header pic

Area51 Board (non-moderated) at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' Scout-Tennessee a51 Crowd- Enjoy ROWDY discussion covering politics, religion, current events, and all things under the sun

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: Electricity Update Pt 9

 (Read 1511 times)

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 24159
  • Liked:
GE Hitachi initiates US licensing of BWRX-300
« Reply #42 on: February 04, 2020, 02:40:11 PM »

GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) has officially started the regulatory licensing process for its BWRX-300 reactor design. On 30 December, the company submitted the first licensing topical report for the small modular reactor to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The company expects such reports to serve as a foundation for the development of a Preliminary Safety Analysis Report that could potentially be submitted to the NRC by a utility customer.

The BWRX-300 is a 300 MWe SMR derived from GEH's 1520 MWe Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor (ESBWR) design. According to GEH, the BWRX-300 leverages the design and licensing basis of the ESBWR, which received design certification from the NRC in 2014. GEH says that, by leveraging the existing ESBWR design certification, utilising licensed and proven nuclear fuel designs, incorporating proven components and supply chains, and implementing simplification innovations, the BWRX-300 can, become cost competitive with power generation from combined cycle gas plants and renewable energy platforms.
"The first licensing topical report was submitted to the NRC at the end of 2019 as part of an aggressive timeline that we set for ourselves," Jon Ball, executive vice president of nuclear products for GEH, said. "As the global demand for carbon-free energy increases, we are seeing significant interest in this groundbreaking SMR technology and are excited about continuing to work toward US licensing," he added.
The Wilmington, North Carolina based company added that, as the tenth evolution of the boiling water reactor, the BWRX-300 represents "the simplest, yet most innovative" BWR design since GE began developing nuclear reactors in 1955.
In March 2019, it submitted an application for a service agreement with the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) to conduct a vendor design review of the BWRX-300. A service agreement is a legal document that establishes the terms and conditions between the CNSC and a reactor vendor. The CNSC's review of the BWRX-300 was initiated in May.
Researched and written by World Nuclear News

President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

HK_Vol

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 23984
  • Liked:
Re: Electricity Update Pt 9
« Reply #43 on: February 05, 2020, 01:16:18 AM »
https://www.timesfreepress.com/news/business/aroundregion/story/2020/feb/03/tva-shutters-last-unit-kentucky-coal-plant/514736/


SNIP:
The Tennessee Valley Authority shut down the last operating unit at its Paradise Fossil Plant in Western Kentucky over the weekend, ending nearly 57 years of coal-fired generation at was once one of the largest coal plants in TVA's fleet.

Despite opposition from President Donald Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the TVA board voted 5-2 last February to retire the last Paradise unit, along with the Bull Run Steam Plant near Oak Ridge by 2023. Due to turbine rotor problem at Paradise and the relatively stagnant power demand for TVA this year, the utility decided to shutter Paradise Unit 3 this month rather than continue to invest in trying to keep the aging power facility on line.


TVA determined that it could generate or buy cheaper and cleaner power from other sources rather than continuing to rely upon its coal-fired unit on the Green River in Western Kentucky. The other two coal-fired units at Paradise were retired in 2017 and were replaced by a $1 billion combined-cycle natural gas plant which is capable of producing 1,025 megawatts of power.

TVA has shut down other coal plants in the past decade at its John Sevier, Allen and Johnsonville plants in Tennessee and its Widows Creek and Colbert plants in Alabama. While Google has built a $600 million data center at the former Widows Creek plant near Stevenson, Alabama, TVA has not disposed of most of its abandoned coal plants where coal ash cleanup and monitoring programs continue.

TVA has already shut down a majority of the 59 coal-fired units it once operated, cutting the share of its power generated by burning coal from nearly two-thirds of TVA's generation in the 1980s to 17% of TVA's generation in fiscal 2019, Hopson said.

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 24159
  • Liked:
GEH promotes BWRX-300 design in Czech Republic
« Reply #44 on: February 07, 2020, 03:00:33 PM »
GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy and Czech utility ČEZ have signed a Memorandum of Understanding on examining the economic and technical feasibility of potentially constructing a BWRX-300 in the Czech Republic. ČEZ operates two nuclear power plants which generate about one-third of the country’s electricity. The Czech government plans substituting aging coal plants with new nuclear build and renewables in the near future.

