Skip navigation

Tag Archives: google.com

To understand why the Germany became the first develop country to take action and start shouting down the nuclear program they have, we have to take a look on the history of nuclear in Germany. We all know until 1989 there was two Germanys the east and the west.

West Germany:

The nuclear program start at 1950s, however the first reactor opened in 1960 in Kohl am Main and it was an experimental nuclear power station. All of the German nuclear power plants that opened between 1960 and 1970 had a power output of less than 1,000 MW and have now all closed down. The first commercial nuclear power plant started operating in 1969. Obrigheim, the first grid station, operated until 2005. (Neckarwestheim). A closed nuclear fuel cycle was planned, starting with mining processes in the Saarland and the Schwarzwald; uranium ore concentration, fuel rod filling production in Hanau; and reprocessing of the spent fuel in the never-built nuclear fuel reprocessing plant at Wackersdorf. The radioactive waste was intended to be stored in a deep geological repository, as part of the Gorleben long-term storage project.

East Germany:

The first nuclear power plant in East Germany was Rheinsberg Nuclear Power Plant and they shutdown in 1990. The second to be commissioned, the Greifswald Nuclear Power Plant, was planned to house eight of the Russian 440 MW VVER-440 reactors. The first four went online between 1973 and 1979. The other four were cancelled during different stages of their build-up. In 1990, during the German reunification, all nuclear power plants were closed due to the differences in safety standards. The Stendal Nuclear Power Plant, which was under construction at the time, was cancelled.

Also Germany had three accidents. The first was in 7/12/1975 the locution was Greifswald, East Germany. Electrical error causes fire in the main trough that destroys control lines and five main coolant pumps, almost inducing meltdown. The second was in 4/5/1986 in Hamm-Uentrop. Operator actions to dislodge damaged fuel rod at Experimental High Temperature Gas Reactor release excessive radiation to 4 km2 (1.5 sq mi) surrounding the facility. The third was in 17/12/1987 in Hesse. Stop valve fails at Biblis Nuclear Power Plant and contaminates local area.

In 8/3/2011 the Germany government shutdown 8 nuclear plant in plan to take the nuclear power aout of the picture completely in 2022.Befor they shut down the plants the nuclear power was accounted for 23% of national electricity consumption. The announcement of the plan  was first made by Norbert Röttgen, head of the Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety, after late-night talks.

 

 

Reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Germany

 

Advertisements

In 1957 the Korean decides to join International Atomic Energy Agency not because they like the nuclear power but because they do not have enough fossil fuel resources. And for all of you out there routing against nuclear power here an example of what can the nuclear power delver and the other source of power cannot. So in 1962 Korea’s first research reactor achieved criticality. Since 1978 nineteen reactors were bulled that’s make total of  four with CANDU and the other sixteen with PWR technology. The first Korean reactor was kori-1 and it was built almost entirely by foreign contractors. Since then the KSNP (Korean Standardized Nuclear Plant) had developed and from 1995 until now they use 95% of their owned technology in building new nuclear reactors. Also in 2010 they went international by   impressing the United Arab Emirates and made their first export order of four APR1400 reactors. Also they were the first country to open a nuclear safety school.

Image

Nuclear plants in South Korea

The total electrical generation capacity of the nuclear power plants of South Korea is 18.5 GWe from 21 reactors. This is 29.5% of South Korea’s total electrical generation capacity, but 45% of total electrical consumption. The South Korean nuclear power sector maintains capacity factors of over 95%. Despite the March 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident, South Korea remains a strong supporter of nuclear power. In October 2011, South Korea reconfirmed its position as a strong supporter of nuclear power with the hosting of a series of events to raise public awareness. The events were coordinated the Korea Nuclear Energy Promotion Agency (KONEPA) and included the participation of the French Atomic Forum (FAF); the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA); as well as public relations and information experts from countries that utilize or plan to utilize nuclear power.[1]

Reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_South_Korea

1. Korea, Junotane (October 22, 2011). “Korea reconfirms strong support for nuclear power”. Junotane. Retrieved 2011-10-22.

