Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

another reason a nuke plant has to shut down - debris

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ensho Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 12:05 PM
Original message
another reason a nuke plant has to shut down - debris

http://hisz.rsoe.hu/alertmap/index.php?smp=&lang=eng


Area: France, Prefecturie of Bordeaux, Blayais Nuclear Power Plant, Braud-et-Saint-Louis



EDF halted all four nuclear reactors at its 3,900-megawatt Blayais nuclear plant in southwest France on Thursday after storms affected water quality on the Gironde river, the company said. "The four reactors were stopped early this morning," said an EDF spokeswoman. "This is a normal procedure which we carried out after we received an alert in a pumping station," the spokeswoman added. The shutdown did not disturb the power grid network, she said, adding she could not say when the reactors would restart. Power stations rely for river water for cooling and take precautions to prevent debris, stirred up storms, from damaging the pumps. "Similar events occurred a couple of years ago at the Paluel power plant (northwest France) and it took a couple of days for the reactors to restart," one trader said, adding it appeared EDF had stopped the four reactors at around 1100 GMT.
----------------------------


last summer the nuke plant in Fl. that's on the Gulf of Mex. almost had to shut down because the intake water from the Gulf was too hot.

wonder what will happen this summer? intake pipe made longer to reach deeper, cooler water? or what?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
1. Once again the nuclear power industry doing exactly what its supposed to do with a safe result
Edited on Fri Feb-13-09 12:08 PM by ThomWV
Amazing itsn't it? And the French at that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ensho Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. more and stronger storms will make more debris thus more stoppage


hotter gulf water could stop the Fl. plant.


we cannot get away from climate change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. Yes, and dryer times will mean less water, and rainy years everything will be great.
Hoter gulf water will never rise to a temperature where it couldn not be an effective coolent for a reactor and besides that, with global warming you get sea level rises.

Give it up, your argument is absurd. The engineering that goes into designing nuclear power plant cooling is way way more exact than wild guesses about what a few degrees of temperature change will make. It just strikes me as odd that anyone would use as an example of the horrors of nuclear energy an article that showed when a safeguard worked perfectly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 12:13 PM
Response to Original message
3. Thanks for posting about another completely normal procedure...
Edited on Fri Feb-13-09 12:13 PM by SidDithers
and reiterating how well safety and backup systems work at France's nuclear power generating facilities.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lost in CT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 12:17 PM
Response to Original message
4. Well should substitute all nuke plants with clean healthy coal.
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 12:18 PM
Response to Original message
6. Leaky pipe likely to blame for spill at coal-burning power plant
"A retention pond at a Tennessee Valley Authority coal-burning power plant leaked waste into a northeast Alabama creek Friday, ramping up pressure on the utility that already is trying to clean up last month's major coal ash spill at a plant in Tennessee.

TVA officials said the latest discharge — water laced with calcium sulfate, a component of a material known as gypsum — presented no danger to people or the environment. But environmentalists were quick to criticize, and some lawmakers said it was more evidence Congress needs to overhaul coal waste regulations.

"One disaster convinced me that we ought to subject coal ash impoundments to federal design, construction, and inspection requirements," said Rep. Nick Rahall, D-W.V., chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee. "But two incidents in less than three weeks at a TVA site illustrate that we must act swiftly if we hope to ensure a basic level safety for our communities and the environment."

http://www.blnz.com/news/2009/01/09/reports_Ala_power_plant_retaining_9739.html

Power is just too dangerous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ensho Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-13-09 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
7. I was posting to note that nuke had to shut down for debri and or


too hot water. (yes, the Fl. plant almost had to shut down last summer due to hot water)


which means it could effect electric concerns for everybody.


the more storms, the hotter water means more times of shortage of electricity which citizens should make note of, etc.

that was the point. the nuke end game. providing electricity in your life.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 02:17 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC