Would Livyjr sign off on that?

As I mentioned, I like the French reactor idea -- and I know tomhye like you Jeff have suggested that nuclear energy can be done safely.

I know that Livyjr has documented issues with a Canadian reactor, but I wonder whether that is a French type reactor, or an older US type reactor which does not reuse the fuel. --- and also whether global warming may have played a role.

Now you are confusing me, tazvil04 ....

I don't recall talking about a Canadian reactor ...

The ones I did talk about are on the American side of Lake Ontario, near Rochester, New York ....

They use the waters of Lake Ontario for their cooling water ....

Without any public notice or review, the federal government BEHIND OUR BACKS has raised up the permissable or allowable temperature that they can bring Lake Ontario waters up to with their waste heat to 83 degrees F.

They are contributing to global warming, heating up the lake water like that ....

And they do it with impunity ....

They are exempt from the law, courtesy of the federal government ....

And so ....

We have a reactor in Fort Calhoun NE outside Omaha. It is operated by Omaha PublicPowerDistrict.
I do not think anything series has happened for the time it has been up and running.

What does it use for cooling water?

Does it have a cooling tower and a plume?

Or does it use surface water?

Sorry -- I thought it was on the Canadian side...

Well, I think we need to undertake an effort to refit our present reactors...so they are more like the french type...

And there have to be controls --- on their heating the water...

I think the French are fortunate that they have the cold waters on their north side to use....

I was the one who talked about the Canadian Reactor (CANDU)

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

It's benefit is that it can use unrefined uranium. As Livy will attest, it still needs water for cooling. That is an inescapable fact.

ALL POWER GENERATORS NEED A HEAT EXCHANGER.

You can use the atmosphere (which is what we do now) or you can use a LARGE body of water.

Personally, I'd go with the latter, like the Pacific and Atlantic oceans which coincides with the great population centers of the USA.

Power to the people. Power to where they live, at least.

Omaha...

Are you a Cornhusker?

I went to school in Lincoln... and was just out there last fall for the unfortunate game against USC...

Sorry I'm a BlueJAY BACKER

My knowledge limited so looked it up;

Fort Calhoun Nuclear Generating Station is a nuclear power plant located on 660 acres (2.7 km²) between Fort Calhoun, Nebraska and Blair, Nebraska. The utility has an easement for another 580 acres (2.3 km²) which is maintained in a natural state.
This plant has one Combustion Engineering pressurized water reactor
generating 500 megawatts of electricity. This is currently the smallest
rated capacity among all operating commercial power reactors in North
America. The plant underwent refurbishment in 2006 by having its steam generators, pressurizer, reactor vessel head,
low pressure turbines and main transformer replaced. The plant recently
had its operating license renewed for an additional twenty years.
The power plant is owned and operated by the Omaha Public Power District of Omaha, Nebraska.

They give a lot of data, but nothing on how it is cooled ....

This help? It has 1 PWR.

The below isn't for Livy - he already knows all this stuff.

Pressurized water reactors (PWRs) (also VVER if of Russian design) are generation II nuclear power reactors that use ordinary water under high pressure as coolant and neutron moderator. The primary coolant loop is kept under high pressure to prevent the water from reaching film boiling, hence the name. PWRs are one of the most common types of reactors and are widely used all over the world. More than 230 of them are in use to generate electric power, and several hundred more for naval propulsion. They were originally designed by the Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory as a nuclear submarine power plant.

Note, Terra, that they are talking about the PRIMARY coolant loop ...

That is indeed sealed .....

But that in its turn requires a heat exchange to the outside environment ....

That is what we are looking for ....

What is the source of the SECONDARY HEAT EXCHANGE COOLING WATER?

That cannot be a sealed system like the first is ....

And note as well that TO PREVENT BOILING, the primary coolant loop is kept AT HIGH PRESSURE ....

Water boils under normal pressure at 212 degrees F.

Keeping it under high pressure prevents it from boiling when it reaches 212 degrees F.

So its temperature ends up being much higher that 212 degrees F. Terra ....

Much higher ....

The heat of another sun ....

And that heat transfers to our environment continuously, as if we had more suns that just the one ....

If you want to cook something faster, turn up the heat ....

And so they have ....

The other necessary relationship, Terra, is for each degree F. given off by one pound of water, how many pounds of air are in turn warmed up?

What is that ratio?

And I will tell you that it is not one for one, which is why in cold places like where I live, hot water heating systems are preferred over hot air ...

And so ...

Too many questions for me to answer... here is a picture of it and it's sitting by some type of water source... Ahem, sorry that is the Missouri River. Short of calling their Power Company and asking the rest of your questions, that's it for me

Well, thank you, Terra ....

Well done ....

IF there was a cooling tower, it would be very visible, because they are huge ....

The river must be their source of cooling water ....

It would be interesting to see what their current license conditions allow them to heat the river water up to ....

May 9, 2000

EA 00-106

S. K. Gambhir, Division Manager
Nuclear Operations
Omaha Public Power District
Fort Calhoun Station FC-2-4 Adm.
P.O. Box 399
Hwy. 75 - North of Fort Calhoun
Fort Calhoun, Nebraska 68023-0399

SUBJECT: FIRE PROTECTION TRIENNIAL BASELINE INSPECTION REPORT

NO. 50-285/00-01

Dear Mr. Gambhir:

On January 24 to 28, and March 10, 2000, the NRC conducted a pilot fire protection triennial baseline inspection of your Fort Calhoun Station reactor facility.

The enclosed report presents the results of that inspection.

The team leader presented preliminary findings to you and members of your staff in a briefing on January 28, 2000, and in an exit meeting on March 10, 2000, both of which were held at Fort Calhoun Station.

Following review of the preliminary findings by the NRC’s Significance Determination Process Panel, a re-exit was held by telephone on April 28, 2000, to inform you of changes to the preliminary inspection findings.

Based on the results of this inspection, the NRC has determined that a violation of NRC requirements occurred for failure to comply with License Condition E to your license, relative to maintaining in effect all provisions of your NRC-approved fire protection program.

Specifically, the installed configuration of power cables in Fire Area 32 (the air compressor room) conflicts with the description of the fire area provided to the NRC in your exemption request of January 9, 1985.

The NRC used this information as a basis for issuing an exemption from 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.2 for power cables in Fire Area 32.

The other example concerns the failure of the installed configuration of control cables in Fire Area 32 to meet the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.2 for ensuring that redundant trains of safe shutdown equipment remain free of fire damage.

This violation is being treated as a noncited violation.

It is the NRC’s understanding that you do not consider the configuration of either the power or control cables to be outside your design basis.

Therefore, it is your position that these violations of your License Condition E did not occur.

However, as committed in the exit meeting of March 10, and again in the exit meeting of April 28, 2000, your posted compensatory measures for Fire Area 32 will remain in place until you have contacted Region IV management otherwise.

In addition, this issue was entered into your corrective action program.

The team also identified a condition where a fire in either Fire Areas 34B (the upper electrical penetration room) or 36B (the west switchgear room) could potentially cause fire-induced circuit failures and result in the reactor coolant gas vent system valves spuriously opening and
Omaha Public Power District establishing a vent path beyond your analyzed makeup capacity.

The NRC staff and industry are currently working to resolve questions raised by the industry about the adequacy of the existing staff guidance concerning fire-induced circuit failures.

In order to allow the industry to develop an acceptable approach to resolving this issue, the NRC will defer any enforcement action relative to these matters while the staff evaluates the Nuclear Energy Institute’s proposed resolution methodology and you have time to implement the resolution methodology, once approved.

Therefore, an apparent violation of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix R, Section III.G.1.a, was identified for failure to ensure that one train of redundant systems necessary for achieving and maintaining hot shutdown, located within the same fire area, would remain free of fire
damage.

The NRC’s Inspection Manual Chapter 0610* defines an apparent violation as “a potential noncompliance with a regulatory requirement that has not yet been formally cited as a violation in a notice of violation or order.”

It is the NRC’s understanding that you do not consider these circuit vulnerabilities to be a violation of NRC requirements; however, as a conservative response to these findings, you posted compensatory measures for Fire Areas 34B and 36B, which will remain in place until this issue is resolved.

During the exit meeting on April 28, 2000, you stated that you had recently completed an analysis, which demonstrated that given a fire in either Fire Areas 34B or 36B, your operators could cope with spurious opening of the reactor coolant gas vent system valves.

These violations are described in the subject inspection report and have been entered into your corrective action program.

If you contest the nature or severity level of any of these violations, you should provide a response within 30 days of the date of this inspection report, with the basis for your denial, to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001, with copies to the Regional Administrator, Region IV, and the Director, Office of Enforcement, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555-0001.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, and its enclosure will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.

Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Dr. Dale A. Powers, Acting Chief
Engineering and Maintenance Branch
Division of Reactor Safety
Docket No.: 50-285
License No: DPR-40
Omaha Public Power District -3-

Enclosure:

NRC Inspection Report No. 50-285/00-01

cc w/enclosure:

Mark T. Frans, Manager
Nuclear Licensing
Omaha Public Power District
Fort Calhoun Station FC-2-4 Adm.
P.O. Box 399
Hwy. 75 - North of Fort Calhoun
Fort Calhoun, Nebraska 68023-0399

James W. Chase, Division Manager
Nuclear Assessments
Fort Calhoun Station
P.O. Box 399
Fort Calhoun, Nebraska 68023

Richard P. Clemens, Manager - Fort Calhoun Station
Omaha Public Power District
Fort Calhoun Station FC-1-1 Plant
P.O. Box 399
Hwy. 75 - North of Fort Calhoun
Fort Calhoun, Nebraska 68023

Perry D. Robinson, Esq.
Winston & Strawn
1400 L. Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-3502

Chairman
Washington County Board of Supervisors
Washington County Courthouse
P.O. Box 466
Blair, Nebraska 68008

Cheryl K. Rogers, Program Manager
Nebraska Health and Human Services System
Division of Public Health Assurance
Consumer Services Section
301 Centennial Mall, South
P.O. Box 95007
Lincoln, Nebraska 68509-5007

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/RE...fcs_2000001.pdf

"Fort Calhoun Station Completes Successful Outage"

June 26, 2008

Omaha Public Power District’s nuclear power plant, Fort Calhoun Station, has successfully completed its latest refueling and maintenance outage.

The plant is currently operating at 100 percent power after going back online Wednesday, June 18.

