"Mini" nuclear reactor tech could return to SA

Lupus said:
Sadly this is how nuclear is seen, doesn't matter the tech involved, it also is seen as inferior to "renewables" which technically also produce quite a bit of residual environmental impacts but heeeeey.
Click to expand...
Nuclear energy is like Covid. They have something in common.
The media paints the negatives, the scary side, and that its very dangerous.
Media rules the dumb maroons, of which there are many in this world, especially in South Africa. I think we manufacture morons and idiots for export.

It doesn't matter whether you know how the tech works or not, the maroons and idiots cry and whine and then they cry and whine when loadshedding comes.

People think solar panels are very efficient.. they're not! To get close to 50% you need to have a near bottomless bank account. I've done the whole renewable energy thing many times. This post is made on a computer running off grid, the batteries are best and most efficiently charged using Eskom, when Eskom isn't trying to punish us, that is.

Has there been any incident at Koeberg?
 
PaulMurkin said:
Nuclear energy is like Covid. They have something in common.
The media paints the negatives, the scary side, and that its very dangerous.
Media rules the dumb maroons, of which there are many in this world, especially in South Africa. I think we manufacture morons and idiots for export.

It doesn't matter whether you know how the tech works or not, the maroons and idiots cry and whine and then they cry and whine when loadshedding comes.

People think solar panels are very efficient.. they're not! To get close to 50% you need to have a near bottomless bank account. I've done the whole renewable energy thing many times. This post is made on a computer running off grid, the batteries are best and most efficiently charged using Eskom, when Eskom isn't trying to punish us, that is.

Has there been any incident at Koeberg?
Click to expand...
There have been 3 major incidents with regards to nuclear in the world, one was actually more of a blip but 3 mile Island is still included almost 50 years later, so is Chernoybl almost 40 years later. Then people throw in Fukushima, which hell it had an earthquake and a bloody Tsunami thrown at it and it didn't erupt into the proverbial mushroom cloud, but people also seem to think that's how a nuclear plant would go up.
Which wouldn't actually be the case, as it's not a nuclear bomb.
 
Lupus said:
There have been 3 major incidents with regards to nuclear in the world, one was actually more of a blip but 3 mile Island is still included almost 50 years later, so is Chernoybl almost 40 years later. Then people throw in Fukushima, which hell it had an earthquake and a bloody Tsunami thrown at it and it didn't erupt into the proverbial mushroom cloud, but people also seem to think that's how a nuclear plant would go up.
Which wouldn't actually be the case, as it's not a nuclear bomb.
Click to expand...
www.extremetech.com

Chernobyl Is Heating Up Again, and Scientists Aren't Sure Why - ExtremeTech

Chernobyl is showing signs of heating up again, several years after the New Safe Confinement sarcophagus was moved into position.
www.extremetech.com www.extremetech.com
 
Lupus said:
There have been 3 major incidents with regards to nuclear in the world, one was actually more of a blip but 3 mile Island is still included almost 50 years later, so is Chernoybl almost 40 years later. Then people throw in Fukushima, which hell it had an earthquake and a bloody Tsunami thrown at it and it didn't erupt into the proverbial mushroom cloud, but people also seem to think that's how a nuclear plant would go up.
Which wouldn't actually be the case, as it's not a nuclear bomb.
Click to expand...
Yep.

I don't know too much about 3 mile island, so I'll leave that aside.

But here are the issues with Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Chernobyl:
- Insufficient containment
- Design fault
- Political interference
- Running safety tests on a live reactor! (ESKOM did this with Majuba Power station, the generator had runaway as the new safety systems didn't work, resulting in catastrophic failure - still not fixed).

Fukushima:
- Insufficient containment
- Placing backup generators in the basement to save costs (they flooded during the tsunami, and could not be used for their intended purpose)
- Engineers designed a ~30m sea-wall to protect against 1-in-100 year tsunami events. Bean counters said it will cost too much, replace with ~15m sea-wall to protect against 1-in-50 year tsunami events. 1-in-100 year tsunami event occurs and tsunami flows over the wall as if it wasn't there.
 
AntennaMan said:
Yep.

I don't know too much about 3 mile island, so I'll leave that aside.

But here are the issues with Chernobyl and Fukushima.

Chernobyl:
- Insufficient containment
- Design fault
- Political interference
- Running safety tests on a live reactor! (ESKOM did this with Majuba Power station, the generator had runaway as the new safety systems didn't work, resulting in catastrophic failure - still not fixed).

Fukushima:
- Insufficient containment
- Placing backup generators in the basement to save costs (they flooded during the tsunami, and could not be used for their intended purpose)
- Engineers designed a ~30m sea-wall to protect against 1-in-100 year tsunami events. Bean counters said it will cost too much, replace with ~15m sea-wall to protect against 1-in-50 year tsunami events. 1-in-100 year tsunami event occurs and tsunami flows over the wall as if it wasn't there.
Click to expand...
3 Mile island was basically a lot of human error and partial meltdown of one of the reactors, was the start of the whole anti-nuclear movement, but it was also a generation 1 or 2 reactor with a lot of old mechanical switches that could lead to failure.
 
Lupus said:
3 Mile island was basically a lot of human error and partial meltdown of one of the reactors, was the start of the whole anti-nuclear movement, but it was also a generation 1 or 2 reactor with a lot of old mechanical switches that could lead to failure.
Click to expand...

3 Mile Island happened during an era when safety and human factors were not well understood. Similar issues in the airline industry led to a better grasp that overloaded operators need better presentation of data, not a screaming wall of irrelevant alarms.

A fault-tree analysis also led to a better understanding of how a level-sensor failure could propagate through other systems. The ancient architecture of the Boeing 737 MAX and the AoA/MCAS disaster comes to mind.
 
Gordon_R said:
3 Mile Island happened during an era when safety and human factors were not well understood. Similar issues in the airline industry led to a better grasp that overloaded operators need better presentation of data, not a screaming wall of irrelevant alarms.

A fault-tree analysis also led to a better understanding of how a level-sensor failure could propagate through other systems. The ancient architecture of the Boeing 737 MAX and the AoA/MCAS disaster comes to mind.
Click to expand...
Yet it's still used as an example of how bad things can get, and it's been 50 years.
 
Lupus said:
There have been 3 major incidents with regards to nuclear in the world, one was actually more of a blip but 3 mile Island is still included almost 50 years later, so is Chernoybl almost 40 years later. Then people throw in Fukushima, which hell it had an earthquake and a bloody Tsunami thrown at it and it didn't erupt into the proverbial mushroom cloud, but people also seem to think that's how a nuclear plant would go up.
Which wouldn't actually be the case, as it's not a nuclear bomb.
Click to expand...
Nuclear bombs, are for the most part, classified. Nobody is exactly sure how they work, but, there is sufficient knowledge that they are using enrichment far superior to that needed for electricity, and they have other items to increase the yield
 
PaulMurkin said:
Nuclear bombs, are for the most part, classified. Nobody is exactly sure how they work, but, there is sufficient knowledge that they are using enrichment far superior to that needed for electricity, and they have other items to increase the yield
Click to expand...
Yup but this is what people think of when they think of a nuclear power plant melting down.

giphy.gif
 
Lupus said:
Yup but this is what people think of when they think of a nuclear power plant melting down.

giphy.gif
Click to expand...
And moreover when you tell them that we are constantly irradiated from space, albeit in a very small dose per annum, the whooshing sound is apparent, flies over their heads. Or they simply say "Come now Paul, stop talking kak and bring out the brandy and coke"
 
But where will they get the hazenile?


Oh wait that was for magical solar panels
 
Once BEE gets hold of this trillions will be spent and nothing will be delivered.
 
aleksandar said:
I think after initial project was closed most of the people working on it left.
Although I'm pro nuclear do we have human capital to pull this project?!
Click to expand...
No, most of them are alive and well, living in South Africa and working on nuclear right now
 
Gordon_R said:
Modular reactors make some sense for specialised users in remote locations (aka military), where the cost of diesel and powerlines would be prohibitive. Those are very different requirements from the baseload generation for a national grid.
Click to expand...
Agreed. SMRs are offgrid and suitable for mines and other LPUs. Also fall under the 100Mw limit
 
exafrica said:
No, most of them are alive and well, living in South Africa and working on nuclear right now
Click to expand...
I thought project was put on hold in 2010 (pebble bed reactor) and almost all staff was let go.
Had a contact there that after leaving started mobile dev shop.

Was there any other project that absorbed those people?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X