283 replies to this topic

[Shortpoet-GTD]

An example-
http://www.garfieldc...-flowers200.jpg

https://encrypted-tb...azove0ON1Xwubi6

https://encrypted-tb...v9Ziwks7tKU1qCQ

https://encrypted-tb...3dF5txU892c2LtU

**Had to post those-oops; back to topic.

[Shortpoet-GTD]

Phil, on 29 May 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:

China is interested but they are still building coal plants as fast as they can.  

I'm not on China's side, but maybe they're making progress towards renewables?
http://en.wikipedia....energy_in_China

http://cleantechnica...nergy-capacity/

http://www.renewable...-power-projects

[still learning]

Phil, on 31 May 2013 - 08:42 AM, said:

....Back to nuclear, I'm one of those who simply does not trust nuclear energy.  I have not researched gen 4 designs, but unless I'm mistaken all major nuclear accidents have not been equipment errors, they've been human errors.  As one article quipped, the problem with making things idiot proof is idiots are so damn creative!.... :<)

Of the three nuclear power reactor meltdowns that have happened, looks like there have been both equipment failure and human failure.
Human failure at the design level for all three, certainly.

At Three Mile Island there was a main feedwater (in the steam generator/turbine/condenser loop, not the reactor loop) pump shutdown (cause not explained), then an automatic turbine shutdown and an automatic reactor shutdown sequence initiated.  Later an automatic relief valve stuck open, but the indicator for that valve in the control room showed closed. Indicator showed what the valve was supposed to be doing, not what it was actually doing.  Then things really started going wrong.  Some hours later, after a control room shift change, somebody figured out that the indicator wasn't actually showing the position of the stuck valve (think I read that there was a secondary indicator, little used, not "in the book") kept things from getting worse.  If the valve hadn't stuck, no drama.

At Chernobyl they were trying out an unproven emergency shutdown procedure when things went out of control.  Had to do with seeing if they could keep the main turbine and cooling pumps going for a minute or so with residual steam in the event of a simultaneous emergency reactor shutdown and loss of external grid power (as happened at Fukushima) until the emergency diesels could get going.  Trying to be ready for some future emergency, trying an emergency procedure when things went wrong.  No actual equipment failure to start the catastrophe.

At Fukushima, earthquake and tsunami started things off.  When the earthquake hit, the reactors automatically started a shutdown sequence and the emergency diesel generators started up okay, still got electricity to run the cooling pumps necessary to prevent meltdown.  Lost one of two connections to the grid.  No great problem so far.  About fifty minutes after the quake tsunami hit.  Lost the other grid connection, most of the backup diesels flooded out along with the main turbines and generators.  There were a couple of backup diesels up on the hill that were capable of supplying enough electricity to provide cooling water, but the electrical distribution equipment was flooded too by the tsunami.  there were batteries enough for a few hours, along with ECCS (emergency core cooling system), supposed to be good for a few hours.  ECCS worked reasonably well for some but not all reactors.  Batteries ran out early.
What to do?  The "book," the preplanned emergency procedures didn't cover this.
Apparently some contention between the people on site and the people at TEPCO headquarters and the government (prime minister's office) as to what to do.  
From what I've read (not enough yet), given the design, once the tsunami hit there was going to be trouble, maybe even some meltdown, but it could have been managed better, contained better.  Maybe they could have prevented most of the off-site contamination.

Phil, you're right, idiots can be really creative.

The US Navy has demonstrated that nuclear reactors can be operated without drama, but I'm not sure that, as a whole, private enterprise can.  Somebody will cut corners in design or in construction or in maintenance or operation.  Not every day, but sometime in the 30 or 40 year lifetime of the reactor.  

[eds]

Radiation Suits VS Solar Suits which one do you want to wear when something goes wrong?

Attached Files

•  radiation suit.jpg   26.04K   0 downloads
•  SolarSuits.jpeg   8.32K   0 downloads

[Shortpoet-GTD]

eds, on 01 June 2013 - 07:55 PM, said:

Radiation Suits VS Solar Suits which one do you want to wear when something goes wrong?

  Great comparison.

[eds]

Follow the Money: Nuclear, Gas, Coal or Oil powered Home VS Solar Home
. . . the control of the Money, remains pretty much the same.

When you retire . . . which home do you want to live in?

