NationStates Jolt Archive

Nuclear Power Safety Act II
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.


Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: Uranium Mining
Proposed by: Ocean County NJ

Description: Nuclear Power. One of the most controversial subjects facing the world today. Since various incidents, the world's view on nuclear energy has gone from sweet to sour and bitter. Many nations across the globe ultilize Nuclear Power to its fullest, some use it in a mix with other sources, while others oppose it in all forms. The purpose of this new legislation is not to promote or demote nuclear energy, but to make it as safe and reliable as humanly possible.


A new reactor deisgn that will 100% kill the risk of a reactor meltdown. The uranium fuel will be encased in very tiny coated pellets that can withstand temperatures of up to around 3600 F. This new reactor deisgn has a maximum physically possible temperature of 1363 F, giving it a HUGE MARGIN OF SAFETY. The reactor will be cooled by super-chilled helium and the whole reactor will be encased in a large containment building. Under this act, all new plants will have this reactor design, effective immediatly, while existing plants must have the new reactors by 2020.

This is one alternative, other new designs include a new coolant of liquid sodium that can take intense heat. Another has water tanks located right above the reactor which would flood the reactor in an accident, using gravity, not failure prone pumps.
I. Implementation
Like stated above all new plants must come with these new reactor designs, while existing plants have 11 years to either shut down, convert, or build a brand new reactor on-site

II. A True "Walk Away Reactor"
You could have the worst accident possible, leave and go home, eat lunch, take a nap and then come back and deal with the problem, no worries, with one of these new designs

III. Containment
Like all existing plants, a huge containment structure with walls several feet thick with steel reinforced concrete. These structures can withstand impacts of airplanes and bombs. Trust me, thse structures are very structually sound

IIII. Protection Against "Intruders"
Aside from a huge military grade security force, all plants will be fitted with iris scans leading to/from the building, control room, storage room, and reactor area, plus a security screening area.

IIIII. Fuel Storage
Until a final site is constructed all spent fuel must be encased in "Dry Casks" regarded as the safest form of temporary storage. The fuel is encased in concrete drums where they are taken to a protected area for air circulation through them to keep the fuel cool. When it cools to acceptable levels it is stored underground, until transported to a permanent storage site, where it will rest for thousands of years until radiation dips below acceptable and unharmful levels.


Please support this proposal to make nuclear power as safe as possible.

Patrik H.
President of Ocean County, NJ

Nuclear Power Safety Act II
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.

How is this at the expense of industry?

Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: Uranium Mining
Proposed by: Ocean County NJ

What strength?

Description: Nuclear Power. One of the most controversial subjects facing the world today. Since various incidents, the world's view on nuclear energy has gone from sweet to sour and bitter. Many nations across the globe ultilize Nuclear Power to its fullest, some use it in a mix with other sources, while others oppose it in all forms. The purpose of this new legislation is not to promote or demote nuclear energy, but to make it as safe and reliable as humanly possible.

If people actually stuck with the recommended methods of maintaining and monitoring the reactors, they wouldn't have meltdowns as often. It's their own fault.

A new reactor deisgn that will 100% kill the risk of a reactor meltdown. The uranium fuel will be encased in very tiny coated pellets that can withstand temperatures of up to around 3600 F. This new reactor deisgn has a maximum physically possible temperature of 1363 F, giving it a HUGE MARGIN OF SAFETY. The reactor will be cooled by super-chilled helium and the whole reactor will be encased in a large containment building. Under this act, all new plants will have this reactor design, effective immediatly, while existing plants must have the new reactors by 2020.

Tried that already. The pellets interfere in both fission and fusion processes. And that limited temperature design is unable to keep my fusion reactors running, as they require a higher temperature than that to cause fusion. I cannot support this option.

This is one alternative, other new designs include a new coolant of liquid sodium that can take intense heat. Another has water tanks located right above the reactor which would flood the reactor in an accident, using gravity, not failure prone pumps.

Gravity is useless when your fusion reactors are on orbital platforms. Liquid sodium, however, I must investigate.

I. Implementation
Like stated above all new plants must come with these new reactor designs, while existing plants have 11 years to either shut down, convert, or build a brand new reactor on-site

That is too short of a time, as it'll take me 15 years to convert any nuclear reactor I have due to what I must do to keep the orbital platforms in orbit.