In March of 1986 the economist magazine celebrated “The Charm of Nuclear Power” on its cover. After one month time the Chernobyl accident happened. In whole Europe and the Western world’s nuclear power industry was despair, Along with the accident at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania in 1979, guided the industry into debility. The public got afraid. The regulatory environment tightened, hovering costs. Billions were expended bailing out lossmaking nuclear-power companies. The industry became a byword for mendacity, secrecy and profligacy with taxpayers’ money. For two decades neither governments nor bankers wanted to touch it. However nuclear power still holds some ground. It provides three-quarters of French electricity. Developing countries have continued to build nuclear plants apace.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now nuclear power has a second chance. Its recovery is most visible in America, where power companies are arranging to flood the Nuclear Regulatory Commission with applications to build new plants. But the tide seems to be rotating in other countries, too. Finland is building a reactor. The British government is preparing the way for new planning regulations. In Australia, which has plenty of uranium but no reactors, the prime minister, John Howard, says nuclear power is “inevitable”.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Everything is going nuclear way. Western governments are worried that most of the world’s oil and gas is in the hands of aggressive or unstable governments. Much of the nuclear industry’s raw material, uranium, by contrast, is conveniently located in welcoming places such as Australia and Canada. Simpler designs cut maintenance and repair costs. Shut-downs are now far less frequent, so that a typical station in America is now online 90% of the time, up from less than 50% in the 1970s. New “passive safety” features can shut a reactor down in an emergency without the need for human intervention. Handling waste may get easier. America plans to embrace a new approach in which the most radioactive portion of the waste from conventional nuclear power stations is isolated and burned in “fast” reactors.Technology has thus improved nuclear’s economics. So has the squeeze on fossil fuels. Nuclear power stations are hugely expensive to build but very cheap to run. Gas-fired power stations—the bulk of new build in the 1980s and 1990s—are the reverse. Since gas provides the extra power needed when demand rises, the gas price sets the electricity price. Costly gas has therefore made existing nuclear plants tremendously profitable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The latest boost to nuclear has come from climate change. Nuclear power offers the possibility of large quantities of baseload electricity that is cleaner than coal, more secure than gas and more reliable than wind. And if cars switch from oil to electricity, the demand for power generated from carbon-free sources will increase still further. The industry’s image is thus turning from black to green.Nuclear power’s moral makeover has divided its enemies. Some environmentalists retain their antipathy to it, but green gurus such as James Lovelock, Stewart Brand and Patrick Moore have changed their minds and embraced it. Public opinion, confused about how best to save the planet, seems to be coming round. A recent British poll showed 30% of the population against nuclear power, compared with 60% three years ago. An American poll in March this year showed 50% in favour of expanding nuclear power, up from 44% in 2001.

Reference:

http://www.economist.com/node/9767699/print?subjectid=821240&story_id=9767699

Relationship are complicated specially the politic kind. In the 1950’s Iranian nuclear program was lunched with the help of the United States as part of the Atoms for Peace program. That support runes in whole Europe countries. In 1979 that help and support disappear in thin air as of the Islamic revolution rolled over and take out the western dear friend the Shah of Iran. Since the 1979 revolution the Iranian government temporarily disbanded elements of the program, and then revived it with less Western assistance than during the pre-revolution era. Iran’s nuclear program has included several research sites, two uranium mines, a research reactor, and uranium processing facilities that include three known uranium enrichment plants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In 12/9/2011 with major assistance of Russian government agency RosAtom the Iranian government opened the first nuclear power plant Bushehr I reactor. Iran has announced that it is working on a new 360 MW nuclear power plant to be located in Darkhovin. Iran has also indicated that it will seek more medium-sized nuclear power plants and uranium mines in the future. In November 2011, the IAEA Board of Governors rebuked Iran following an IAEA report Iran had undertaken research and experiments geared to developing a nuclear weapons capability. Iran rejected the details of the report and accused the IAEA of pro-Western bias and threatened to reduce its cooperation with the IAEA.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

So that’s lefts us with a lot of the questions to ask, wither if the Shah of Iran still in the power position are we going to be  having this dissections. Who’s allowed to have nuclear program and who’s not.i was against the Iranian nuclear program. But when I discover that the program was set to start years and years before my birth, I changed my mind.

 

Reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran

A lot of counters are looking on nuclear power to be the solution for electricity consumption who it expected to double. Even thou many nuclear power plant are reaching the of their life span. However if you look to the whole picture you will see global warming unstable country’s that import oil and gas  and a lot of concern about the future of the world. That is all make the nuclear power the most depend source of power.

I have bad news for anti-nuclear power, 31 reactors are under construction and many more are in the planning stages. Also some countries, such as Turkey and Vietnam, are considering starting nuclear-power programmes, and others, including Argentina and South Africa, plan to expand their existing ones. Both China and India are building several reactors and intend to increase their nuclear-generating capacity several times over in the next 15 years.

In the western world US is expecting a rush of applications to build new reactors in the coming months—the first in almost 30 years. Britain’s Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, recently affirmed his support for a new generation of nuclear power plants. Construction of a new one in Finland, Western Europe’s first for 15 years, began in 2005; work is just starting on another of the same design in France. Other European countries that had frozen or decided to scrap their nuclear programmes are rethinking their plans.

In the world today there are 439 nuclear reactors in 31 countries supply 15% of the world’s electricity. The worldwide producing capacity of nuclear power plants will probably rise from about 370 gigawatts today to 520 gigawatts in 2030. But if there were a price on carbon dioxide, says Mr Birol, “it could grow even faster.” This enthusiasm for nuclear power is responsible. Nuclear reactors emit almost none of the CO2 to the environment; also they are generated by the uranium. which is relatively abundant and is available from many sources, including reassuringly stable places such as Canada and Australia.

However the nuclear reactors are very expansive. It takes billions of dollars to bulled one. Worse, in the past, ill-conceived designs, safety scares and the regulatory delays they gave rise to made nuclear plants even more costly than their hefty price-tags suggest. Vendors of new nuclear plants, such as Areva, General Electric (GE), Hitachi and Westinghouse, argue that things are different now. The latest designs incorporate suggestions from utilities and operators with decades of experience, and should, their creators say, make new plants safer and easier to operate. They believe the simpler new reactors, with their longer lifespans and reduced maintenance costs, will also improve the economics of the industry.


Reference:

http://www.economist.com/node/9719029/print?subjectid=821240&story_id=9719029