Attached Files

•  PV.jpeg   13.39K   1 downloads

[Besoeker]

eds, on 01 June 2013 - 07:55 PM, said:

Radiation Suits VS Solar Suits which one do you want to wear when something goes wrong?

Perspective....

Energy Source   Death Rate (deaths per TWh) OLD

Coal – world average    161 (26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)
Coal – China    278
Coal – USA 15
Oil 36  (36% of world energy)
Natural Gas 4  (21% of world energy)
Biofuel/Biomass 12
Peat    12
Solar (rooftop) 0.44 (less than 0.1% of world energy)
Wind 0.15 (less than 1% of world energy)
Hydro    0.10 (europe death rate, 2.2% of world energy)
Hydro - world including Banqiao) 1.4 (about 2500 TWh/yr and 171,000 Banqiao dead)
Nuclear 0.04 (5.9% of world energy)


a link

[Dingo]

Eclipse, on 29 May 2013 - 01:11 AM, said:

Gen4 nukes are the forever machine!

So I indicated, at least in theory, in my first post. What I also tried to show was that it wasn't in the cards that these nuclear power plants would ever fulfill their reason for existence, namely to replace most fossil fuel plants. Cost, the lateness of the hour and the lack of public enthusiasm make this solution beyond the pale. Still I think we should set about designing and building an optimal 4th generation model, perhaps so when things break down we will have an optional backdrop of knowledge to draw on should civilization pull itself off the floor and try to get it right on the second go around.

[eds]

Dingo, on 02 June 2013 - 10:03 AM, said:

So I indicated, at least in theory, in my first post. What I also tried to show was that it wasn't in the cards that these nuclear power plants would ever fulfill their reason for existence, namely to replace most fossil fuel plants. Cost, the lateness of the hour and the lack of public enthusiasm make this solution beyond the pale. Still I think we should set about designing and building an optimal 4th generation model, perhaps so when things break down we will have an optional backdrop of knowledge to draw on should civilization pull itself off the floor and try to get it right on the second go around.

Your right, Nuclear as a religion is dead, the people with Money to invest in it,
. . . can already see the Return On Investment is Not there, and
. . . "If things break down" Distributed Renewables will always survive Centralized Grid Breakdowns.
I don't think . . . I know, Living in a State where the Grid goes down every couple of years,
. . . from Ice Storms, for weeks at a time,
. . . while the price of electricity keeps going up.

Ask the survivors of any catastrophe,  Hurricane, Tornado, Ice Storm, etc.
. . . We don't think . . . We KNOW, NOT to spend on an "optimal 4th generation model,"  
. . . the only thing that will change, is the price of energy going up faster.
What's needed is on site, affordable, mobile, renewable energy generators, distributed ASAP.
. . . We have the brains, the tools and the price point is in reach,
. . . to make distributed renewable, become a reality.  Maybe something like the Ikube?

Source:  Ikube  Spec's  Brochure

Attached Files

•  Roi2.jpeg   8.69K   0 downloads

[Shortpoet-GTD]

eds, on 02 June 2013 - 05:40 AM, said:

When you retire . . . which home do you want to live in?

Considering I'm in tornado alley but want solar too-something like this perhaps.

[eds]

Rocky Mountain Research Center,
. . . Passive Annual Heat Storage,
. . . Earth Sheltered Umbrella Homes.
A simple underground house design uses a novel insulating/water-shedding blanket
. . . that covers the structure and surrounding soil,
. . . creates a huge subterranean thermal reservoir,
. . . that soaks up the sun’s energy during summertime and
. . . stores it for winter heating.
In many cases, the clever design makes a heating system unnecessary.

Source:  Underground Home

Attached Files

•  unbrella.jpeg   12.39K   0 downloads
•  unbrella2.jpg   38.12K   0 downloads

[Dingo]

It seems to me if we are relying on distributive renewables, we still need a large baseload energy source to manufacture the generators, photovoltaics and pretty much any kind of major appliance or even simple transportation like a bicycle. Short of fossil fuel that pretty much leaves hydro and nuclear. Solar and hydrogen just aren't ready for prime time. Look at Bosoeker's list of energy sources above and their percent of contribution to world energy to get some idea of how little solar and wind are part of the picture.