II. A True "Walk Away Reactor"
You could have the worst accident possible, leave and go home, eat lunch, take a nap and then come back and deal with the problem, no worries, with one of these new designs

The worst accident possible is a total meltdown followed by multiple nuclear explosions. I don't see you going home and eating lunch after that.

III. Containment
Like all existing plants, a huge containment structure with walls several feet thick with steel reinforced concrete. These structures can withstand impacts of airplanes and bombs. Trust me, thse structures are very structually sound

True.

IIII. Protection Against "Intruders"
Aside from a huge military grade security force, all plants will be fitted with iris scans leading to/from the building, control room, storage room, and reactor area, plus a security screening area.

I use DNA scanners combined with an AI, automated disruptor cannons, and a video system beyond the technology level of MT nations. Combine that with the fact the platform itself usually has at least a dozen ships near it constantly scanning the area. You need to allow for more advanced tech levels.

IIIII. Fuel Storage
Until a final site is constructed all spent fuel must be encased in "Dry Casks" regarded as the safest form of temporary storage. The fuel is encased in concrete drums where they are taken to a protected area for air circulation through them to keep the fuel cool. When it cools to acceptable levels it is stored underground, until transported to a permanent storage site, where it will rest for thousands of years until radiation dips below acceptable and unharmful levels.

Actually, I usually just dump what I cannot recycle into a black hole. Most of it is recycled for use in certain technologies requiring extreme power sources that people won't exactly be going near anyway.

Please support this proposal to make nuclear power as safe as possible.

Patrik H.
President of Ocean County, NJ

It's good, but needs refinement to allow for those of us are more advanced and that have more advanced ways of dealing with the waste.

How much do you REALLY know about Nuclear power?

Nuclear Power Safety Act II
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.


Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: Uranium Mining
Proposed by: Ocean County NJ

Description: Nuclear Power. One of the most controversial subjects facing the world today. Since various incidents, the world's view on nuclear energy has gone from sweet to sour and bitter. Many nations across the globe ultilize Nuclear Power to its fullest, some use it in a mix with other sources, while others oppose it in all forms. The purpose of this new legislation is not to promote or demote nuclear energy, but to make it as safe and reliable as humanly possible.

Sounds good....


A new reactor deisgn that will 100% kill the risk of a reactor meltdown. The uranium fuel will be encased in very tiny coated pellets that can withstand temperatures of up to around 3600 F. This new reactor deisgn has a maximum physically possible temperature of 1363 F, giving it a HUGE MARGIN OF SAFETY. The reactor will be cooled by super-chilled helium and the whole reactor will be encased in a large containment building. Under this act, all new plants will have this reactor design, effective immediatly, while existing plants must have the new reactors by 2020.

Except, it won't work... Reactors are cooled by WATER for a reason... Water is used as a thermal conductor... Cooling the reactor with helium would make it impossible to derive any heat from the thing.... which is what you need in the first place...


This is one alternative, other new designs include a new coolant of liquid sodium that can take intense heat. Another has water tanks located right above the reactor which would flood the reactor in an accident, using gravity, not failure prone pumps.

Yes, Liquid sodium has wonderful heat conduction properties.... however it is also an excellent conductor for hard radiation... There is a reason why Liquid NA reactors were abandoned.... because they tend to dose anyone around them with beyond the recommended limits of radiation.... In relation to the "water" version of your concept... you describe the presently used Generation IV reactor plants, that use pumps for boost, but rely mostly on gravity feed, in addition to requiring control rods which with negative left motors, so once power is lost, the system scrams.


I. Implementation
Like stated above all new plants must come with these new reactor designs, while existing plants have 11 years to either shut down, convert, or build a brand new reactor on-site

Except most of your designs are either unusable, or even more dangerous than existing in use systems.


II. A True "Walk Away Reactor"
You could have the worst accident possible, leave and go home, eat lunch, take a nap and then come back and deal with the problem, no worries, with one of these new designs

There is no such thing as a "walk away reactor"... unless you are reffering to the high-power MARC's, HPR's and ZPM's we use in our FT nations.... where we eject them into the depths of space and limp away.... unfortuneately, planet based modern tech nations do not have those advantages.


