Disney may lose its right to build a nuclear power station

PorterRedkey

PorterRedkey

Well-Known Member
Joebradley62 said:
Do a little research. The waste argument is tired and fraught with bad information.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should.
https://www.surfrider.org/coastal-blog/entry/americas-nuclear-waste-problem

Here's one incident from this article: https://armscontrolcenter.org/nuclear-waste-issues-in-the-united-states/

"2014 radiological release incident
In February 2014, WIPP was shut down for almost three years after an accident at the site resulted in the release of radiation. The radiological release was traced to a single waste drum, which was packaged incorrectly at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). According to the accident investigation performed by DOE, the drum in question had been packaged with organic kitty litter, which was intended to act as an absorbing material. The organic compounds in the kitty litter reacted with some of the drum’s waste contents, eventually causing an explosion. The error was apparently caused by unclear instructions about which type of kitty litter to use — inorganic, mineral-based kitty litter is commonly used in the waste drums as an absorbent material.
Although the error causing the drum to rupture took place at LANL, the DOE accident investigation also cited a number of safety issues at WIPP itself. In particular, WIPP’s air filtration system failed to fully contain the radiological release within the facility.
The February 2014 accident and shutdown of WIPP ended up being very expensive, with analysis by the Los Angeles Times putting the estimated long-term cost at around $2 billion dollars. The site was formally reopened on January 9, 2017, and waste shipments to the facility resumed in April 2017."
 
Last edited:
PorterRedkey

PorterRedkey

Well-Known Member
Joebradley62 said:
Nobody died at TMI. Japan was stupid and did not protect their backup power sources from catastrophe. Chernobyl was driven by politics and very very bad decision making in relation to a test they didnt have to do. Turkey point nuclear plant near homestead Florida took a direct hit from a cat 5 hurricane and is still running today. Just saying.
Click to expand...
As I said, it is safe until it isn't. America runs on nuclear power and for the most part, it runs without incident.

Regardless of what you think nuclear waste is still an issue. Did you check out the article I posted about that? And that is just America's issues.
 
Joebradley62

Joebradley62

Active Member
PorterRedkey said:
As I said, it is safe until it isn't. America runs on nuclear power and for the most part, it runs without incident.

Regardless of what you think nuclear waste is still an issue. Did you check out the article I posted about that? And that is just America's issues.
Click to expand...
I have read it. The industry has paid billions of dollars already for a storage facility, but nothing gets done out of ignorance, irrational fear, just plain old politics. The waste from nuclear power production is really not all that vast (spoiler, I work in the industry) It also is not a question of technical issues as the article points out. It is really people opposing it for reasons that are emotional . It could be put in an underground vault in the middle of nowhere and nobody would ever hear of it again but the states with all that middle of nowhere space keep fighting it for no logical reasons except fear and politics. It got to the point that most plants if not all have instituted dry spent fuel storage at their sites. People want solar and wind but they dont want to clear the trees to build solar and the wind turbines are another big problem for lots of people. You cant please all the anti everything people.
 
George

George

Liker of Things
Premium Member
Interesting debate. You know, I bet with some imagination a clever theme park designer could come up with an attraction about energy that would help us see over the horizon. Too bad, it will never happen. Kind of an out there idea I suppose.
 
Joebradley62

Joebradley62

Active Member
larryz said:
The statement was "no radiation was released." I posted a link to the NRC's report on the incident. It's quite clear how serious that situation was if you read the whole thing. They were lucky and learned quite a bit about unforeseen design issues.
Click to expand...
I am in the industry and we study this incident every year in our training. The fact is everything that could go wrong just about did and yet still nobody was killed or injured. Now from the lessons learned there are even more systems and policies in place that mitigate or eliminate all that went wrong there. Luck really had nothing to do with it. They didnt do anything right and still you could have been standing at the gate and not get one millirem of exposure. Heck smokers get more dose than I do working at a plant.
 
