First Nuclear Reactor Permits in Over 30 Years To Be Issued Today.

Only to be held up by the inevitable lawsuit.

Technology • February 2012 • Views: 1,312

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is expected to approve licenses to build two new nuclear reactors Thursday, the first approvals in over 30 years.

This is good news. Unfortunately, even if the Permits are issued as is expected, actual construction of the Reactors will be held up for years by a myriad of lawsuits.

“Still, a coalition of nine mostly regional environmental groups say the current design is not safe. They are asking the NRC to delay its decision Thursday until they can file a challenge in federal court.”

Bastards.

Recent Pages by Bubblehead II:
I am screwed NRA Sues Florida to Block New Gun Law Steve Bannon Stepping Down From Breitbart Cecil Andrus, Former Governor and Interior Secretary Who Helped Conserve Alaska Land, Dies at 85 Sebastian Gorka Gone From White HousePolitics

Jump to bottom

4 comments

Locker Feb 9, 2012 7:02:22am

Having lived through Three Mile Island and having the crap scared out of me plus what’s happened in Russia and Japan I think some extremely caution is in order. However, I’m pro-Nuclear specifically because I’m an environmental type person who would like to see coal and oil go by the wayside.

In this case I think a very, very heavy amount of regulation is an extremely wise way to approach such a dangerous endeavor.

lawhawk Feb 9, 2012 8:29:28am

TMI was an event that was wholly contained within the containment structures, and was due to human error.

Chernobyl was a combination of human error and failures to understand events as they were developing, plus flaws with the design of the reactor - to say nothing of the lack of a proper containment structure.

Fukushima Daiichi was the result of a massive quake and tsunami, combined with poor placement of backup generators and the inability of TEPCO to understand what was going on with the reactors in a timely fashion.

The new reactor designs are supposed to be built with redundancies, including shielding and backup water that is gravity fed so that no pumps are required. That would allow operators to put water on the reactor in case of a problem with the core and control rods to cool it down.

Locker Feb 9, 2012 1:16:27pm

re: #2 lawhawk

TMI was an event that was wholly contained within the containment structures, and was due to human error.

Chernobyl was a combination of human error and failures to understand events as they were developing, plus flaws with the design of the reactor - to say nothing of the lack of a proper containment structure.

Fukushima Daiichi was the result of a massive quake and tsunami, combined with poor placement of backup generators and the inability of TEPCO to understand what was going on with the reactors in a timely fashion.

The new reactor designs are supposed to be built with redundancies, including shielding and backup water that is gravity fed so that no pumps are required. That would allow operators to put water on the reactor in case of a problem with the core and control rods to cool it down.

TMI was due to a lot more than human error. Specifically the PORV valves created by Babcock and Wilcox failed and stuck open as they had in other instances.

This is the kind of thing which makes me wary. Even the Space Shuttle blew up due to the failure of one individual part but if it happens in nuclear reactor then the consequences could be a lot worse.

Once again I’m not anti-nuclear I just want us to be extra-super careful.

EiMitch Feb 9, 2012 1:46:21pm

re: #2 lawhawk

True, but I’d rather not see any more nuclear reactors being built. I don’t care if that means relying on aging nuclear reactors, or even fossil fuels. I’ll just face an industry whom decades ago told me and everyone else on my side to talk to the hand. And then I’ll continue to preach that they should just shut their reactors down.

I don’t want to solve the problems of old, less efficient, and possibly poorly designed reactors in degrading states of repair. I just want to wave my magic wand and make it all disappear.

Just in case: /sarc

In all seriousness, I don’t want more nuclear plants. But I do realize how much we rely on existing nuclear plants for our power grid, and would like to see replacements for the plants that most desperately need to be shut down. Is that unreasonable?

Auto

This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!