Question:
Some of you say that nukes will supply ‘more’ power than Renewable sources will. need THAT much power. Renewable energy sources can provide all the power that humanity needs,Solar Panel Inverter design and when enough renewable energy collectors are built to supply all of that power we will simply not need Nuclear Energy anymore. I went looking around and I found a wonderful site that has a lot of good information about PV. You have probably heard of this organization before it is called: THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY!!! **background trumpets** You can find their PV division here: http://www.eren.doe.gov/pv/ I READ THROUGH ALMOST THEIR ENTIRE PV DIVISION AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO ALSO. these are a few highlights I found there: Each second, the sun releases an enormous amount of radiant energy into the solar system. The Earth receives a tiny fraction of this energy; still, an average of 1367 watts (W) reaches each square meter (m2) of the outer edge of the Earth’s atmosphere. The atmosphere absorbs and reflects some of this radiation, including most X-rays and ultraviolet rays. Still, the amount of sunshine energy that hits the surface of the Earth every minute is greater than the total amount of energy that the world’s human population consumes in a year! PV modules covering 0.3% of the land in the United States, one-fourth the land occupied by roadways, could supply all the electricity consumed here.Solar Panel Inverter design The combined efforts of industry and the Department of Energy have reduced PV system costs by more than 300% since 1982. The PV market is estimated to be growing at 20% per year today. The number of U.S. companies producing PV panels has doubled since the late 1970s to about 20 today. *(Research projections from the DoE predict a further 10 fold decrease in PV costs in the next 25 years (It was on their site))* The cost of larger PV systems (greater than 1 kW) is measured in “levelized” costs per kWh–the costs are spread out over the system lifetime and divided by kWh output. The levelized cost is now about $0.25 to $0.50/kWh. At this price, PV is cost effective for residential customers located farther than a quarter of a mile from the nearest utility line. Reliability and lifetime are steadily improving; PV manufacturers guarantee their products for up to 20 years. OFFICIAL NAME: United States of America CAPITAL: Washington DC SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT: Federal Multiparty Republic AREA: 9,372,608 Sq Km (3,618,784 Sq Mi) *(0.3%=28117.824sq mi would equal a space 167.683-mi by 167.683-mi OR less then 3.5sq mi per state.)* ESTIMATED 2000 POPULATION: 271,290,000 The conversion efficiency of a PV cell is the proportion of sunlight energy that the cell converts to electrical energy. This is very important when discussing PV devices, because improving this efficiency is vital to making PV energy competitive with more traditional sources of energy (e.g., fossil fuels). Naturally, if one efficient solar panel can provide as much energy as two less-efficient panels, then the cost of that energy (not to mention the space required) will be reduced. For comparison, the earliest PV devices converted about 1%-2% of sunlight energy into electric energy. Today’s PV devices convert 7%-17% of light energy into electric energy. *(This means “”WHEN”" efficiency levels reach 20-35% the us will need only 0.15% surface area to power the entire US)* Most importantly, many renewable energy sources, such as wind power and solar thermal, are already cheaper than conventional fuels– even though the price of fossil fuels and nuclear power does not reflect their full environmental and economic costs. Many of these renewable energy options can be designed, built, and exploited locally and at less costs than conventional systems. They contribute significantly to national economies because they exploit indigenous labour and materials. In Kenya more rural households obtain their electricity from solar energy than from the official policy of grid extension. The European Commission’s ‘Power for the World Program’ (a global photo voltaic action plan) estimates that providing solar electricity to a billion people in the developing world would cost $60 billion ($3 billion a year for 20 years). This is only 3% of annual energy investments in developing countries and less than 0.5% of current military expenditure. **(This says “”DEVELOPING”" countries annual energy investments. That means it would equal even less than that % for developed countries. Let me do a little math here: if $60 billion=1 billion people when 6 billion people would mean 6*60=$360 billion. Round it up to $400 to be sure. This means $20 billion a year for 20 years and the entire worlds population can be living off of Solar power, and believe me $20 billion is chump change to the ENTIRE world’s economic markets)** http://www.nrel.gov/ncpv/powerout.html http://www.nrel.gov/ncpv/spectrocell.html http://www.eren.doe.gov/pv/ Building Opportunities in the United States for Photovoltaics. Buildings use about two-thirds of the electricity generated in the United States. There is also a great deal of space on the roofs and walls of these buildings that could support PV generation capacity. According to one study, between 270 and 320 megawatts of PV would be cost-effective on buildings at a system cost of $3000 per kilowatt. Incorporating PV into buildings at the design and construction stage lowers costs and increases the value of the electricity generated. Although BOS components (such as inverters, batteries, support structures, junction boxes, and control systems) represent just half the cost of PV systems, they are responsible for as much as 99% of system failure and repair problems. The goal here is to increase the efficiency of these components, increase their reliability through optimized designs, and reduce their costs through mass production. Solar Panel Inverter design
Response:
Renweables except hydro can only provide a maximum of 6% of the gloabl power load, hydro could give us another 5% at best. You are not going to be able to save enough power to get by using only those power sources,Solar Panel Inverter design what about all those people in the third world, do you think they will be content to live like they are forever becasuse we want to save power? Do you think that a person who can only just live would be offended by you saying that they will have to do with less? Do you think those yet to be born would like to grow up in a world where they can only use their computer 15 minutes per day and can’t have an conditioner in a hot climate just to save power? People wont stand for it and most people would rather build nuclear plants then try to save power. Solar Panel Inverter design
Response:
Are you for real? Third world is going solar. BP is supplying 40,000 panels to the Philippines alone. Lets get closer to home (my home) My power use is currently 600-700 Watt hours per day. I don’t go without but I certainly do with less… PSolar Panel Inverter design Renweables except hydro can only provide a maximum of 6% of the gloabl power load, hydro could give us another 5% at best. You are not going to be able to save enough power to get by using only those power sources, what about all those people in the third world, do you think they will be content to live like they are forever becasuse we want to save power? Do you think that a person who can only just live would be offended by you saying that they will have to do with less? Do you think those yet to be born would like to grow up in a world where they can only use their computer 15 minutes per day and can’t have an conditioner in a hot climate just to save power?Solar Panel Inverter design People wont stand for it and most people would rather build nuclear plants then try to save power.
Response:
You are kinda narrowing your vision of renewable energy there, my friend.Solar Panel Inverter design You are not counting all renewable energy. Renewable energy is based on solar input which is way more than we need if totalled. We, of course, can harvest only a fraction of all the solar energy entering the planetary system, but we can harvest more than wind and PV. There are other ways of harvesting this power,Solar Panel Inverter design like Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC), which uses the heat stored in the surface water of the oceans to generate steam like any other steam plant. (Except that it would be less than atmospheric pressure inside the system.) More energy is absorbed by the oceans of the world than we could use. Our current means of harvesting this energy is rather inefficient, but the world has yet to start working on this problem. There has been some initial research, (Like the NELHA site on the big island of Hawaii, which is quite sucessful for other reasons than power.) but with a little more investment, the technologies could improve the efficiencies greatly. Check out: www.weeei.com . When you have a collector the size of the ocean, you have quite a bit of solar power. We already have a nuclear reactor, the sun.Solar Panel Inverter design Renweables except hydro can only provide a maximum of 6% of the gloabl power load, hydro could give us another 5% at best. You are not going to be able to save enough power to get by using only those power sources, what about all those people in the third world, do you think they will be content to live like they are forever becasuse we want to save power? Do you think that a person who can only just live would be offended by you saying that they will have to do with less? Do you think those yet to be born would like to grow up in a world where they can only use their computer 15 minutes per day and can’t have an conditioner in a hot climate just to save power? People wont stand for it and most people would rather build nuclear plants then try to save power.