The BWRX-300 is a 300 MWe water-cooled, natural circulation small modular reactor with passive safety systems that leverages the design and licensing basis of GEH's US Nuclear Regulatory Commission-certified ESBWR. Through "dramatic design simplification", GEH projects the BWRX-300 will require significantly less capital cost per MW when compared to other water-cooled SMR designs or existing large nuclear reactor designs.
"This agreement is the latest example of the growing global interest in our breakthrough SMR technology," said Jon Ball, Executive Vice President of Nuclear Products for GEH.
Daniel Beneš, CEO of ČEZ, said: "We are already engaged with the development of small modular reactors, especially in our daughter company ÚJV Řež. The SMRs can be a significant alternative in the future that we cannot ignore. The collaboration with GE Hitachi is therefore a logical step for us."
GEH said last week it had officially started the regulatory licensing process for its BWRX-300 reactor design. On 30 December, the company submitted the first licensing topical report for the SMR to the US NRC. In March 2019, it submitted an application for a service agreement with the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) to conduct a vendor design review of the BWRX-300. The CNSC's review of the BWRX-300 was initiated in May.
Researched and written by World Nuclear News

President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 24159
  • Liked:
Energy Northwest Study Makes a Case for SMRs in Future Power Mix
« Reply #45 on: February 08, 2020, 05:31:25 PM »
Deep decarbonization of the U.S. Northwest can be achieved at “manageable” costs by 2045, but only if utility agency Energy Northwest secures zero-emitting firm capacity, such as by relicensing Columbia Generating Station—the sole nuclear plant in the region—and building small modular reactors (SMRs), a new study suggests.
The study by San Francisco-based consulting group Energy + Environmental Economics (E3), which was made public on Jan. 30, responds to Washington state’s May 2019–enacted measures to produce 100% of its power from “clean” sources by 2045, such as hydropower, wind, and solar. Energy Northwest, a not-for-profit utility agency established in 1957 by the state legislature and which today comprises 27 public utilities districts and municipalities in the state, commissioned the E3 study as part of a multi-year effort to evaluate all its options through the next 20 years and beyond.
As Energy Northwest CEO Brad Sawatzke noted, the clean energy mandate is “an ambitious and worthwhile goal, so we have to start planning today to ensure the people of Washington state have the right mix of energy sources tomorrow.” A major challenge the utility agency is now grappling with is to “make sure that mix is not only reliable, but affordable,” he said.
Among the study’s key findings is that if “new firm capacity” is not built, achieving a region-wide 100% greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction compared to 1990 levels will exhibit a “marked increase” in costs. While firm capacity that could result in “manageable costs” could come from pairing renewables and gas (natural gas and renewable gas), deep decarbonization would be most economically achieved from extended operation of the Columbia Generating Station as well as with new SMRs. The other deep decarbonization option, “A system that largely relies on wind, water, solar, and battery storage … requires over 100 GW of new capacity additions in 2045 to maintain reliability,” it concludes.
A system that depends solely on renewables coupled with storage, meanwhile, would become “less and less effective at reducing carbon in the Northwest compared to the reference case [which assumes natural gas power is built to replace retired coal capacity] and as the amount of GHG emissions allowed in the electricity sector decrease.” A renewables-dependent system also risks “large overbuild,” and could result in a growing frequency and magnitude of renewable curtailment, driving up the cost of reducing GHG emissions, the study says. In a 100% GHG reduction scenario, for example, 40% of new renewable generation would need to be curtailed, it says.
However, the future role of SMRs also “depends on their cost, the stringency of regional emissions limits and the availability of gas generators to provide firm capacity,” it says. If no new gas is built in the region, SMRs will have their largest build-out cases, with at least 6.3 GW of SMRs being built by 2045. At currently estimated costs in a 100% GHG reduction scenario by 2045, SMRs could slash costs by nearly $8 billion a year, owing to their provision of firm capacity. SMRs also appear more economically feasible if a currently available production tax credit (PTC) of $18/MWh is applied, and the study assumes that the Northwest could claim nuclear subsidies for up to 3 GW of new SMRs.
Assessing the Cost of New Resources
The study uses E3’s RESOLVE model, which  “co-optimizes investments and operations to minimize total [net present value] of electric system cost over the study time horizon,” the company said. That essentially means that investments and operations are “optimized in a single stage to capture linkages between investment decisions and system operations,” E3 explained. The model also “selects resources based on total value to the entire system, not just levelized cost of energy,” it said.
But the study also builds on several previous analyses E3 performed to study carbon scenarios in the Northwest. A 2017 study found that a portfolio of hydro, renewables, and natural gas would be the least cost strategy to achieve an 80% reduction in power sector emissions. In 2018, E3 found that the cost of achieving 100% decarbonized power in the Northwest would be greatly reduced if firm resources like SMRs or biomethane gas generators were available. Another study it conducted last year, meanwhile, found that the region will need firm generation to ensure reliability “because the marginal capacity contributions of wind, solar and storage decline as their penetrations increase.” Significantly, that study also found that “gas is the least cost option to provide firm capacity given existing technologies.”
E3’s new study, which follows Washington’s Clean Energy Transformation Act, takes into account the clean energy mandate’s provisions to eliminate coal portfolios after 2025, and requirements that electric utilities in the state become carbon-neutral by 2030. To determine how costs for new resources will play out over the long-term, it assesses them within a series of scenarios that explore reductions of GHG emissions in the state below 1990 levels, ranging from an 80% reduction by 2045 to a 100% reduction.