A plant of Fort Calhoun Station’s design routinely returns to full power gradually in order to make adjustments where needed as the power output increases.

The plant was taken off line April 19.

During the outage, about one third of the fuel assemblies in the reactor core were replaced.

The new fuel assemblies will remain in the reactor for approximately four and a half years.

In all, OPPD plant personnel and other employees performed hundreds of activities with supplemental workers from outside companies assisting.

In all, around 1,300 workers took part in nearly 10,000 activities and tasks during the outage.

Besides refueling the plant, workers conducted numerous tests and performed preventive maintenance on plant equipment and instrumentation to ensure the plant continues to perform safely at peak efficiency.

Workers also inspected the plant’s steam generators installed in 2006 as well as the steam turbine used by the plant to generate electricity.

When operating, Fort Calhoun Station generates approximately 500 million watts of emission-free power.

The Omaha Public Power District serves nearly 340-thousand retail customers, the most of any utility in Nebraska.

http://www.oppd.com/NewsandEvents/Newsroom...0#outage_062608

Found the license - http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collecti.../sr1437s12b.pdf

There were 66 areas that the SCIS addressed that pertained to the environment. It's 148 pages long, just that part of the license so I just looked for references to ambient river temps. The also admitted that they had done little to no study on the that section of the Missouri river as it was considered desolate prior to this new license.

Anyway, I think your point is made. There is a lot of information in just those 148 pages - but I don't understand it all enough to read the entire 800+ pages. This gives a pretty good picture.

Page 23

Comment: The second point is — or the second topic that I wanted to discuss was
environmental impact. Recently, the Army Corps of Engineers is looking to change their
manipulation of the Missouri River. There is a lobby against changing it from the power
associations because they require high levels of water in the river during the summer to cool
down the plants.
In turn, this basically greater — or it threatens seriously endangered species, including the
pallid sturgeon and the piping plover. (FCS-W-2)

Response: The comments are noted. The comments relate to aquatic- and terrestrial-ecology
issues and have been considered in the preparation of the SEIS. NRC consultation with the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is discussed in Chapter 4 of the SEIS.



Page 23
Response: The comments are noted. The comments relate to aquatic- and terrestrial-ecology
issues and have been considered in the preparation of the SEIS. NRC consultation with the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) is discussed in Chapter 4 of the SEIS.

Comment: Section 2.2.3, Page 2-19, Line 31 – This sentence indicates that average change in
river temperature would be approximately 1 °C (2 °F) in a turbulent mixing system. However,
using lowest monthly average river flow (January) of 20,982 and discharge temperature of 23
°F above ambient, OPPD calculates that the increase in river temperature after complete mixing
would be only 0.5 °C (0.9 °F). It is unclear whether this represents a discrepancy; if so, it
should be resolved. (FCSD-D-13)

Response: Staff assumptions on river flow used in the draft SEIS were slightly different from
those used by OPPD, leading to differences in rounding; for consistency, the values derived
from using OPPD’s assumptions have been used in Section 2.2 of the final SEIS.
|
Comment: Section 2.2.3, Page 2-19, Lines 31-34 – Revise as follows: “During the winter, the
total change in temperature may be greater as the upstream discharge of cooling water is
performed to melt any ice in the river to prevent icing of the intake structure. Under normal
winter operating these conditions, the total change in temperature may be as high as 18°C
(32°F) between the intake and discharge of the cooling waters.” (FCSD-D-14)
|
Comment: Section 2.2.5, Page 2-22, Lines 10-12 – Revise sentence to read, “Fish Creek, a
small tributary that outfalls to the Missouri River, on the Fort Calhoun Station site which
is located on Fort Calhoun Station and is the lowermost segment of the Missouri River, provides
little available…” (FCSD-D-15) |

Page 40
Comment: How far downstream does the released water travel before being fully mixed with |
the Missouri River water during the May–July time period? Does this distance vary under high |
and low flow conditions, and if so what is the variation? (FCSD-E-3) |
|
Response: The downstream distance that FCS cooling water travels before being fully mixed
has not been directly assessed in the current CORMIX studies, which have focused on
conformance to provisions of Nebraska Title 117 Chapter 1, Section 041, for mixing zones,
which is 1524 m (5000 ft) downstream from the discharge point. The CORMIX thermal plume
modeling results using near-worst-case summer low-flow conditions indicate that the plume
temperature would fall to approximately 1.5
C (2.7
F) above river ambient temperature at the
end of the mixing zone (OPPD 2003). This modeling run assumed only a circulating water flow
from the plant of 22.7 m3/s (802 cfs), which is slightly lower than total discharge of 23 m3/s
(827 cfs), a discharge temperature of 13.1
C (23.6
F) above river ambient temperature, which
approximates full power conditions and worst-case summer river conditions, including a
summer 7-day, 10-year low-flow (7Q10) of 818 m3/s (28,892 cfs) and an ambient river
temperature of 30.6
C (87
F). Historical thermal plume studies indicate that low river flows
result in poorer mixing conditions than high river flow conditions, so predicted plume
temperature at a point 1524 m (5000 ft) downstream would be lower at higher river flows

Basically, Livy...

What my untrained eye tells me is exactly what you said..

It's raising the temperature of the river by about 2 degrees, more or less on any given day - and that they really have no idea how far down stream it takes for it to 'mingle' and cool with the rest of the water but are guessing about a mile or such.

And how do you 'mingle' hot water back to cold water.. I mean once the temperature of the water is raised so high - that forever changes the temperature of down river temperatures.

I also learned something new! They consider a plume either steam/vapor that rises upwards .. but a plume can also be that same range of heat that is flowing south down the river.

Living in the desert, I never had given that much thought.

Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants - Supplement 12 Regarding Fort Calhoun Station, Unit 1

Final Report U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Washington, DC 20555-0001

Manuscript Completed: August 2003

Date Published: August 2003

Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, DC 20555-0001

2.1.3 Cooling- and Auxiliary-Water Systems

During its operations, Fort Calhoun Station obtains water from (1) a once-through, noncontact cooling system that uses water from the Missouri River and (2) potable water supplies from the City of Blair Municipal Water System.

In addition, a small quantity (less than 6.3 L/s [100 gpm]) of groundwater from two onsite wells is used at the plant.

The groundwater is used predominantly to (1) adjust water levels and (2) flush the sanitary-waste lagoons and the center-pivot irrigation system, which is used to land-apply treated effluent from the lagoons.

Details of the once-through cooling system and groundwater withdrawals are discussed in the following sections.

2.1.3.1 Cooling-Water System

The once-through, noncontact cooling system (water is self-contained, and cooling water does not come into contact with the reactor core) at Fort Calhoun Station consists of an intake structure that collects cooling water from the water source (the Missouri River).

The cooling water is used to remove heat from internal (contained) coolants and is then released directly back into the water source.

Thermal-plume studies were initiated in the early days of the plant’s operation and have recently been repeated at Fort Calhoun Station (OPPD 1976, EPA 2003).

These studies examined the impact of discharging the heated water back into the water source and identified a thermal gradient that moves parallel to the shoreline of the Missouri River.

This thermal gradient does not significantly impact gross ambient temperatures in the river.

The maximum change in the temperature of the receiving water is regulated by the State of Nebraska under the Clean Water Act using National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits.

At Fort Calhoun Station, the intake structure is a reinforced-concrete building that extends approximately 24 m (80 ft) along the bank of the Missouri River at river mile (rmi) 645.85.

Most of the water withdrawn at the structure is used in the circulating-water system, which employs three pumps operating at 7571 L/s (2000 gal/s).

The water in the circulating-water system removes heat from the main (turbine) condensers and other turbine plant-heat exchangers, which are used to cool turbine bearings, lubricating oil, and related equipment (OPPD 2002a).

Water is also withdrawn from the intake structure by the raw-water system, which provides once-through cooling water to component cooling-water-heat exchangers.

This cooling water removes heat from various auxiliary systems, the spent fuel pool, ventilation equipment, pump components, and other equipment.

The raw-water system consists of four pumps; each pump has an operating capacity of 336 L/s (89 gal/s).

During normal plant operations, only one pump operates, but two pumps may operate in the summer when ambient river temperatures are higher.

Water enters the intake structure through six separate inlet bays.

Vertical trash screens or racks (steel bars placed approximately 8 cm [3 in.] apart) are placed on each inlet to prevent large debris from entering the system.

Debris that accumulates on the trash racks is removed periodically by isolating the outer portion of the inlet bay and using the surface sluice system to
backwash the racks.

Approximately 3 m (9.8 ft) beyond the gates are traveling screens with a 1-cm (3/8-in.) mesh to prevent small debris from entering the system.

Any debris that is washed from the traveling screens is then directed to a screen wash trough that discharges back to the river at the downstream end of the intake structure.

Water passing through the intake screens enters three pump cells with two inlet bays per cell.

The pumps for both the circulating-water system and the raw-water system take suction from this area of the intake structure.

The circulating-water-system pumps, transfer water from the pump cells to the intake tunnel and through the main condensers and turbine plant-heat
exchangers.

Side streams from the intake tunnel provide water for backwashing the trash racks and traveling screens and for operating the surface sluice system.

Under extreme low-flow conditions, the average velocity of intake water flowing through the sluice gate openings in the curtain walls is approximately 0.85 m/s (2.8 ft/s).

The estimated average approach velocities to the traveling screens are 0.2 and 0.3 m/s (0.7 and 1.1 ft/s) at river surface elevations of 302 and 300 m (992 and 983 ft), respectively.

These two river surfaces correspond to normal- and low-flow conditions in this reach of the Missouri River.

Once cooling water from the Missouri River passes through the main condensers and heat exchangers, the water is discharged from a below-grade, reinforced-concrete discharge tunnel that measures 10 by 4 m (33 by 14 ft).

This tunnel is approximately 12 m (40 ft) downstream of the intake structure.

The floor of the discharge structure protrudes an additional 8 m (25 ft) downstream to protect against riverbed scouring.

2.2.2 Water Use

The maximum water withdrawal from the Missouri River into the intakes of the once-through cooling system during normal operation is approximately 23 m3/s (827 ft3/s).

At the average lowest-flow conditions in the Missouri River from 1967 to 2000 (occurring in January), this would amount to approximately 4 percent of the river flow.

In the average highest-flow period (occurring in June), this intake volume accounts for 2 percent of the Missouri River flow.

Aside from minor losses to evaporation, the entire volume of water that is withdrawn from the Missouri River at the intake structure is subsequently returned to the river at a small distance downstream.

In addition, the once-through cooling water system at Fort Calhoun Station does not have cooling towers, so any water losses through evaporation are minimal.

2.2.3 Water Quality

In a noncontact cooling system such as the one in place at Fort Calhoun Station, the cooling water is self-contained and does not come into direct contact with the reactor core.

In addition, this type of cooling system does not discharge water that has been in contact with contaminants.

Therefore, potential sources of pollution from a noncontact cooling system include high-temperature water discharges; heavy metal leaching from condenser piping; and biocides, which are added to cooling water to control the buildup of microbial biomass.

At Fort Calhoun Station, the use of biocide has been unnecessary so far.

In addition, the general potential for heavy metal leaching from condenser piping has been examined in the GEIS and has been deemed to be a small Category 1 impact.

Therefore, the applicable issue to Fort Calhoun Station is the change in temperature of the receiving waters that is caused by discharges from the once-through cooling system.

Additional water-quality issues may arise from the discharge of cooling water.

The energy from the discharges can potentially mobilize sediments that can then negatively impact water quality.

In addition, because the water source of Fort Calhoun Station is the highly managed Missouri River, additional issues related to channel dredging and bank stability are potential sources of sediment resuspension and are discussed in Chapter 4.

The cooling-water circulation system is operated in compliance with provisions of NPDES Permit NE0000418 for Fort Calhoun Station.

The permit currently limits discharge temperatures to 43.3 C (110 F) and allows a conditional discharge temperature of 44.4 C (112 F) under the terms of a Consent Order that was entered into by the OPPD and the NDEQ (OPPD 2002a).

The terms of the Consent Order allow for continued full-power operation of Fort Calhoun Station during the unusually high ambient river temperatures that have been experienced in the Missouri River in recent years.

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collecti.../sr1437s12a.pdf

You are a good researcher, Terra ....

And you have a discerning mind ...

And here is exactly what I thought that I would find, Terra ...

This is the same CRAP that they are pulling with the nuke plants on Lake Ontario ....

In this specific case, they are negating any real permit limits on cooling water effluent temperature with a CONSENT ORDER which is not subject to public review or scrutiny or challenge ...

And if you are a layperson unfamiliar with permits and enforcement of permit conditions, this would go right on by your head for many reasons ....

But just study this sentence right below here for a moment, and then tell me what you think it says:

The terms of the Consent Order allow for continued full-power operation of Fort Calhoun Station during the unusually high ambient river temperatures that have been experienced in the Missouri River in recent years.

It says they know damn well it's been heating the river far past their projections for probably the past 15 years, and no one can stop them from continuing to do so. (=

Pretty damn sad, and really sneaky how they put that in there.

See, that's why I don't believe a damn thing they say about Yucca, either. Lie lie lie - is all they do!!

You got it cold, Terra ....

And I would say that they are doing this for all the nuke plants ....

It is a great big scam ....

On the one hand, they tell you they have a permit, and the permit limits them so there won't be no harm ...

But on the other hand, they actually have a FREE PASS which releases them from compliance with the permit conditions ....

And so ....

Perhaps you can now see the basis of my concerns ...

Mankind is going to have to take a much more aggressive role in the mastery of the earth.

We now have the tools. Will we find the strength?

Can the 9 Billion souls estimated to be here by mid-century put their lives to mere CHANCE that the earth's temperature or fish stocks or freshwater supplies or energy sources will all align for our benefit?

Maybe the Jesus-people who live by faith over fact.

I would like to see the world launch a series of ultra-thin metalized mylar solar reflectors in low earth orbit to CONTROL the temperature of the earth by controlling the insolation.

I would like to see a massive conversion to nuclear power, the most abundant and safest form of energy from which all sorts of intermediary liquid fuels can be manufactured.

I would like to see advancement in aquaculture and desalinization (the Israelis have got it down to 55 cents per cubic meter).

THERE ARE TOO MANY PEOPLE TO JUST LET THINGS HAPPEN.

Well, jeffmoskin, when we have a government over here who lies to us and deceives us, as in the case of this Nebraska nuke plant ...

And when we have a population that sucks up those lies like a milkshake through a straw and then clamors for more ....

Like Obama telling cheering crowds of apparently mindless people last night that he is going to end our dependence on foreign oil in TEN YEARS, when with two terms, IF ELECTED, he would only be in office for eight ...

I think we are on a downhill run of it, myself ....

Because houses built on shifting sand cannot stand ....

And LIES do not produce positive forward progress ....

But hey, that's just me ....

And so ...

Will we find the strength to realize that WE DO NOT HAVE THE TOOLS ....

Will we find the strength to realize that we are the masters of doodly-squat ...

Will we find the strength to finally say NO to all the LIES?

Probably not, jeffmoskin ...

And Jesus got his @$$ hung on a tree for speaking UNPOLITICALLY CORRECT TRUTH ....

There's a real message right there, jeffmoskin, for people like me ....

And so ...

If you take a look at this part of the GEIS supplement for this Nebraska nuke plant, Terra, what you are going to see is what we engineers call HOBBLE-GOBBLE and GOBBLEDY-GOOK, which is TECHNO-SPEAK for what you laypersons would call PURE, PLAIN BULL**** ....

Case in point are these following two sentences, to wit:

The cooling-water circulation system is operated in compliance with provisions of NPDES Permit NE0000418 for Fort Calhoun Station.

The permit currently limits discharge temperatures to 43.3 C (110 F) and allows a conditional discharge temperature of 44.4 C (112 F) under the terms of a Consent Order that was entered into by the OPPD and the NDEQ (OPPD 2002a).

end quotes

The second sentence clearly contradicts the first sentence, and notwithstanding, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation goes ahead and publishes it anyway, because they can ...

It is PURE BULL****, and they know it, but they publish it anyway because they can ...

It won't be challenged ...

There isn't a mechanism that allows for such a challenge ....

The government document that supports the re-licensing of this Nebraska nuclear facility for another twenty years states that "The cooling-water circulation system is operated in compliance with provisions of NPDES Permit NE0000418 for Fort Calhoun Station and that the permit currently limits discharge temperatures to 43.3 C (110 F)" ....

PERMIT CURRENTLY LIMITS ....

They are saying that the permit allows the nuke facility to discharge water back into the Missouri river that is 110 degrees F. ....

Then, in the same breath, they add "and allows a conditional discharge temperature of 44.4 C (112 F) under the terms of a Consent Order that was entered into by the OPPD and the NDEQ (OPPD 2002a)."

So there really IS NOT a LIMIT of 110 degrees F, because they are actually allowed to go to 112 degrees F. by the backroom deal that their lawyers cooked up with the alleged regulators ....

And then, the real BULL**** factor enters in in the last sentence, to wit:

The terms of the Consent Order allow for continued full-power operation of Fort Calhoun Station during the unusually high ambient river temperatures that have been experienced in the Missouri River in recent years.

end quotes

TERMS OF CONSENT ORDER ALLOW FOR CONTINUED FULL-POWER OPERATION .....

The more power the plant is producing, the more heat it is discharging ....

If you go back to the licensing document above here, you will notice:

Most of the water withdrawn at the structure is used in the circulating-water system, which employs three pumps operating at 7571 L/s (2000 gal/s).

end quotes

2000 gal/s is 2000 gallons of river water per second ....

PER SECOND ....

And it is not clear, but I take that to mean PER PUMP, so that would be a cumulative 6,000 gallons per second passing through this plant and coming back out again as 112 degree F. water into the Missouri river, which the government admits is experiencing "unusually high ambient river temperatures" ...

Well, hey, there's a real big surprise, isn't it?

By the VOODOO science employed by the government and the nuclear industry and its many apologists, you can put water at 112 degrees F. into cooler river water all day long, 24/7/365, and the river water itself will never get warmer, or it will only get TWO DEGREES warmer, or some such BULL**** as that ....

And if it should turn out that the Missouri river is heating up, well, that is because a termite in Africa or a cow in a Nebraska feedlot farted ....

So kill the termites and all problems will be solved ....

And let's have a nuke plant on every block in America ....

Let's have a nuke plant in everybody's back yard, because they are SAFE ....

How do we know they are safe?

Well, we have the word of the nuclear industry, and everybody knows that CORPORATE AMERICA never ever lies ....

And then, to back them up, we have the word of the federal government ....

And the federal government tells even more truth than CORPORATE AMERICA does ....

And there is where we really are, Terra ....

God bless the children of the generations yet to come ....

Maybe you can do them a favor by putting out a HOW-TO book on living in a desert ....

They will need it ....

Because we are going to leave them one as our bequeathal to them ...

And so ...

Exactly why I don't believe them about Yucca, and Yucca is no longer 90 miles from Vegas... houses are almost right next to it. The gvmnt lied about prior nuclear tests deeming them safe - and yet towns and people who got covered in the dust are still suffering from it 40 years later.. Utah, Nevada - with 50 times the amount of certain cancers than anywhere else..

They lie and fudge and write fake reports (and get caught sometimes) .. and we who have lived in NV all our lives have been saying No to Yucca since they nominated this state - cause no one knows better than the men and women who worked those tunnels for years and years - that they are lying through their teeth. Maybe they are waiting for them all to die off - so they will stop talking.

And the nuclear power sites - if they 'REALLY' weren't causing a problem they wouldn't have to lie and deceive.. they wouldn't have to write them a free pass behind the facade of easily accessed public information. And I still don't grasp the nuts and bolts of everything - but, from what little I have learned over yucca the past 22 years is enough to tell me they have done nothing but feed the public lies and misinformation when it comes to getting what they want.

Really, there needs to be Nuclear Power for Dummy classes in every town.

Unfortunately, there already are.

Starting with "The China Syndrome"

Brought to you by...

BigOil

Not quite what I had in mind.

At least our old time Mayor Oscar Goodman has some sense. He went and laid down across the road when they tried to bring one truckload in on the sly - and he had a whole bunch of people with him.

I don't even care he was drinking his trademark Martini at the time.

Absolutely, unless there is something added which cools it off like colder surface air, rainwater, or water melting from snow north of it...

Man is not the master of the Earth.

He is subject to its whims in terms of climatology and geology.

However, man does have an impact on the Earth and as we have seen from global warming which I believe is influenced by manmade

They, the Plant, are melting the snow so it doesn't bother their intake valves. So add an additional messing with the natural flow of the environment to the laundry list.

"Hurricane-force winds, heavy rain hit Phoenix area - Storms packing hurricane-force winds rip through Phoenix, damage football facility"

Associated Press

Last updated: 3:42 p.m., Friday, August 29, 2008

PHOENIX -- A series of fast-moving thunderstorms packing winds of up to 100 mph plowed through the Phoenix area, leaving tens of thousands without power, briefly shutting down the airport and ripping the roof off a brand-new college football facility.

There were no immediate reports of injuries from Thursday's storms.

About 500 travelers were forced to spend the night at Sky Harbor International Airport, where damage was reported to terminals, cargo areas, electrical systems, jetways and aircraft, spokeswoman Deborah Ostreicher said.

The airport was shut down for about an hour during the height of the storm, which dumped up to a 1 1/2 inches of rain and three-quarter-inch hail in some areas.

Flight delays were likely to continue Friday afternoon because flight crews were kept late and may have worked the maximum number of hours allowed.

National Weather Service meteorologist Leslie Wanek said Sky Harbor recorded peak winds of 75 mph, but radar indicated gusts of up to 100 mph in parts of the metro area.

In Tempe, Arizona State University officials said the storm damaged the school's new $8.4 million indoor practice facility that's mostly used for football.

A witness said the fabric roof on the structure was shredded and the bubble dome had completely deflated.

The 103,500-square-foot facility was completed this month.

At the State Capitol, a statue of World War I pilot Frank Luke Jr. was toppled from its pedestal.

Hundreds of trees in central and uptown Phoenix were downed, and a large section of roofing from a new condominium complex was torn off and thrown hundreds of feet, landing on the lines powering the city's soon-to-open light rail line.

Windows were blown out of at least one high-rise building downtown.

Tens of thousands of customers remained without power Friday, utility companies said.

At the height of the storm, about 100,000 homes and businesses were without power.

Power for many downtown traffic signals was still out as the morning rush began, and some traffic delays were reported.

Historically, the impact has been NEGATIVE. My point is that, for the first time in history, we have the scientific power to take control of this planet, shape it to our needs climatically, and permit our people to survive.

We do not need to be Katrina victims.

We do not need to lose our food stocks and fresh water.

We do not need to revert to a 19th century life-style.

We can do this... with leadership.

And while Obama will have to leave after 8 years of his ten year project, does that mean we have to stop? Is he going to take it with him, like the Clintons took the furniture?

The 21st century still has 92 years left. Let's use it wisely.

No, we don't, jeffmoskin ...

And it is folly to even begin to think that we do, just because on a veritable flyspeck of land, the people in Isreal, with a ton of financial backing from us, are able to water a speck of desert ....

We don't have the power to take control of this planet ...

Hell, jeffmoskin ....

You're close to Death Valley ...

There's a good place to start ...

You and Obama can start there ....

Take control of that as your initial demonstration project ....

Obama says that he can command science to do his biddding ...

There is the place for him to start ...

And in the meantime, he can tame these couple of hurricanes that are making their way towards us ....

And maybe he can make it like the Bahamas or Tahiti up here where I am while he is at it ....

And so ...

We must agree to disagree on this issue.

We split the atom.

We put a man on the moon.

Then we kind of gave up.

We must get back to work. The planet is in trouble, and we CAN AND MUST fix it. I do not believe we must stand idly by and await whatever climatic changes she wants to throw at us.

We split the atom, jeffmoskin, and what did that actually accomplish for anyone?

We put a man on the moon, and what did that accomplish for anyone?

We kind of gave up, actually, because those things were done at an exorbitant cost, and they accomplished DOODLY-SQUAT ....

We blew through a bunch of money and resources so that we could build up our NATIONAL EGO by saying that we could put a man on the moon ....

WHOOPTY ****ING DOO!

There is a big hurricane coming, jeffmoskin ....

Have modern science make it go away .....

That should be a real simple trick, after putting a man on the moon ....

And so ....

You want to control the weather, jeffmoskin, by covering the sky with MYLAR ....

MYLAR is polyethylene ....

I believe that polyethylene is made out of oil ....

I believe that your plan would use up all the oil there is in the world to make this MYLAR shield ....

And then, instead of looking up at a blue sky, we are going to look up and see MYLAR above our heads ....

And then that MYLAR is going to come down on top of us and suffocate us underneath of it ....

And finally, perhaps peace will return to the earth, after we have committed mass suicide by suffocating to death underneath a huge plastic bag that we like fools put ourselves into ....

And so ....

Naw.

The mylar could be gossamer thin (no weather up there). We would need thousands of them (with diameters of several miles each).

BUT IT COULD BE DONE.

And we could eliminate the swings in temperature that have nothing to do with CO2 emissions.

There was global warming between 900 and 1300AD.

And a quick cool-down in the early 1300s which probably led to the great plague in Europe in 1340.

If we had one of those "tricks" from mother nature, we might lose half the population of the planet.

And what exactly are you planning on doing to the climate up here where I am with your scheme, jeffmoskin?

What are you going to convert our climate over to?

And when you eliminate these temperature swings, what are you going to do about maple syrup, for example, that requires temperature swings for the tree to produce the sap?