Response:
Need is one thing, I want, I want, I want is another.Solar Panel Inverter design but you are telling those that need more power to cut down on their power usage. Are you for real? Third world is going solar. BP is supplying 40,000 panels to the Philippines alone. Lets get closer to home (my home) My power use is currently 600-700 Watt hours per day. I don’t go without but I certainly do with less… Power that is. Stop hogging power George Renweables except hydro can only provide a maximum of 6% of the gloabl power load, hydro could give us another 5% at best. You are not going to be able to save enough power to get by using only those power sources, what about all those people in the third world, do you think they will be content to live like they are forever becasuse we want to save power? Do you think that a person who can only just live would be offended by you saying that they will have to do with less? Do you think those yet to be born would like to grow up in a world where they can only use their computer 15 minutes per day and can’t have an conditioner in a hot climate just to save power? People wont stand for it and most people would rather build nuclear plants then try to save power.
Response:
Renweables except hydro can only provide a maximum of 6% of the gloabl power load, hydro could give us another 5% at best.
Wind from the mid-west could supply the whole US of A.Solar Panel Inverter design Add a little solar for air conditioning peaks and no more nucs. You are not going to be able to save enough power to get by using only those power sources, what about all those people in the third world, do you think they will be content to live like they are forever becasuse we want to save power?
Wind will drive down the cost of generation and distribution. Do you think that a person who can only just live would be offended by you saying that they will have to do with less?
Wind will allow them to do more because the energy will ultimately be cheaper than nuclear. Do you think those yet to be born would like to grow up in a world where they can only use their computer 15 minutes per day and can’t have an conditioner in a hot climate just to save power? Solar Panel Inverter design
Computer power could be reduced 1,000 X with better designed hardware and software. Solar calls will support the air conditiioner nicely. People wont stand for it and most people would rather build nuclear plants then try to save power.
No need to do either. M. Simon Space-Time Productions http://www.spacetimepro.com Free CNC Machine Control Software Free Source Code Control the World From a Parallel Port
Response:
You are kinda narrowing your vision of renewable energy there, my friend. You are not counting all renewable energy. Renewable energy is based on solar input which is way more than we need if totalled. We, of course, can harvest only a fraction of all the solar energy entering the planetary system, but we can harvest more than wind and PV. There are other ways of harvesting this power, like Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC), which uses the heat stored in the surface water of the oceans to generate steam like any other steam plant. (Except that it would be less than atmospheric pressure inside the system.)
OTEC is not a high gain system. And so far only suited to special locations. More energy is absorbed by the oceans of the world than we could use. Our current means of harvesting this energy is rather inefficient, but the world has yet to start working on this problem. There has been some initial research, (Like the NELHA site on the big island of Hawaii, which is quite sucessful for other reasons than power.) but with a little more investment, the technologies could improve the efficiencies greatly. Solar Panel Inverter design
The problem is low delta T. We already have a nuclear reactor, the sun. Now all we have to do is use the power it puts out.
Wind is growing at 50% a year. Solar at 20%. Wind currently has 14,000 MW installed. Solar a few hundred MW at most. Wind will be providing most of our renewable energy for quite some time.
Are you for real? Third world is going solar. BP is supplying 40,000 panels to the Philippines alone. Lets get closer to home (my home) My power use is currently 600-700 Watt hours per day. Solar Panel Inverter design We, of course, can harvest only a fraction of all the solar energy entering the planetary system, but we can harvest more than wind and PV. There are other ways of harvesting this power, like Ocean Thermal Energy Conversion (OTEC), which uses the heat stored in the surface water of the oceans to generate steam like any other steam plant. (Except that it would be less than atmospheric pressure inside the system.) More energy is absorbed by the oceans of the world than we could use. Our current means of harvesting this energy is rather inefficient, but the world has yet to start working on this problem. There has been some initial research, (Like the NELHA site on the big island of Hawaii, which is quite sucessful for other reasons than power.) but with a little more investment, the technologies could improve the efficiencies greatly. Check out: www.weeei.com . When you have a collector the size of the ocean, you have quite a bit of solar power. We already have a nuclear reactor, the sun. Now all we have to do is use the power it puts out. -=db=- Renweables except hydro can only provide a maximum of 6% of the gloabl power load, hydro could give us another 5% at best. You are not going to be able to save enough power to get by using only those power sources, what about all those people in the third world, do you think they will be content to live like they are forever becasuse we want to save power? Do you think that a person who can only just live would be offended by you saying that they will have to do with less? Do you think those yet to be born would like to grow up in a world where they can only use their computer 15 minutes per day and can’t have an conditioner in a hot climate just to save power? People wont stand for it and most people would rather build nuclear plants then try to save power.