More at Page


President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 24159
  • Liked:
DOE invites feedback on advanced reactor programme
« Reply #46 on: February 13, 2020, 01:31:12 PM »
The US Department of Energy (DOE) on 5 February issued a Request for Information/Notice of Intent (RFI/NOI) to solicit applications for two advanced reactor demonstration awards. It said the issuance of the RFI/NOI was also to give interested parties an opportunity "to provide their insights on how the demonstration programme could be successfully executed".

The Advanced Reactor Demonstration (ARD) Program was initiated last year to demonstrate multiple advanced reactor designs. In December, Congress authorised USD230 million in funding for the programme during fiscal year 2020, ending 30 September.
"DOE recognises that continued efforts will be necessary to assure US leadership in the research, design and development of advanced reactors, and to ensure the successful deployment of these reactors in the US and international marketplaces," DOE said. "However, the primary goal of the new ARD Program is on actual construction and operational readiness of the selected demonstrations."
DOE said it has an "aggressive strategy to demonstrate two advanced reactor designs within five to seven years of award, and two to five smaller awards to address technical risks in other advanced designs." It added, "The RFI/NOI notifies interested parties of DOE's intended strategies to implement this programme, as well as solicits input regarding these strategies from interested parties, including advanced reactor developers."
Through the RFI/NOI, DOE is seeking information related to the scope and implementation considerations of Demonstration and Risk Reduction projects. It said the information would be used to develop DOE's solicitation for executing these projects. The department plans to issue a financial assistance Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) for this solicitation and award cooperative agreements for the demonstrations. The FOA will also include Risk Reduction for Future Demonstrations.
It said demonstration awards would be granted to two teams seeking to develop advanced reactors. The total first year DOE funding for each award will be about USD80 million, "with future year funding dependent on the selected project requirements and future congressional appropriations". These awards will require a cost share of not less than 50% from non-federal sources.
Between two and five applicants not selected for the demonstration awards may be considered for separate risk reduction awards under the FOA. These awards - totalling USD30 million from DOE in the first year - will address technical risks in each applicant's reactor design. These awards will require a cost share of not less than 20% from non-federal sources.
Responses to the RFI/NOI must be submitted by 26 February.
Researched and written by World Nuclear News

President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 24159
  • Liked:
Renewable Power Theatre of the Absurd
« Reply #47 on: February 13, 2020, 02:06:34 PM »
Along with many other states, California, Arizona and Nevada all have “renewable portfolio laws.” California requires that 60% of its electric power be from renewable sources by 2030. Nevada requires 50% by 2030. Arizona requires 15% by 2025. Renewable power is defined by law in each state, but usually it amounts to wind or solar.
One might think that having a quota for renewable power means that the power has to be generated by wind or solar and consumed within the state. There is a loophole. The “renewable attribute” can be legally separated from the actual power. So, the power can be consumed in one place, but a different place gets credit as if it had actually consumed the renewable power. For example, a wind farm in Colorado can generate a megawatt hour of electricity. The power is actually sold and consumed in Colorado, but California gets credit for a megawatt hour of renewable power.
The Colorado wind farm in the normal course of events can sell the abstract credit, known as an RPC or Renewable Power Certificate to California. California needs credits to meet it renewable power quota, so it is willing to pay, for what is a piece of paper. The wind farm can also sell the real electric power separately to someone who is willing to buy electricity that comes without the renewable power attribute, because the renewable power attribute has been sold to California. This is a legal way to convert power from fossil fuels into renewable power, or to meet a renewable power quota without actual renewable power.


California Energy Commission
Sometimes the certificate may be more valuable than the power. In fact, sometimes the power may literally be worth less than nothing. At certain times California has too much solar power that it can’t use because it would destabilize the grid. When the power is worth less than nothing, the producer will have to pay someone to use the power. Someone has to use the power or there can’t be a certificate. That would be a counterfeit certificate. You can’t just throw the power away. That would negate the whole rationale. You might think that any state would be happy to accept free power, but it may be inconvenient for technical or economic reasons, or it may just be that only one party is available that can take the power and they can exercise monopoly power and make the party trying to get rid of the power pay for the privilege.
A similar situation exists in the spring with wind power in the Pacific Northwest. Wind power receives a 2.4 cents per kilowatt hour subsidy from the federal government. But in the spring, there is a surplus of hydroelectric power due to plentiful rainfall. The wind power suppliers pay power consumers to take their power so they can get the federal subsidy. The hydroelectric suppliers have no motive to do the same because they don’t get a subsidy. So, the hydroelectric suppliers spill the excess water and some electricity users get paid rather than billed for their power. This is known as a market distortion caused by the government.

Often with solar power there is too much during the middle of the day and not enough later in the day. In the evening there isn’t any solar power. In California the major problem with excess solar power is in the spring, when the sunshine is kicking in, but the big consumption for air conditioning hasn’t yet kicked in. California could simply tell the solar power generating stations to cut back, but then they would lose credit toward their renewable power quota. Some contracts may even make them pay for the power that they would have received without the cutback. So, they try to get utilities in adjacent states to take the power, keeping the certificates for themselves. This was all revealed in a Los Angeles Times article. Apparently, California is paying as much as $15 a megawatt hour to unload the unusable solar power.
To see why this makes sense for California it is necessary to look at the economics of solar power. To generate solar power if there weren’t various subsidies would cost about $80 per megawatt hour. With the federal and state subsidies the cost might be reduced to $25 per megawatt hour. In contrast, the marginal cost of generating power with natural gas is $15 to $20 a megawatt hour. But the $25 renewable power runs out when the California grid can’t accept any more solar in the middle of the day. If they pay Nevada $15 to accept the excess solar, they now have a route to get renewable credits for $40 per megawatt hour, $25 for the solar power and $15 to get Nevada to accept the unusable power. Essentially by a legal strategy they are converting natural gas electricity, delivered in the evening, into renewable electricity. Nevada, on the other hand is getting electricity that is not legally renewable, even though it really does come from solar. Nevada may not want more non-renewable electricity unless they are paid for it, because Nevada has a quota for renewable power too.

The situation is more than a little strange. Propaganda from the sellers of wind and solar power makes people think that wind and solar are actually useful. Huge subsidies make wind and solar seem cheaper than they really are. The idea that introducing wind and solar in U.S. states will make a significant difference in world CO2 emissions is wrong. The real emissions problem, if it is a problem, is in Asia. People that really believe in global warming should face up to the fact that nuclear is the only route to stopping the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. Some of the most important advocates of global warming catastrophe make that clear.
The most salient fact conc erning wind and solar is that they are intermittent and erratic sourcesof power. They always have to be backed up with fossil fuel plants that take over when the sun sets or the wind stops. They never replace fossil fuel plants.
A pathetic attempt to correct the inherent problems of wind and solar is to add batteries to store power. That costs a fortune, a very high price to pay to help in meeting renewable power quotas..
The utilities know the facts. But the utilities have no incentive to stop the waste because they have figured out how to make money by promoting dubious renewable power. Apparently, the politicians on state public utility commissions and in state legislatures don’t have the knowledge or the courage to represent the interests of the people, rather than the interests of the manufacturers of wind and solar stations and the interests of the environmental organizations that are profiting from an artificial fear of traditional energy. People send money to environmental organizations because they have been convinced that catastrophes are looming.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/02/renewable_power_theatre_of_the_absurd.html
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 24159
  • Liked:
The war on energy respects no limits
« Reply #48 on: February 14, 2020, 01:29:26 PM »
The far left’s war on energy does not stop with battery car mandates and the closure of coal-fired power plants. The movement also despises clean-burning natural gas. Radical activists oppose using it for any purpose, even for cremation after we die.
They want everything to run on electricity stored in massive batteries — products that increase demand for child labor in cobalt mines abroad and impose an assortment of environmental problems in foreign lands.
Toward achieving their costly and harmful vision, anti-energy activists from across the United States met last summer in New York to plot a new attack on American homes, workplaces and kitchens. Attendees included representatives from the Energy Foundation, the World Research Institute and the Colorado-based Rocky Mountain Institute. Others, as discovered in emails obtained by WesternWire.net, included state government officials from what Democrats call the 12 “trifecta” states — those, including Colorado, in which the Democratic Party controls the governor’s office and both legislative chambers.




More at link 
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 24159
  • Liked:
Wind Turbine Blades Can’t Be Recycled, So They’re Piling Up in Landfil
« Reply #49 on: February 23, 2020, 12:47:20 PM »
Companies are searching for ways to deal with the tens of thousands of blades that have reached the end of their lives.
A wind turbine’s blades can be longer than a Boeing 747 wing, so at the end of their lifespan they can’t just be hauled away. First, you need to saw through the lissome fiberglass using a diamond-encrusted industrial saw to create three pieces small enough to be strapped to a tractor-trailer.
The municipal landfill in Casper, Wyoming, is the final resting place of 870 blades whose days making renewable energy have come to end. The severed fragments look like bleached whale bones nestled against one another.

“That’s the end of it for this winter,” said waste technician Michael Bratvold, watching a bulldozer bury them forever in sand. “We’ll get the rest when the weather breaks this spring.”

Tens of thousands of aging blades are coming down from steel towers around the world and most have nowhere to go but landfills. In the U.S. alone, about 8,000 will be removed in each of the next four years. Europe, which has been dealing with the problem longer, has about 3,800 coming down annually through at least 2022, according to BloombergNEF. It’s going to get worse: Most were built more than a decade ago, when installations were less than a fifth of what they are now.
Built to withstand hurricane-force winds, the blades can’t easily be crushed, recycled or repurposed. That’s created an urgent search for alternatives in places that lack wide-open prairies. In the U.S., they go to the handful of landfills that accept them, in Lake Mills, Iowa; Sioux Falls, South Dakota; and Casper, where they will be interred in stacks that reach 30 feet under.
A wind turbine’s blades can be longer than a Boeing 747 wing, so at the end of their lifespan they can’t just be hauled away. First, you need to saw through the lissome fiberglass using a diamond-encrusted industrial saw to create three pieces small enough to be strapped to a tractor-trailer.

The municipal landfill in Casper, Wyoming, is the final resting place of 870 blades whose days making renewable energy have come to end. The severed fragments look like bleached whale bones nestled against one another.

“That’s the end of it for this winter,” said waste technician Michael Bratvold, watching a bulldozer bury them forever in sand. “We’ll get the rest when the weather breaks this spring.”

Tens of thousands of aging blades are coming down from steel towers around the world and most have nowhere to go but landfills. In the U.S. alone, about 8,000 will be removed in each of the next four years. Europe, which has been dealing with the problem longer, has about 3,800 coming down annually through at least 2022, according to BloombergNEF. It’s going to get worse: Most were built more than a decade ago, when installations were less than a fifth of what they are now.
Built to withstand hurricane-force winds, the blades can’t easily be crushed, recycled or repurposed. That’s created an urgent search for alternatives in places that lack wide-open prairies. In the U.S., they go to the handful of landfills that accept them, in Lake Mills, Iowa; Sioux Falls, South Dakota; and Casper, where they will be interred in stacks that reach 30 feet under.




“The wind turbine blade will be there, ultimately, forever,” said Bob Cappadona, chief operating officer for the North American unit of Paris-based Veolia Environnement SA, which is searching for better ways to deal with the massive waste. “Most landfills are considered a dry tomb.”

“The last thing we want to do is create even more environmental challenges.”

To prevent catastrophic climate change caused by burning fossil fuels, many governments and corporations have pledged to use only clean energy by 2050. Wind energy is one of the cheapest ways to reach that goal.
The electricity comes from turbines that spin generators. Modern models emerged after the 1973 Arab oil embargo, when shortages compelled western governments to find alternatives to fossil fuels. The first wind farm in the U.S. was installed in New Hampshire in 1980, and California deployed thousands of turbines east of San Francisco across the Altamont Pass.
The first models were expensive and inefficient, spinning fast and low. After 1992, when Congress passed a tax credit, manufacturers invested in taller and more powerful designs. Their steel tubes rose 260 feet and sported swooping fiberglass blades. A decade later, General Electric Co. made its 1.5 megawatt model—enough to supply 1,200 homes in a stiff breeze—an industry standard.
Wind power is carbon-free and about 85% of turbine components, including steel, copper wire, electronics and gearing can be recycled or reused. But the fiberglass blades remain difficult to dispose of. With some as long as a football field, big rigs can only carry one at a time, making transportation costs prohibitive for long-distance hauls. Scientists are trying to find better ways to separate resins from fibers or to give small chunks new life as pellets or boards.


n the European Union, which strictly regulates material that can go into landfills, some blades are burned in kilns that create cement or in power plants. But their energy content is weak and uneven and the burning fiberglass emits pollutants.

In a pilot project last year, Veolia tried grinding them to dust, looking for chemicals to extract. “We came up with some crazy ideas,” Cappadona said. “We want to make it a sustainable business. There’s a lot of interest in this.”
One start-up, Global Fiberglass Solutions, developed a method to break down blades and press them into pellets and fiber boards to be used for flooring and walls. The company started producing samples at a plant in Sweetwater, Texas, near the continent’s largest concentration of wind farms. It plans another operation in Iowa.

“We can process 99.9% of a blade and handle about 6,000 to 7,000 blades a year per plant,” said Chief Executive Officer Don Lilly. The company has accumulated an inventory of about one year’s worth of blades ready to be chopped up and recycled as demand increases, he said. “When we start to sell to more builders, we can take in a lot more of them. We’re just gearing up.”

Until then, municipal and commercial dumps will take most of the waste, which the American Wind Energy Association in Washington says is safest and cheapest.
“Wind turbine blades at the end of their operational life are landfill-safe, unlike the waste from some other energy sources, and represent a small fraction of overall U.S. municipal solid waste,” according to an emailed statement from the group. It pointed to an Electric Power Research Institute study that estimates all blade waste through 2050 would equal roughly .015% of all the municipal solid waste going to landfills in 2015 alone.

In Iowa, Waste Management Inc. “worked closely with renewable energy companies to come up with a solution for wind mill blade processing, recycling and disposal,” said Julie Ketchum, a spokeswoman. It disposes all the blades it receives, with as many as 10 trucks per day hauling them to the company’s Lake Mills landfill.

Back in Wyoming, in the shadow of a snow-capped mountain, lies Casper, where wind farms represent both the possibilities and pitfalls of the shift from fossil fuels. The boom-bust oil town was founded at the turn of the 19th century. On the south side, bars that double as liquor stores welcome cigarette smokers and day drinkers. Up a gentle northern slope, a shooting club boasts of cowboy-action pistol ranges. Down the road, the sprawling landfill bustles and a dozen wind turbines spin gently on the horizon. They tower over pumpjacks known as nodding donkeys that pull oil from wells.

“People around here don’t like change,” said Morgan Morsett, a bartender at Frosty’s Bar & Grill. “They see these wind turbines as something that’s hurting coal and oil.”
But the city gets $675,000 to house turbine blades indefinitely, which can help pay for playground improvements and other services. Landfill manager Cynthia Langston said the blades are much cleaner to store than discarded oil equipment and Casper is happy to take the thousand blades from three in-state wind farms owned by Berkshire Hathaway Inc.’s PacifiCorp. Warren Buffett’s utility has been replacing the original blades and turbines with larger, more powerful models after a decade of operation.
While acknowledging that burying blades in perpetuity isn’t ideal, Bratvold, the special waste technician, was surprised by some of the negative reactions when a photo of some early deliveries went viral last summer. On social media, posters derided the inability to recycle something advertised as good for the planet, and offered suggestions of reusing them as links in a border wall or roofing for a homeless shelter.

“The backlash was instant and uninformed,” Bratvold said. “Critics said they thought wind turbines were supposed to be good for the environment and how can it be sustainable if it ends up in a landfill?”

“I think we’re doing the right thing.”
In the meantime, Bratvold and his co-workers have set aside about a half dozen blades and in coming months, they’ll experiment with methods to squeeze them into smaller footprints. They’ve tried bunkers, berms and even crushing them with the bulldozer, but the tracks kept slipping off the smooth blades. There’s little time to waste. Spring is coming, and when it does, the inexorable march of blades will resume.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-02-05/wind-turbine-blades-can-t-be-recycled-so-they-re-piling-up-in-landfills?fbclid=IwAR2XuPvgukJVNpKEGRPQHxajfjVituhZ1DJ4S2UigOhiF5FyZe0n-3LTmZ8












President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 24159
  • Liked:
Southern CEO: Early start-up of Vogtle units possible
« Reply #50 on: February 24, 2020, 03:20:39 PM »
Southern Company remains confident of meeting the regulatory-approved in-service date of November 2021 for unit 3 of the Vogtle nuclear power plant in Georgia, CEO Tom Fanning said during a presentation of its 2019 results. He noted the AP1000 unit could even be brought online as early as May next year, with unit 4 following a year later.

Construction of unit 3 began in March 2013 and unit 4 in November the same year. Southern Nuclear and Georgia Power, both subsidiaries of Southern Company, took over management of the construction project in 2017 following Westinghouse's Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Vogtle 3 is scheduled to enter service by November 2021 and unit 4 by November 2022. Major systems testing began in November at Vogtle 3 in preparation for cold hydro testing and hot functional testing later this year. The unit's licensee, Southern Nuclear Operating Company, has informed the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) it plans to begin initial fuel loading on 23 November.
"In April 2019, we laid out an aggressive site work plan as a tool to achieve margin to meet the November 2021 and 2022 regulatory approved in-service dates," Fanning said. "Executing this strategy resulted in substantial progress at the site and we reached all major milestones in 2019."
Open vessel testing began at unit 3 in November, while the main control room was ready for testing in December. The total project is now 84% complete, he said, with direct construction of unit 3 now 85% complete and that of unit 4 is 63% complete. The aggressive site work plan established in April 2019 set a goal of approaching 90% completion of unit 3 direct construction by year-end.
Southern earlier this month completed a schedule refinement for Vogtle 3 and 4. This, Fanning said, had reached three major conclusions. "First, we confirmed our expected ability to achieve the November 2021 and 2022 in-service dates. Second, we supported the site strategy to continue to utilise an aggressive site work plan with no change to the May 2021 target in-service date for unit 3 and a two-month advancement of the target in-service date of unit 4 to March 2022. And third, we confirmed no change in the projected overall capital costs forecast.
"Under the refined aggressive site work plan, we have extended by about six weeks two of our near-term milestones for unit 3: starting cold hydro testing and hot functional testing. By extending these milestones, refining testing sequences between hot functional testing and fuel-load and planning to complete non-critical electrical work later in the schedule, we now have more time to complete construction and work down the current backlog of construction hours. With these changes the aggressive site work plan continues to target a unit 3 fuel load by the end of this year supporting a May 2021 in-service date."
Southern has also established a November benchmark that forecasts construction production levels and future milestone dates necessary to support the regulatory approved in-service date for unit 3 of November 2021.
"This benchmark provides a clear comparison to the refined aggressive site work plan," Fanning said. "On the November benchmark, fuel-load could occur as late as the summer of 2021 in support of a November 2021 in-service date. The November benchmark also supports our expectation that the aggressive site work plan is an appropriate strategy and provides sufficient flexibility to achieve the November 2021 regulatory approved in-service date."
The estimated cost of completing the Vogtle 3 and 4 project is USD2.5 billion, he said, adding  however there is no change to expected total cost.
Researched and written by World Nuclear News

President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 24159
  • Liked:
UAE’s First Reactor Gets Go-Ahead
« Reply #51 on: February 25, 2020, 08:49:39 AM »
Gets Go-Ahead
 



The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is set to begin commercial operation of the Middle East’s first nuclear power plant, after the country’s regulatory agency on Feb. 17 gave its approval for the start-up of the first reactor at the Barakah site. The plant can now begin loading fuel, and Unit 1 is expected to come online by year-end.
Finished Plant Will Include Four Reactors
The Barakah nuclear plant, located about 150 miles east of the capital Abu Dhabi on a strip of desert along the Persian Gulf, is a 5,600-MW generation capacity development featuring four APR-1400 reactors. It is being built and run by a venture led by Korea Electric Power Corp. (KEPCO). Construction of the plant, with an original budget of $20 billion, began in 2012. Barakah originally was scheduled to begin fuel loading in August 2017, but construction delays, including “adverse findings” from the country’s Federal Authority for Nuclear Regulation (FANR), have pushed back the start date, despite the first reactor being completed in 2018. Analysts estimate the finished cost of the plant will be between $25 billion and $30 billion.
“Barakah was meant to be the showcase for the international nuclear industry,” Mycle Schneider, an independent analyst, told Bloomberg. “Grid connection is at least three years late, and there is no doubt that it is way over budget.”
The UAE hopes to have all four reactors at the site operating by 2023. The nuclear plant once fully commissioned will represent about 20% of the nation’s installed generating capacity.
Region Poised for Nuclear Development
Other nations in the Middle East, including Egypt and Saudi Arabia, are looking at nuclear power. Iraq had a research reactor that was destroyed by an Israeli air strike in 1981. Iran, not considered an Arab state, has operated the Bushehr nuclear plant since 2011—36 years after construction began at the site, with years of delay caused by the 1979 Islamic revolution, and repeated bombings of the site during the eight-year Iran-Iraq war that began in 1980. A second unit at Bushehr is now under construction as part of a partnership with Russia.
The UAE wants to diversify its energy industry. The country, the third-largest producer in the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC), has long depended on its domestic production of oil and natural gas, with gas powering nearly all of the country’s electricity generation. Dubai, the business center of the UAE, located about 90 miles northwest of Abu Dhabi on the Persian Gulf, has established a target of receiving 75% of its power supply from solar energy and other renewables by 2050.
Nawah Energy Co., the Abu Dhabi-based joint venture between KEPCO and the state-run Emirates Nuclear Energy Corp. (ENEC) that will operate the Barakah reactors, “can fulfill all the safety requirements of the UAE,” said Christer Viktorsson, head of the FANR, at a news conference Monday in Abu Dhabi. Nawah officials said a government-sponsored training program has produced 380 Emirati nuclear experts. The company said about 60% of the staff members at ENEC are citizens of the UAE.

https://www.powermag.com/uaes-first-reactor-gets-go-ahead/
President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

Cincydawg

  • Ombudsman for the Secret Order of the Odd Fellows
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 37401
  • Liked:
Re: Electricity Update Pt 9
« Reply #52 on: February 25, 2020, 12:36:19 PM »
This article strikes me as probably too much of a cheerleading effort, but it does contain some interesting data I think.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/natural-gas-is-crushing-wind-and-solar-power-why-isnt-anyone-talking-about-it

I'd also like to see some figures on cost of amortized wind power versus NG these days.  I have not found an analysis that does not strike me as biased.  

HK_Vol

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 23984
  • Liked:

DunkingDan

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 24159
  • Liked:
US Defense Department invites comment on microreactor
« Reply #54 on: March 03, 2020, 06:59:44 PM »
The US Department of Defense (DoD) is seeking public comment on a proposal to construct and demonstrate a prototype advanced mobile nuclear microreactor to support its domestic and operational energy demands. This is expected to be a small advanced gas reactor using high-assay low enriched uranium tristructural isotropic (TRISO) fuel and air cooling.

The DoD issued a Request for Information in January last year to identify concepts for a "small mobile reactor" design to address electrical power needs in rapid response scenarios. In a notice published yesterday in the Federal Register, it said it intends to prepare, in partnership with the US Department of Energy, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the prototype reactor. The DoD's proposed action includes construction of the prototype microreactor and demonstration activities, as well as the planned disposition of the reactor following operation.
"DoD installations need the capability to reduce their present reliance on local electric grids, which are highly vulnerable to prolonged outages from a variety of threats, placing critical missions at unacceptably high risk of extended disruption," it said in the Federal Regiser. "Backup power is often based on diesel generators that have limited on-site fuel storage, are undersized for new homeland defence missions, are not prioritised to critical loads, and are inadequate in duration and reliability. Advanced nuclear power is capable of meeting the DoD's need to increase energy security and resilience, but must demonstrate its technical and safety specifications at full size and power."
The microreactor must keep radiation exposure during power operation, abnormal operations, or "upset conditions", as low as reasonably achievable, DoD said, and minimise consequences to the nearby environment and population "in case of kinetic or non-kinetic action affecting structural integrity or release of contamination". It must also utilise materials that, if damaged, "do not generate and impose excessive training and equipping burdens on forward area first responders, site medical facilities, or supported military personnel and the civilian population".
Two locations are needed for the prototype construction and demonstration: one would be inside an existing structure, and the second would be outdoors. The DoD Strategic Capabilities Office (SCO) has identified Idaho National Laboratory and Oak Ridge National Laboratory as potential locations.
The public has until 1 April to comment on the scope of the EIS. After considering all comments received during scoping, SCO will prepare a draft EIS for the construction and demonstration of the prototype microreactor which it expects will be available for public review and comment in 2021.
Researched and written by World Nuclear News

President Harry S. Truman said: “The fundamental basis of this nation’s laws was given to Moses on the Mount.  The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings…  If we don't have the proper fundamental moral background, we will finally wind up with a totalitarian government which does not believe in rights for anybody except the state.”

HK_Vol

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 23984
  • Liked:
Re: Electricity Update Pt 9
« Reply #55 on: March 04, 2020, 04:27:04 AM »
Just for you Dan.....

29 minute interview....

https://www.arcenergyinstitute.com/small-and-modular-a-new-era-for-nuclear-reactors/

So you think nuclear power plants are big concrete monoliths? Not so, says Norman JD Sawyer the President and CEO of ARC Nuclear Canada. His company is among a new generation developing small, modular nuclear reactors. Norm explains why, compared to the big reactors in operation today, his technology overcomes many of the issues. For example, smaller reactors are safer and have much less waste. A modular design helps keep costs down too. The company’s first commercial project is expected to be in operation by 2028 in New Brunswick, Canada.


 

Support the Site!