[eds]

Dingo, on 02 June 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

It seems to me if we are relying on distributive renewables, we still need a large baseload energy source to manufacture the generators, photovoltaics and pretty much any kind of major appliance or even simple transportation like a bicycle. Short of fossil fuel that pretty much leaves hydro and nuclear. Solar and hydrogen just aren't ready for prime time. Look at Bosoeker's list of energy sources above and their percent of contribution to world energy to get some idea of how little solar and wind are part of the picture.

If you really believe that, I would suggest you put all you money in Nuclear stocks.
. . . We have a Nuclear plant in New Hampshire and you can see what a great job it's doing here.

[Dingo]

eds, on 02 June 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

If you really believe that, I would suggest you put all you money in Nuclear stocks.
. . . We have a Nuclear plant in New Hampshire and you can see what a great job it's doing here.

Come on, that's an ideological, not a reality based response. Where are you going to get the energy for heavy industry?

[eds]

Dingo, on 02 June 2013 - 02:53 PM, said:

Come on, that's an ideological, not a reality based response. Where are you going to get the energy for heavy industry?

I was born during the Depression and grew up during World War II,
. . . when the US Heavy industry turned out a endless supply of Ships, Planes, Vehicles and Weapons.
I know your not going to believe this, but their were no:
. . . Cell Phones,
. . . Personal Computers,
. . . Television,
. . . Micro-wave Ovens,
. . . Washing Machines,
. . . Refrigerators, and
. . . No Nuclear Power Plants.
If we had the Solar Energy that's available to this generation today,
. . . we wouldn't be sitting on our hands,
. . . we had a "Can Do" attitude and
. . . we would have them built,
. . . . . . made them available to people, and
. . . everyone would have put to them to work,
. . . making a difference in the world.

Attached Files

•  Rosie.jpeg   11.14K   0 downloads

[eds]

Sputnik Engineering builds solar-powered solar factory,
. . . its designer, Burckhardt+Partner, claims the building's electricity
. . . is provided entirely by renewable energy.
It's one thing to build a house with all-renewable electric supplies.
. . . Offices and factories are much more intensive energy consumers,
. . . due to the equipment and machinery packed densely into the floor area,
. . . in this case, all 11,800 sq m (127,000 sq ft) of it .

An all-renewable approach tends to mean stringent control of energy use at the best of times, and
. . . it appears that efforts have been made to keep consumption down.
. . . The factory floor is bathed in daylight from the rows of skylights overhead,
. . . . . . which will greatly reduce the need for electric lighting.

Hyundai Unveils Plans to Install South Korea’s Largest Solar Power Plant

Hyundai plans to install 40,000 solar photovoltaic modules on the rooftops of the plant’s
. . . press, welding, assembly and engine buildings by the end of the year.
. . . The giant rooftop solar plant will curb 5,600 tons of CO2 emissions,
. . . the equivalent of planting 1.12 million pine trees.

The system will cover a whopping 2.2 million square feet, or about 50 acres of rooftop.
. . . 100% of the solar will be built on existing rooftops,
. . . . . . so it won’t require any additional land
. . . . . . or cause environmental problems.
. . . Lastly, the sprinklers used to cool the solar modules
. . . . . . will also help the cool indoor temperatures during hot seasons,  
. . . . . . reducing the demand for air conditioning.

This is REAL, it is what a "Can Do" attitude can accomplish.

Source: Sputnik Engineering  Hyundai

Attached Files

•  Hyundai.jpg   79.96K   0 downloads

[Dingo]

eds, on 02 June 2013 - 05:02 PM, said:

Hyundai Unveils Plans to Install South Korea’s Largest Solar Power Plant

Hyundai plans to install 40,000 solar photovoltaic modules on the rooftops of the plant’s
. . . press, welding, assembly and engine buildings by the end of the year.
. . . The giant rooftop solar plant will curb 5,600 tons of CO2 emissions,
. . . the equivalent of planting 1.12 million pine trees.

The system will cover a whopping 2.2 million square feet, or about 50 acres of rooftop.
. . . 100% of the solar will be built on existing rooftops,
. . . . . . so it won’t require any additional land
. . . . . . or cause environmental problems.
. . . Lastly, the sprinklers used to cool the solar modules
. . . . . . will also help the cool indoor temperatures during hot seasons,  
. . . . . . reducing the demand for air conditioning.

This is REAL, it is what a "Can Do" attitude can accomplish.

I'm afraid simple me needs clarity. So are they building cars with pvs? And might this be free of any central power source like say nuclear which they have a lot of in S. Korea?

As for the 2nd world war it's hard to imagine that effort, even theoretically, being seriously powered by pvs and windmills.

If the idea is to be seriously dispersed it would seem that maybe we should turn our central inspiration to the 18th century and before and even there quite selectively. Hard to get more centralized than ordering up the Great Wall of China.

Maybe a little diversionary but instructive anyway. Free your kid from too much technology and he may grow up to be a brainiac.

[eds]

Dingo, on 02 June 2013 - 07:21 PM, said:

I'm afraid simple me needs clarity. So are they building cars with pvs? And might this be free of any central power source like say nuclear which they have a lot of in S. Korea?

When I post, I give the Source of my material, for those who need clarity or wish to dig deeper into the subject.
. . . Had you looked at the source, you would have found the answers to your questions.  I'm posting the link again.
. . . and yes, South Korea is experimenting with a lot of Nuclear material, with the hopes of selling it,  That Link is here also.

Source:  Hyundai  South Korea

Dingo, on 02 June 2013 - 07:21 PM, said:

As for the 2nd world war it's hard to imagine that effort, even theoretically, being seriously powered by pvs and windmills.

I believe you when you say you find it hard to imagine World War ll, production lines.
. . . My generation worked hard, so you never felt what it's like to go hungry for days at a time, stand in bread lines,
. . . wear hand me down clothes with patch's, or worked from Sunup to Sundown.
. . . Most things were made by hand, by craftsmen, not by all the computerized or the push-buttoned  machines you have today.  Look at the video on this Link, to understand what it was like,

Source:  World War II Video

Dingo, on 02 June 2013 - 07:21 PM, said:

If the idea is to be seriously dispersed it would seem that maybe we should turn our central inspiration to the 18th century and before and even there quite selectively. Hard to get more centralized than ordering up the Great Wall of China.

All you need, is to find something to believe in, maybe you can understand this, maybe you can't. but here's a Link.

Source:  A New Economic Vision Video

[Besoeker]

eds, on 02 June 2013 - 05:02 PM, said:

Hyundai Unveils Plans to Install South Korea’s Largest Solar Power Plant

Hyundai plans to install 40,000 solar photovoltaic modules on the rooftops of the plant’s
. . . press, welding, assembly and engine buildings by the end of the year.
. . . The giant rooftop solar plant will curb 5,600 tons of CO2 emissions,
. . . the equivalent of planting 1.12 million pine trees.

The system will cover a whopping 2.2 million square feet, or about 50 acres of rooftop.
. . . 100% of the solar will be built on existing rooftops,
. . . . . . so it won’t require any additional land
. . . . . . or cause environmental problems.
. . . Lastly, the sprinklers used to cool the solar modules
. . . . . . will also help the cool indoor temperatures during hot seasons,  
. . . . . . reducing the demand for air conditioning.

This is REAL, it is what a "Can Do" attitude can accomplish.

Source: Sputnik Engineering  Hyundai

The Hyundai proposed installation is an example of what can be done and it is to be commended.
It also gives an example of scale. It will be the largest in South Korea.
The installed capacity is to be 10,000kW peak capacity. Or about 1,300kW on average.

It's an industrial plant. I'm an electrical engineer dealing mainly with power electronic equipment for industrial and process plants. So I can give you some idea of context with a few examples from personal experience.

We have just completed the build phase of a project for variable speed drives for a cryogenic plant in north east England. The installed capacity is 1,360 kW. I don't know what other plant will be installed at the site or what the the duty cycle will be. It is usually 24/7.

This week, today actually, my chief site support guy is putting a compressor drive back into service after a little bit of TLC. It's 6,300kW and runs 24/7.

On the basis of a project we did for one of their cement works (a couple of 2,500kW drives), I have an invitation to tender for another 4,000kW unit of similar design. These also run continuously.

Steel works.....arc furnace producing the steel for car bodies....my experience on those is limited. This is the last one I did the controls for:



114,000kW

Context...........

[Besoeker]

eds, on 02 June 2013 - 08:45 PM, said:

I believe you when you say you find it hard to imagine World War ll, production lines.
. . . My generation worked hard,

Did you work on a WWII production line?