Response:
No, but you are telling those that need more power to cut down on their power usage. -Solar Panel Inverter design. I don’t go without but I certainly do with less… Power that is. Stop hogging power George Renweables except hydro can only provide a maximum of 6% of the gloabl power load, hydro could give us another 5% at best. You are not going to be able to save enough power to get by using only those power sources, what about all those people in the third world, do you think they will be content to live like they are forever becasuse we want to save power? Do you think that a person who can only just live would be offended by you saying that they will have to do with less? Do you think those yet to be born would like to grow up in a world where they can only use their computer 15 minutes per day and can’t have an conditioner in a hot climate just to save power? People wont stand for it and most people would rather build nuclear plants then try to save power.
Response:
Yes it is. But did you know that higher power consumption goes together with high life expectancies. I would rather build a basement reactor then live 10 years less then I would with that reactor becasue some useless piece of shit decides that we must rely on renewables alone, when I claim that nuclear is a renewable and prove it they say that it isn’t small and therefore not renewable. When I claim that size has nothing to do with whether it can be renewed they just say that if it will meltdown it can’t be renewable, I point out that safety has nothing to do with that and also that nuclear is safer but then they just claim I own stock in nuclear reactor companies when I don’t. Some of the above is hypothetical, it hasn’t happened yet. Solar Panel Inverter design You are not going to be able to save enough power to get by using only those power sources, what about all those people in the third world, do you think they will be content to live like they are forever becasuse we want to save power? Wind will drive down the cost of generation and distribution.
It will never reach the cost of coal or nuclear Do you think that a person who can only just live would be offended by you saying that they will have to do with less? Wind will allow them to do more because the energy will ultimately be cheaper than nuclear.
No it wont. Do you think those yet to be born would like to grow up in a world where they can only use their computer 15 minutes per day and can’t have an conditioner in a hot climate just to save power? Computer power could be reduced 1,000 X with better designed hardware and software.
1000 times, I don’t think so,Solar Panel Inverter design 10 would be about the best we could do, look how much trouble they go to with laptops, and they only get 3 hours off their battery. Solar calls will support the air conditiioner nicely.
Air conditioners require a large amount of power, I doubt solar could give it. People wont stand for it and most people would rather build nuclear plants then try to save power. No need to do either.
Yes there is a need, you wont be able to save power, and you are too optimistic about wind.
Response:
Need more power? Like a junkie needs more drugs,eh. Yes you may use more power than me and there is no real problem with that. But the choices you make about the products you use and their power consumption is pure choice and you are not required to one appliance over another. I do not ask that you go without just that you make a choice that is more in tune with energy conservation. In other words don’t be a power junkie. GSolar Panel Inverter design we could only hope to feed 5 billion people properly and bring them up to our standard of living if we increase power production. If we can get the power without damaging the environment (nuclear) and can get all we need (nuclear does this also) then I don’t see why we shouldn’t use it, the true art of conservation is using easy to access abundant resourses like Uranium to save less abundant resourses, it isn’t to cut down on everything we can regardless of whether it is abundant or not. -Solar Panel Inverter design. Need more power? Like a junkie needs more drugs,eh. Yes you may use more power than me and there is no real problem with that. But the choices you make about the products you use and their power consumption is pure choice and you are not required to one appliance over another. I do not ask that you go without just that you make a choice that is more in tune with energy conservation. In other words don’t be a power junkiSolar Panel Inverter designe.
Response:
Wind currently has 14,000 MW installed. Solar a few hundred MW at most. Wind will be providing most of our renewable energy for quite some time. And that is _pitiful_, considering what a minute fraction 14,000MW is compared to total energy needs.
