Bienvenido(a) a Crisis Energética, Anonymous Jueves, 28 Marzo 2024 @ 16:07 CET

Crisis Energética Foros

energia nuclear en foro


Estado: desconectado

emiliorull

Forum User
Junior
Identificado: 13/12/2004
Mensajes: 15
Hola,

Creo que el esquema de la web es muy bueno, pero me falta un foro donde hablar sobre energía nuclear. No sé si soy demasiado torpe o realmente falta; más aun teniendo en cuenta que se está presentando como una falsa solucion al cambio climático y a la grave crisis energética producida por el alto consumo de combustiobles fosiles.

'chas gracias



cambiamos el clima, dejamos radioactividad para miles de años...
¿y no somos capaces de tener un modelo con renovables y ahorro?!

Estado: desconectado

PPP

Site Admin
Admin
Identificado: 06/10/2003
Mensajes: 3113
Emilio:

Existe una sección denominada "energái nuclear" y hay una traducción de unos atículos de WISE sobre el MOX el elemento que se utiliza como excusa para la recuperación de parte del combustible no gastado y para justificar que el reprocesamiento es bueno, que merece la pena. También en algún sitio del foro se ha tocado, pero siempre de forma tangencial.

Pero tienes razón que la energía nuclear produce tanto respeto como temor y está poco tratada en este foro. Tienes tambén razón en que se está vendiendo como "ecológica", puesto que no produce emisiones y de ello, la culpa, en parte, está en los que venden energías renivables con el etiquetado de reducción de CO2 como principal premisa.

Aprovecho para invitar a todos a contribuir; especialmente e los físicos nucleares, si se dan una vuelta por la página. A mi me interesarían fundamentalmente los daots relativos a la producción de residuos cuantificables anuales para una central tipo, por ejemplo de 1 GW. Dividiendo los tipos de actínidos y demás elementos radiactivos y cuantificando sus residuos. Se que varían ne función del tipo de central (RMBK, WPR LWPR, etc) y que las hay más y menos plutoníferas. Por ello, una explicación clara de lo que generan anualmente, sería muy de agradecer.

Otro dato interesante, sería cuantificar con solidez las reservas mundiales probadas y el criterio, que hasta ahora se que es fundamentalmente economicista (US$/kg de uranio). Ver las reservas por países; analizar la ley del mineral en cada una de ellas. Ver especialmente lo que ha sucedido en las minas estadounidenses, cuya producción ha caído espectacularmente (¿cenit?) y cómo se ha degradado la relación ganga/mena.

Me interesaría conocer en profundidad (aunque, por ejemplo, la enciclopedia Británica es una excelente fuente), los procesos mecánicos y químicos, para llegar desde el mineral al U3O8 o pasta amarilla, base del combustible.

Me gusarían poseer datos de los cascos o envases donde se almacenan los de alta o muy alta actividad. Conocer a fondo sus propiedades químicas y radioactivas, su capacidad de contaminación; sus posibildiades reales de reciclado.

Saber cuánto de lo que queda de residuo del quemado se puede recuperar y cuánto se está recuperando en la actualidad.

Saber por qué cerraron el Super-Phoenix en Francia y si existen reactores (creo que no) regeneradores, de los que tanto se presume para hablar de la inagotabildiad de las fuentes si se recupera el cobustible gastado.

En fin, me gustaría saber de tantsa cosas...