III. Containment
Like all existing plants, a huge containment structure with walls several feet thick with steel reinforced concrete. These structures can withstand impacts of airplanes and bombs. Trust me, thse structures are very structually sound


You also need tanks of diesel fuel oil, and lead plates... because concrete will not stop neutron radiation. Not unless you plan on having several miles of it.


IIII. Protection Against "Intruders"
Aside from a huge military grade security force, all plants will be fitted with iris scans leading to/from the building, control room, storage room, and reactor area, plus a security screening area.

At least your security sounds reasonable.


IIIII. Fuel Storage
Until a final site is constructed all spent fuel must be encased in "Dry Casks" regarded as the safest form of temporary storage. The fuel is encased in concrete drums where they are taken to a protected area for air circulation through them to keep the fuel cool. When it cools to acceptable levels it is stored underground, until transported to a permanent storage site, where it will rest for thousands of years until radiation dips below acceptable and unharmful levels.

The reactor does not take long to cool once scramed... there is no need to cool fuel rods external to the housing... merely scram the system for a week, refuel, reseal, and keep going... Though keeping large numbers of spent pellets cool and non-reactive would be a good idea.


Please support this proposal to make nuclear power as safe as possible.


Don't think I will, I do not like the hazerdous nature of some of your "safty ideas"....

Note to self: Brush up on nuclear physics and leave antimatter alone for this nation.

So in 11 years I have to shut down my current reactors that arent yours and by 2020 I have to have only your reactors. So what will I do for power for those in-between years? In AI its 1984 so that just makes it even more complicated!

Nations of the World:

Be it known that South Arctica supports this resolution by the Nation of Orange County NJ, though we question the wording of the following clause:

IIII. Protection Against "Intruders"
Aside from a huge military grade security force, all plants will be fitted with iris scans leading to/from the building, control room, storage room, and reactor area, plus a security screening area.
It seems to us that this section is needlessly specific about the type of security technology to be used. A more generic description, calling for "biometric scanners" and "extreme security measures around critical areas" would probably suffice. However, we would approve the measure as written, as the most critical point (that no reactor design is foolproof against malicious intent) has been made.

Nuclear power is the way of the future. Safe nuclear power will ensure that we may enjoy that future. Unsafe nuclear reactors are a danger to the whole world!

Sincerely,


Edgar Ziebarth
Science Advisor to the First Citizen, South Arctica

So in 11 years I have to shut down my current reactors that arent yours and by 2020 I have to have only your reactors. So what will I do for power for those in-between years? In AI its 1984 so that just makes it even more complicated!

Those damn commies coming to get you? And how are the loudspeakers holding out?

OOC: Sorry I couldn't resist! =))

Nations of the World:

Be it known that South Arctica supports this resolution by the Nation of Orange County NJ, though we question the wording of the following clause:


It seems to us that this section is needlessly specific about the type of security technology to be used. A more generic description, calling for "biometric scanners" and "extreme security measures around critical areas" would probably suffice. However, we would approve the measure as written, as the most critical point (that no reactor design is foolproof against malicious intent) has been made.

Nuclear power is the way of the future. Safe nuclear power will ensure that we may enjoy that future. Unsafe nuclear reactors are a danger to the whole world!

Sincerely,


Edgar Ziebarth
Science Advisor to the First Citizen, South Arctica

Please read Tekania's post. Tekania posted the multitude of technical problems with it.

Note to self: Brush up on nuclear physics and leave antimatter alone for this nation.

Well, MARC's are antimatter.... HPM's and ZPM's do not use antimatter... the former uses Hypermatter, the later folds exotic matter or plasma in a quantum spatial (Zero-Point) field.

Well, MARC's are antimatter.... HPM's and ZPM's do not use antimatter... the former uses Hypermatter, the later folds exotic matter or plasma in a quantum spatial (Zero-Point) field.

Uh, that is my MT puppet nation. I hadn't meant to post it. You should read their introduction topic.

Please read Tekania's post. Tekania posted the multitude of technical problems with it.

I am doing my own independant research on the matter, and do not agree with everything Tekania has to say. However, I have learned from experience that it is pointless to argue endlessly over details, so I'll just say that not all of those technicalities are matters that meet with 100% agreement among the scientific community.

I am doing my own independant research on the matter, and do not agree with everything Tekania has to say. However, I have learned from experience that it is pointless to argue endlessly over details, so I'll just say that not all of those technicalities are matters that meet with 100% agreement among the scientific community.

Like I said under Sarkarasa: I need to research nuclear more.

Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: Uranium Mining
Proposed by: Ocean County NJ What strength?
Environmentals don't have Strength, they have Industry Affected instead. A few others (guns, drugs) have similar variants without the Strength bit.

Environmentals don't have Strength, they have Industry Affected instead. A few others (guns, drugs) have similar variants without the Strength bit.

It's been too long since I proposed a resolution.

Well, his liquid helium idea is ridiculous... it sounds like he misread the particulars of HGTR's... of course... if that is what he meant, he has a problem; since the HGRT is not compatible with his previous proposed fuel-pellet form.

And the nuclear leakage of Liq NA is only one of it's problems, I didn't mention in addition that Liq NA is highly reactive with most other materials, and has a tendency to explode (you think a leak in a LWR/PWR is bad?)...

The most hazerdous reactor types are Liquid Metal reactors, and High-power Boiling Water reactors...

Generation III PWR's are the cheapest and safetest design, their moderator and thermal conductor is DI/DM H2O (easily attainable in abundance), kept at high pressure to prevent primary coolant loop from boiling (actually water DOES boil in one place in the system, the Pressurizer.... where the water is allowed to boil, and form a steam bubble to keep the loop under tremendous pressure).... Typically the primary loop will circulate 400-500F WATER, with a steam generator used to boil a secondary loop for power generation systems... In addition Gen III's control-rods are designed to need continuous power to stay in operation (if power is cut to the control rod motors... the rods drop, and the system scrams)... In addition while they use pumps to speed water through the system; even without the pumps, the water will flow still due to gravity and thermodynamics (natural circulation). Gen III CANDU's are also very reliable...

Neither design has ever posed a major problem... as opposed to accidents occuring with older GEN-II PWR and BWR's (which lacked natural circulation systems and fuel rod advantages)... PWR's are generally more reliable than BWR's (since water is not allowed to boil in the primary loop and create the potential problem of steam bubbles in the core).

The only Liquid Metal reactor that is anywhere close to as safe are BeO2 reactors... but they have extreme high costs for their coolant material. Liquid Sodium is just too hazerdous to deal with in the Liquid Metal designs...

Now, I'm nowhere near being an expert on chemistry, but isn't sodium prone to reacting with just about everything? I recall seeing solid sodium explode after being put in water. Surely liquid sodium would be even more dangerous.

Sorry people,

All reactors will be cooled by water! The reactors will be surrounded by these materials to cool the exterior sorry! People, I don't know if you know please stop saying "brush up on nuclear physics, learn more stuff about nuclear energy, etc." I'm only 13, but the smartest 13 year old I know :headbang: :headbang:

Sorry people,

All reactors will be cooled by water! The reactors will be surrounded by these materials to cool the exterior sorry! People, I don't know if you know please stop saying "brush up on nuclear physics, learn more stuff about nuclear energy, etc." I'm only 13, but the smartest 13 year old I know :headbang: :headbang:

Well, no offense of course; but regardless of your actual age/knowledge level; you should extensively research an area before writting a proposal on it... Or these kind of things are destined to happen.

Sorry people,

All reactors will be cooled by water! The reactors will be surrounded by these materials to cool the exterior sorry! People, I don't know if you know please stop saying "brush up on nuclear physics, learn more stuff about nuclear energy, etc." I'm only 13, but the smartest 13 year old I know :headbang: :headbang:

I think deep down, in the concept at least, this proposal has some serious potential. Nuclear policy tends to get great shunning or support in the UN, depending on who you talk to and what the policy idea is. if this proposal were redrafted as either a "security around nuclear reactors" proposal, or strictly a "energy standards on nuclear reactors" then it would have a fairly decent case.

Don't be sorry about faulty proposals and such. It takes some ideas a long time to come out and be expressed adequately. Just stick to your most base, still valid, guns and you can slavage a lot from this. Keep a list of the delegates that support this, whatever you do.