Quite true. But about 7,000 MW of wind will be added this year. How many nucs were built this year? Next year we will get about 10,000 MW of wind. 15,000 in 2002. etc Is the nuc building rate climbing at 50% a year? M. Simon Space-Time Productions Solar Panel Inverter design
Response:
But our civiliasation can’t survive without power, we could only hope to feed 5 billion people properly and bring them up to our standard of living if we increase power production. If we can get the power without damaging the environment (nuclear) But nuclear power can and has damaged the environment…
And so has the harvesting/mining/manufacturing of materials to be consumed/used by mankind has damaged the environment…Even renewable energy devices require damaging the environment (to some degree). Just having mankind exist on earth has caused an enviromental impact on Mother Earth…. As the human race population increase, there is even more of a damaging impact on the environment… Just having 5 billion people breath in/out damages the environment… The only way NOT to damage the environment is to remove mankind from earth… Anything else is a compromise.
Response:
-Solar Panel Inverter design Wind currently has 14,000 MW installed. Solar a few hundred MW at most. Wind will be providing most of our renewable energy for quite some time. And that is _pitiful_, considering what a minute fraction 14,000MW is compared to total energy needs. Quite true. But about 7,000 MW of wind will be added this year. How many nucs were built this year? Next year we will get about 10,000 MW of wind. 15,000 in 2002. etc Is the nuc building rate climbing at 50% a year?
Can you sustain 50% growth? Next period, can you get to 22,500? Next year get to 33,xxx? and so forth? What is your (wind) percent contribution of the energy pie? Pretty small the last I saw.
Response:
But our civiliasation can’t survive without power, we could only hope to feed 5 billion people properly and bring them up to our standard of living if we increase power production. If we can get the power without damaging the environment (nuclear) Chenoble
Chernobyl – yes – a poorly designed, unstable reactor and a poorly planned experiment that wasn’t executed to plan did release a large amount of radioactivity – but no one is advocating more of this type of reactor. Three Mile Island
The releases at TMI were small. The containment building at TMI served to bottle up that accident. When access by personnel was required to certain areas of the plant – those areas were vented to the atmosphere in order to lessen radiation dose of the workers. However, the releases were controlled and within the limits the plant can release. Mother Nature releases more radioactivity to the environment – tritium and other radioisotopes for example – than did TMI. So while it is not desirable to release anything, the releases that did occur did not damage the environment to a significant extent. In India it is against the law to own a Giger Counter
What’s their reasoning for this? In California they built a reactor on top of a fault
Not quite true – the Hosgri Fault line is off-shore of where the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant is located. The plant has been designed to withstand the maximum earthquake that could happen on the fault – and then some. Solar Panel Inverter design But our civiliasation can’t survive without power, we could only hope to feed 5 billion people properly and bring them up to our standard of living if we increas e power production. If we can get the power without damaging the environment (nuclear) Chenoble Chernobyl – yes – a poorly designed, unstable reactor and a poorly planned experiment that wasn’t executed to plan did release a large amount of radioactivity – but no one is advocating more of this type of reactor. And the one next door, the ones in India, the new ones being built in the third world….
India uses Candus and Candu clones, not Russian RBMKs. Solar Panel Inverter design. In India it is against the law to own a Giger Counter What’s their reasoning for this? Their reactors are not clean, but then people are expendable
What is the wording of the law against owning giger counters in India? Parts of India are more radioactive naturally than much of the evacuated zone around Chernobyl. In California they built a reactor on top of a fault Not quite true – the Hosgri Fault line is off-shore of where the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant is located. The plant has been designed to withstand the maximum earthquake that could happen on the fault – and then some. So were the buildings in Alaska, the bridges in LA…
Safety systems in bridges tend not to be negatively reactive. This isn’t the same reactor where the buttress walls were erected facing the wrong way is it? An accident with a reactor has the potential to destroy life and environment over a very large area,
The Chernobyl accident was about as bad as a nuclear accident could get. Small scale loss of life and a large area kept evacuated for political reasons. second guessing mother nature is a game that man has played and LOST since we first thought. Years ago I thought that Nuclear was the best thing ever. Almost unlimited power. What it realy is is a growing amount of radioactive waste, poorly designed and run installations, and weapons of mass destruction.
They make weapons grade fissile materials with uranium centrifuges and weapons grade plutonium production reactors. Basically the biggest problem is MAN driven by greed and a lust for power. Nuclear Power is a toy that mankind is not mature enough, at this time, to play with.
So, if that’s true (not saying it is or isn’t), and if it’s true that wind energy is cheaper than nuclear (not saying it is or isn’t), then mankind isn’t mature enough for even cheaper power like wind then. Nuclear Power in itself is not the problem. George
– Karl Johanson, Victoria B.C. Canada -It’s okay to disagree with me. However, once I explain where you’re wrong you’re supposed to become enlightened & change your mind. Congratulating me on how smart I am is optional.
Response:
Solar Panel Inverter design But our civiliasation can’t survive without power, we could only hope to feed 5 billion people properly and bring them up to our standard of living if we increase power production. If we can get the power without damaging the environment (nuclear) Chenoble Chernobyl – yes – a poorly designed, unstable reactor and a poorly planned experiment that wasn’t executed to plan did release a large amount of radioactivity – but no one is advocating more of this type of reactor.
And the one next door, the ones in India, the new ones being built in the third world…. Three Mile Island The releases at TMI were small. The containment building at TMI served to bottle up that accident. When access by personnel was required to certain areas of the plant – those areas were vented to the atmosphere in order to lessen radiation dose of the workers.
I notice that the key word here is lessen and not prevent However, the releases were controlled and within the limits the plant can release. Mother Nature releases more radioactivity to the environment – tritium and other radioisotopes for example – than did TMI.
Yes just not all in one place So while it is not desirable to release anything, the releases that did occur did not damage the environment to a significant extent. In India it is against the law to own a Giger Counter What’s their reasoning for this?
Their reactors are not clean, but then people are expendable In California they built a reactor on top of a fault Not quite true – the Hosgri Fault line is off-shore of where the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant is located. The plant has been designed to withstand the maximum earthquake that could happen on the fault – and then some.
So were the buildings in Alaska, the bridges in LA… This isn’t the same reactor where the buttress walls were erected facing the wrong way is it? An accident with a reactor has the potential to destroy life and environment over a very large area, second guessing mother nature is a game that man has played and LOST since we first thought. Years ago I thought that Nuclear was the best thing ever. Almost unlimited power. What it realy is is a growing amount of radioactive waste, poorly designed and run installations, and weapons of mass destruction. Basically the biggest problem is MAN driven by greed and a lust for power. Nuclear Power is a toy that mankind is not mature enough, at this time, to play with. Nuclear Power in itself is not the problem.Solar Panel Inverter design But our civiliasation can’t survive without power, we could only hope to feed 5 billion people properly and bring them up to our standard of living if we increase power production. If we can get the power without damaging the environment (nuclear) Chenoble Chernobyl – yes – a poorly designed, unstable reactor and a poorly planned experiment that wasn’t executed to plan did release a large amount of radioactivity – but no one is advocating more of this type of reactor. And the one next door, the ones in India, the new ones being built in the third world….
The Russians are in the process of shutting down the RBMK reactors like Chernobyl – but they do need alternate sources to replace the power before they shutdown the RBMKs. I don’t believe anyone is building any new RBMK reactors. Three Mile Island The releases at TMI were small. The containment building at TMI served to bottle up that accident. When access by personnel was required to certain areas of the plant – those areas were vented to the atmosphere in order to lessen radiation dose of the workers. I notice that the key word here is lessen and not prevent
Yes – I’m being accurate and honest. The radiation exposure to the workers was not zero. However, radiation workers do get exposed to radiation as part of their jobs. There are other people who get exposed to radiation as a part of their jobs – like airline pilots, or anyone who travels by airliner as part of their business. In fact, pilots and frequent flyers get more radiation than radiation workers in nuclear plants do. However, the releases were controlled and within the limits the plant can release. Mother Nature releases more radioactivity to the environment – tritium and other radioisotopes for example – than did TMI. Yes just not all in one place
The releases at TMI diffused very quickly to cover a large area – so in essence, you have what Mother Nature does – radioactivity spread over a large area – with the exception that Mother Nature spreads more radioactivity than TMI did. So while it is not desirable to release anything, the releases that did occur did not damage the environment to a significant extent. In India it is against the law to own a Giger Counter What’s their reasoning for this? Their reactors are not clean, but then people are expendable
You are saying that they won’t let the people have Geiger counters so they won’t know the reactors leak? I’m sure some neighboring country will detect the plume from a leaking reactor and the word will get out to the Indian people. In California they built a reactor on top of a fault Not quite true – the Hosgri Fault line is off-shore of where the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant is located. The plant has been designed to withstand the maximum earthquake that could happen on the fault – and then some. So were the buildings in Alaska, the bridges in LA…
Buildings in Alaska and bridges in L.A. are not designed to the same earthquake standards as nuclear power plants. This isn’t the same reactor where the buttress walls were erected facing the wrong way is it?