Joebradley62

Joebradley62

Active Member
PorterRedkey said:
Maybe you should.
https://www.surfrider.org/coastal-blog/entry/americas-nuclear-waste-problem

Here's one incident from this article: https://armscontrolcenter.org/nuclear-waste-issues-in-the-united-states/

"2014 radiological release incident
In February 2014, WIPP was shut down for almost three years after an accident at the site resulted in the release of radiation. The radiological release was traced to a single waste drum, which was packaged incorrectly at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). According to the accident investigation performed by DOE, the drum in question had been packaged with organic kitty litter, which was intended to act as an absorbing material. The organic compounds in the kitty litter reacted with some of the drum’s waste contents, eventually causing an explosion. The error was apparently caused by unclear instructions about which type of kitty litter to use — inorganic, mineral-based kitty litter is commonly used in the waste drums as an absorbent material.
Although the error causing the drum to rupture took place at LANL, the DOE accident investigation also cited a number of safety issues at WIPP itself. In particular, WIPP’s air filtration system failed to fully contain the radiological release within the facility.
The February 2014 accident and shutdown of WIPP ended up being very expensive, with analysis by the Los Angeles Times putting the estimated long-term cost at around $2 billion dollars. The site was formally reopened on January 9, 2017, and waste shipments to the facility resumed in April 2017."
Click to expand...
That is nuclear weapon stuff there, not nuclear power plants. Nuke weapons are a different subject altogether as well as the waste generated by that process.
 
Joebradley62

Joebradley62

Active Member
PorterRedkey said:
Maybe you should.
https://www.surfrider.org/coastal-blog/entry/americas-nuclear-waste-problem

Here's one incident from this article: https://armscontrolcenter.org/nuclear-waste-issues-in-the-united-states/

"2014 radiological release incident
In February 2014, WIPP was shut down for almost three years after an accident at the site resulted in the release of radiation. The radiological release was traced to a single waste drum, which was packaged incorrectly at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). According to the accident investigation performed by DOE, the drum in question had been packaged with organic kitty litter, which was intended to act as an absorbing material. The organic compounds in the kitty litter reacted with some of the drum’s waste contents, eventually causing an explosion. The error was apparently caused by unclear instructions about which type of kitty litter to use — inorganic, mineral-based kitty litter is commonly used in the waste drums as an absorbent material.
Although the error causing the drum to rupture took place at LANL, the DOE accident investigation also cited a number of safety issues at WIPP itself. In particular, WIPP’s air filtration system failed to fully contain the radiological release within the facility.
The February 2014 accident and shutdown of WIPP ended up being very expensive, with analysis by the Los Angeles Times putting the estimated long-term cost at around $2 billion dollars. The site was formally reopened on January 9, 2017, and waste shipments to the facility resumed in April 2017."
Click to expand...
Also in the case of WIPP the dose equivalent release was 1 millrem per year well below the limit of 10 per year. Once again nobody was killed or hurt from this. Just driving your car is more dangerous. Even taking into account Fukushima and Chernobyl.
 
S

seascape

Well-Known Member
Joebradley62 said:
I have read it. The industry has paid billions of dollars already for a storage facility, but nothing gets done out of ignorance, irrational fear, just plain old politics. The waste from nuclear power production is really not all that vast (spoiler, I work in the industry) It also is not a question of technical issues as the article points out. It is really people opposing it for reasons that are emotional . It could be put in an underground vault in the middle of nowhere and nobody would ever hear of it again but the states with all that middle of nowhere space keep fighting it for no logical reasons except fear and politics. It got to the point that most plants if not all have instituted dry spent fuel storage at their sites. People want solar and wind but they dont want to clear the trees to build solar and the wind turbines are another big problem for lots of people. You cant please all the anti everything people.
Click to expand...
You must mean the people who say, "I want wind power." Then complain about the birds that die. "I want hydro power." The complain about the fish that can't bread and the environmental damage to the land that is flooded. And yes, you ate absolutely correct about the people who protest solar Farms replacing trees at Great Adventure. It is absolutely amazing that claim to want green zero carbon power but don't want it in their backyard. There are also many who don't fully understand that you can't have power without some environmental impact. Plus, they have no idea that building huge concrete building releases lots of carbon into the environment. Cities cant be built without causing pollution. Maybe the only solution that would please the radical environmentalist is to eliminate the cause of the problem, all humans. The US is the only country that is actually exceeding the so called Paris accords because we have fracking and switched from coal to natural gas. Yes, the same natural gas the greens want to eliminate. Think about how expensive electricity would be without using our natural gas and how many people would freeze to death if it were not for low cost natural gas produced from fracking.
 