Saludos

Estado: desconectado

emiliorull

Forum User
Junior
Identificado: 13/12/2004
Mensajes: 15
Hola,Además están intentando hacer pasar la energía nuclear como una opcion economicamente viable, y sin embargo no paran de darles todo tipo de subvenciones, ayudas, directas e indirectas...y es un fracaso economico.Hay cosas, informes, noticias que nosé dónde colocarlas en el foro. Por ejemplo, el otro dia me llegó una noticia acerca de las ayudas que da la Agencia de Exportacion-Importacion yanqui a sus empresas para poner reactores nucleares en China.(en este caso he puesto la noticia completa porque el enlace te lleva a una pagina de pago. No la he traducido para mantener el rigor de la noticia)February 28, 2005 MondayU.S. Loans for Reactors In China Draw ObjectionsThe Westinghouse Electric Corporation plans to present a bid to China on Monday for building four huge nuclear reactors, backed by a pledge of nearly $5 billion in financial assistance from the United States government that it hopes will give the company an edge over competitors from France, Germany and other nations.But the package of loans and loan guarantees does not follow the typical pattern of the government's Export-Import Bank, and is raising objections from some critics.Approved on a preliminary basis by the bank on Feb. 18, the package is almost three times larger than anything the bank has offered before. And while it would stimulate employment in the United States, the price would amount to about $1 million a job. The package also appears to benefit the British government, which owns Westinghouse through BNFL, the company formerly known as British Nuclear Fuels.''If the risk were not falling on the Ex-Im bank, it would be falling on the British government,'' said Peter A. Bradford, a member of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission from 1977 to 1982. Mr. Bradford said he opposed the subsidy to a foreign company, and what he said was support by the commission for Westinghouse 's sales efforts. ''Jobs really aren't what this is about. What it's about is protecting the investors in the company making the bid, and here, there is only one investor.''Representative Dennis J. Kucinich, an Ohio Democrat who is a frequent critic of the bank, said, ''The bank is funded by U.S. tax dollars; they should be supporting U.S. companies. I'm not against U.S. jobs, but shouldn't we be for U.S. companies?''Mr. Kucinich said that the deal could also eventually hurt the export of technology from this country because China has said that it wants to build many more plants and take over the manufacture of the components, many of which are now made in the United States.A spokesman for the bank, Phil Cogan, said the aid package had ''nothing to do with shareholders.'' The package, which would go to the bank for final approval if Westinghouse won the bidding, ''is for the Westinghouse Electric Company of Monroeville'' in Pennsylvania, he said. Ownership of the company ' 'makes absolutely no difference,'' he said.BNFL bought Westinghouse's nuclear unit from CBS, the broadcasting company, in 1998. BNFL's other businesses in the United States have met with mixed success. The company contracted in the mid-1990's with the Energy Department to build a factory in Washington State to solidify liquid nuclear wastes, but the two entities had a rancorous falling-out over costs and other factors. This month, BNFL and the Energy Department settled a long dispute over BNFL's performance in cleaning up former nuclear weapons sites in Tennessee and Idaho.The British government has intermittently discussed selling BNFL and its Westinghouse subsidiary, and recently reorganized the company. To make the company more attractive, the company recently separated some of its unprofitable ventures, including liabilities related to a subsidiary that recovered plutonium from spent nuclear fuel for reuse.A spokesman for Westinghouse, Vaughn Gilbert, said in a telephone interview from the company's headquarters in Monroeville, near Pittsburgh, that the proposal to build the Chinese reactors represented about 5,000 jobs in the United States because components like the instrumentation and control systems wou> ld be manufactured here. The reactor vessel and the steam generators, the largest parts, would come from other countries.Westinghouse would also supply the fuel, at least initially. China has expressed interest in building dozens more reactors and sticking to a standard design, so winning this contract could mean many years of business, although fewer parts would be imported as time went on. Bidders are hoping for a decision from China by the end of the year.The Westinghouse design is said to incorporate ''passive'' safety features that require fewer active parts, like pumps, relying instead on features like cooling through natural heat circulation. It is called the AP-1000, for ' 'advanced passive.'' None have yet been sold. Spencer Abraham, a former secretary of energy, told reporters after an appearance last week at the United States Energy Association that if China chose the Westinghouse design, it might make it easier for electric utilities to build that model here.Mr. Cogan, the Ex-Im spokesman, said that the bank was backing only the portion of the contract that would involve work in the United States. According to Westinghouse, the American portion of the deal is half the reactors' value, suggesting that the four reactors would cost $10 billion, but the company would not disclose the amount of its bid.Asked how the level of support -- almost $5 billion for 5,000 jobs -- compared to that of other projects that the bank had nurtured, he insisted that the bank had no yardstick, and that dividing the amount of support by the number of jobs was not a good measure. ''That's a crazy equation,'' Mr. Cogan said.The bank's announcements about its loan and loan-guarantee packages often give few details, but in several recent cases where an amount and a number of jobs were specified, the dollars-per-job figures were far smaller.For example, on Feb. 24 the bank announced it would guarantee a loan of $500,000 to a company in Carson City, Nev., that exports hoses, fittings, nuts and bolts, and that this would create up to 18 new jobs, which comes to less than $30,000 a job. On Jan. 11, it announced a guarantee that helped provide a $315,000 loan for a company in Oakmont, Pa., that makes equipment for testing the efficiency of filters. The company had three employees but was faltering, the owner said in the announcement; with the loan it got more business in China, and expanded its work force by two. That works out to $63,000 a job.Mr. Cogan said that the cost to American taxpayers would depend on the success of the project; if the loans are paid back on time, they could generate a profit for the bank, he said.Gary C. Hufbauer, a former deputy assistant secretary of the Treasury for international trade and investment policy and now a senior fellow at the Institute for International Economics, a nonprofit group here, said that at one time the bank had a requirement that 65 percent of the work be in this country. But, he said, ''the choice is, as this case illustrates, not between 100 percent U.S. and 100 percent U.S.; it's 50 percent U.S. and no percent at all. And 50 percent is better than nothing.''But Michael Mariotte, the executive director of the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, an antinuclear group based here, said, ''you can think of other corporations that would be sounder risks.'' He added, ''I'm sure there's cheaper ways to generate 5,000 jobs.''''A lot of the money is not staying in the United States, and whatever profit is made on this deal is going to the U.K.''http://www.nytimes.comsaludos



cambiamos el clima, dejamos radioactividad para miles de años...
¿y no somos capaces de tener un modelo con renovables y ahorro?!

Estado: desconectado

Marga V.

Forum User
Miembro activo
Identificado: 20/10/2003
Mensajes: 1440
Hola:
Cuando son temas más generales, relacionados más o menos periféricamente con el tema central de Crisis Energética, en la sección de Materiales y Referencias hay abiertos varios hilos, como por ejemplo: Lo que dice la prensa, o Lecturas (2) en la red.

Luego, en la sección Energías Renovables y alternativas a los combustibles fósiles también hay al menos un hilo, que yo recuerde, sobre el tema nuclear: Centrales Nucleares.

Aunque no hay demasiada costumbre aún en el foro, dado que la idea de CE es ofrecer material en castellano, si el proponente no tiene tiempo o capacidad para traducir, siempre cabe o bien resumir, o pedir una traducción si se considera que el material es lo suficientemente valioso como para ser difundido.

Saludos,
Marga

Todas las horas son CET. Hora actual 04:07 pm.

  • Tópico normal
  • Tópico Pegado
  • Tópico bloqueado
  • Mensaje Nuevo
  • Tópico pegado con nuevo mensaje
  • Tópico bloqueado con nuevo mensaje
  •  Ver mensajes anónimos
  •  Los usuarios anónimos pueden enviar
  •  Se permite HTML
  •  Contenido censurado