This is one of those urban myths told about Diablo Canyon by people who don’t understand what the concern really was. Let me explain what happened. Diablo Canyon has two reactors and associated equipment. The two reactors are built as mirror images of each other. If you have reactors that are mirror images – you don’t have to analyze both of them – you can analyze only one – and use symmetry. The laws of physics don’t care what we humans call north, and what we call south, for example. Therefore, you only need to analyze one of the two reactor units – in this case I believe it was Unit 2. You compute the response of Unit 2 for earthquakes coming from all directions. Now to get the response of Unit 1 from a certain direction, you mirror image the position of the earthquake epicenter in the symmetry plane – and then look at the response of Unit 2 to that earthquake. Since Unit 1 is the mirror image of Unit 2, Unit 1’s response to a given earthquake will be the same as Unit 1’s mirror image, i.e. Unit 2 – to an earthquake that is the mirror image of the Unit 1 earthquake. This scheme will work if the two reactor units are exact mirror images of each other. However, a PG+E engineer noted that the two units are not exact mirror images to each other – they are 99% of mirror images of each other. Therefore PG+E had to do a complete analysis for Unit 1 just as they did for Unit 2. However, this whole scenario is complex, and as the story was told and retold – it turned into stories, like they installed the safety systems all backward and they buttressed the wall backward, and such. You are merely repeating a nonsensical urban legend. Do you really think no one in the construction company would notice that a wall was buttressed the wrong way? An accident with a reactor has the potential to destroy life and environment over a very large area, second guessing mother nature is a game that man has played and LOST since we first thought.
We’ve been “playing this game” in the U.S. for over 40 years – and have not been losing to Mother Nature. No – scientists and engineers use Mother Nature and her laws to keep nuclear reactors safe. Yes – TMI was a bad accident that destroyed the reactor core, but due to good engineering and forethought – like providing a containment building, the consequences of the accident were bottled up by the containment building. Chernobyl didn’t have a containment building for the reactor, and we saw what happened. Years ago I thought that Nuclear was the best thing ever. Almost unlimited power. What it realy is is a growing amount of radioactive waste, poorly designed and run installations, and weapons of mass destruction.
Commercial nuclear power and nuclear weapons have absolutely nothing to do with each other. In the U.S., nuclear weapons are built at the behest of Congress and the President, by companies and Universities that are not affiliated with nuclear power. Utilities and nuclear reactor companies have no stake in nuclear weapons. Basically the biggest problem is MAN driven by greed and a lust for power. Nuclear Power is a toy that mankind is not mature enough, at this time, to play with. Nuclear Power in itself is not the problem.
Then MAN can’t do anything – you can’t trust man to build buildings that won’t fall down, airliners that won’t all fall out of the sky, ships that all don’t sink… Of course all this happens at a low level. We have had low level nuclear accidents. But if you are talking about a massive reactor accident in a well designed western power plant – the probability is so remote that you are better off worrying about ALL the airliners falling out of the sky at a given moment. Solar Panel Inverter design
Response:
Categories: Solar Panel Inverter | 
No Comments »
Hawaii is kinda obvious – some of their power is as high as 25 cents per kwh.