Joebradley62

Joebradley62

Active Member
seascape said:
You must mean the people who say, "I want wind power." Then complain about the birds that die. "I want hydro power." The complain about the fish that can't bread and the environmental damage to the land that is flooded. And yes, you ate absolutely correct about the people who protest solar Farms replacing trees at Great Adventure. It is absolutely amazing that claim to want green zero carbon power but don't want it in their backyard. There are also many who don't fully understand that you can't have power without some environmental impact. Plus, they have no idea that building huge concrete building releases lots of carbon into the environment. Cities cant be built without causing pollution. Maybe the only solution that would please the radical environmentalist is to eliminate the cause of the problem, all humans. The US is the only country that is actually exceeding the so called Paris accords because we have fracking and switched from coal to natural gas. Yes, the same natural gas the greens want to eliminate. Think about how expensive electricity would be without using our natural gas and how many people would freeze to death if it were not for low cost natural gas produced from fracking.
Click to expand...
Natural gas is so cheap transport is the biggest cost! Electrical grid needs stability which is base load generation. The kind you get from nuclear, natural gas and other fossil fuels. We are living a dream if we think we can eliminate those sources of power. Everybody talks a good game until you tell them their taxes and bills will go up, oh and by the way you can't run your a/c anymore.
 
Joebradley62

Joebradley62

Active Member
seascape said:
You must mean the people who say, "I want wind power." Then complain about the birds that die. "I want hydro power." The complain about the fish that can't bread and the environmental damage to the land that is flooded. And yes, you ate absolutely correct about the people who protest solar Farms replacing trees at Great Adventure. It is absolutely amazing that claim to want green zero carbon power but don't want it in their backyard. There are also many who don't fully understand that you can't have power without some environmental impact. Plus, they have no idea that building huge concrete building releases lots of carbon into the environment. Cities cant be built without causing pollution. Maybe the only solution that would please the radical environmentalist is to eliminate the cause of the problem, all humans. The US is the only country that is actually exceeding the so called Paris accords because we have fracking and switched from coal to natural gas. Yes, the same natural gas the greens want to eliminate. Think about how expensive electricity would be without using our natural gas and how many people would freeze to death if it were not for low cost natural gas produced from fracking.
Click to expand...
My favorite was one of the Kennedys when they protested wind farm off the coast that they could see from their compound. Biggest anti everything guy on the world and he was still a not in my backyard guy.
 
S

seascape

Well-Known Member
Joebradley62 said:
Natural gas is so cheap transport is the biggest cost! Electrical grid needs stability which is base load generation. The kind you get from nuclear, natural gas and other fossil fuels. We are living a dream if we think we can eliminate those sources of power. Everybody talks a good game until you tell them their taxes and bills will go up, oh and by the way you can't run your a/c anymore.
Click to expand...
This is the reason WDW should have updated the energy Pavilion. Walt would have loved the fact that everyone was wrong when they updated it last time. No one expected the USA to become the worlds largest energy exporter but we are about to become that. It is American ingenuity that made that reality come true. Cheap natural gas is cutting down pollution and allowing homeowners to heat their homes at a reasonable cost. The story of energy should be told but because of the beliefs of a vocal percentage of the population that story can't be told and we lose the energy Pavilion. The world loses when real stories can't be told. Walt must hate what is happening to Epcot and his wish for a permanent world fair for countries and technology.
 
Sirwalterraleigh

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
Master Yoda said:
It absolutely drives me nuts that so many people in this country are so afraid of nuclear power even though it is one of the safest and cleanest ways to produce reliable energy.

Regardless of that, I seriously doubt that Disney has any plans to build a nuclear reactor. If they are smart, they will just use this as an opportunity to get something else they want.
Click to expand...
KBLovesDisney said:
My guess is that fear ultimately came from the disaster at Chernobyl. But, that is just a guess.
Click to expand...

For Disney - it’s economic. The cost if not given to them in grants far exceeds the benefits to a private entity.

I think that’s more the deal than fear it goes code and they have to refund a days tickets worth of very merry Christmas party tickets
 
George

George

Liker of Things
Premium Member
The big points aren’t being made, like, you can swim in the pool of a pool type reactor provided you don’t go down to the bottom right next to the actual fuel. Also, big money can be made burying waste in an actual backyard repository. Enough money for almost a full week at WDW if u stay at the LBV Holiday Inn and eat at Sweet Tomatoes. Finally, quite a few energy sources like surreptitiously kidnapped, fit as a fiddle neighbors (you know who usually work out, thus neighbors) duct taped to very well maintained Pelotons (you want to reduce frictional loss) aren’t being mentioned at all.
 
S

seascape

Well-Known Member
DocMcHulk said:
Chernobyl and Three Mile Island were 1970's era reactors. A LOT has changed since then. Modern designs arent fool proof, but darn close. So many redundancies.
Click to expand...
None of that matters. Disney will not build a nuclear power plant on their property. The cooling towers would scare too many of their customers away. Disney wants to attract as many customers as possible and that is why they try to keep politics out of their parks.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom