' uranium- The neutron energy profile allows "burning" of fission products from light-water reactors (solving the waste issue by burning it as fuel... very neat.)- Online refueling- Can run as breeding reactors; e.g. ThoriumThey should be used as PART of a fleet of traditional light-water reactors, to consume the most difficult of the fission products, and as breeder reactors. A few thrown into the mix can provide real advantages in terms of fuel cycle.I think their fuel cycle advantages will make them more important in the future, if uranium supplies ever become tight or we get serious about reprocessing or burning actinide waste, but currently they're not as cost-effective or experienced designs as typical modern light-water reactors.They are sometimes considered a proliferation risk due to the unenriched fuel and tritium breeding (because of the use of deuterium as the moderator.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Yeah, I think you hit it right on the head there -- they can be breeders. A lot of people are going to have a problem with that. Canada, as a "neutral" country can have breeder reactors with no problem. If some other countries put them in (possibly even the United States) it might contravene some nuclear treaty or other.Is breeding inherent to the design, or can it simply be left out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricco67 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 So in other words, CANDU Reactors aren't up to the task? CANTDU if you will? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lockmat Posted December 17, 2007 Share Posted December 17, 2007 Texas Going Nuclear With Greenpeace Founder's Backinghttp://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...pA&refer=usOver the next decade, Texas may become the biggest U.S. builder of nuclear generating plants Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.