Are you going to have DuPont start making maple syrup out of some kind of chemical residues they now have laying around in some sludge tank somewhere?

I'm going to make upstate New York livable, which is better than I remember it was when I lived there.

Well, then, jeffmoskin ....

First thing that you will have to do then is to get rid of those nuke plants on Lake Ontario near Rochester ....

Then, you are going to have to take all of that heat energy back out of Lake Ontario that was put in there by the waste heat from the nuke plants ....

And then, you are going to have to stop the frigid winds that come down from Canada and the Arctic from coming down this way ....

And when you do that, and the bugs stop getting killed off by the cold, then you are going to have to do something about all the trees that they have killed - replace them with some other species, such as coconuts or bananas or something ....

And then, on the second day .....

And so ...

Evaporation sucks energy out of the main body.
Examples: Hurricanes, body sweating, the botijo ...



The Spanish botijo is a water bottle made of unglazed earthenware that cools the water it contains by evaporation. The water is partly absorbed by the unglazed walls of the botijo. When the water reaches the surface, the water molecules with a high energy level manage to escape. In this way, the average energy level, which defines the temperature of the water, drops, and the water cools down till it reaches the dew point. In average kitchens this is at about 12 deg

So what we need is a Spanish botijo that we can put the waters of the Missouri River and Lake Ontario into so we can cool them back down ....

And all will then be copacetic with the world ....

And on the third day ...

And so ...

"Global warming's toasty water connection to Gustav - The fiercest storms, like Gustav, coming more often; scientists see global warming's effect"

By SETH BORENSTEIN, Associated Press

Last updated: 5:32 p.m., Sunday, August 31, 2008

Global warming has probably made Hurricane Gustav a bit stronger and wetter, some top scientists said Sunday, but the specific connection between climate change and stronger hurricanes remains an issue of debate.

The Atlantic is seeing an increase in storms rated among the strongest.

In the past four years, Hurricanes Gustav and Katrina, and six other storms have reached Category 4 or higher with sustained winds of at least 131 mph, according to research at Georgia Tech.

Six scientists contacted by The Associated Press on Sunday said this shows some effect of global warming, but they differ on the size of the effect.

"We are just seeing a lot more Categories 4 and 5 globally than we have ever seen," said Judith Curry, chairman of Earth and atmospheric sciences at Georgia Tech.

"The years 2004, 2005 and 2007 are quite high."

"We're just seeing more and more."

Measurements of the energy pumped into the air from the warm waters -- essentially fuel for hurricanes -- has increased dramatically since the mid 1990s, mostly in the strongest of hurricanes, according to a soon-to-be published paper in the journal Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems by Kevin Trenberth, climate analysis chief at National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo.

But the same scientists also caution it is impossible to blame global warming for any single weather event and that some form of Gustav (and other hurricanes) would have likely still formed and turned deadly without man-made climate change.

Yet the fingerprint of global warming on the strongest storms is becoming clearer with new research, scientists said.

And that includes Gustav, which reached Category 4 status Saturday before weakening.

"The strongest storms are expected to be stronger," said Gabriel Vecchi, a research oceanographer for a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration lab in Princeton, N.J.

"And since Gustav is a very strong storm, you'd expect Gustav to have had an effect from human-induced global warming."

But how much of an effect is where it gets tricky.

Vecchi said he can't tell how much, which makes him uncomfortable as a scientist.

Trenberth calculated, in an earlier journal article, that major storms like Katrina and Gustav probably have increased their rainfall by about 6 to 8 percent because of global warming.

Warmer water makes the surface air warmer, which means it could contain more moisture.

That means more hot moist air rises up the hurricane, serving as both fuel for the storm and extra rainfall coming back down, said Peter Webster, professor of atmospheric sciences at Georgia Tech.

For the past several years, scientists have traded papers and jibes about the effect global warming has already had -- if any -- on hurricanes.

Some scientists, such as Christopher Landsea at the National Hurricane Center, have faulted the quality of storm numbers and the length of time used for historical study used by Curry, Webster and others to connect to hurricanes to global warming.

"Yes, climate change is impacting hurricanes," Landsea said.

But the effect on storm intensity now is "very small," something that can't be noticed in a storm so big, he said.

Hugh Willoughby, a former government hurricane research director and now professor of meteorology at Florida International University in Miami, is not quite as convinced.

However, he said a consensus seems to be forming on a global warming effect on just the strongest of hurricanes.

But he said he thought Webster and others are exaggerating the effects.

Hurricane activity cycles -- where about every 25 years a lot of storms form followed by another quarter-century of fewer hurricanes -- plays a bigger role than global warming, Willoughby said.

"We have a real effect due to climate change," Willoughby said.

"But the dominant effect in my mind is just bad luck."

Plus, Willoughby said Gustav probably has little or no climate change effect to it because it looks just like similar storms from decades and even centuries ago.

Curry thinks it's more than cyclical.

The number of strongest storms now is far more than it was in the 1940s and 1950s, the last flurry of hurricane activity, she said.

And it's only getting worse, Curry said.

From 1975 to 1990, about 17 percent of all hurricanes around the world were Category 4 and 5.

From 1990 to 2004, that jumped to 35 percent.

And from 2003 through last year it was up to 41 percent -- not including this year's Gustav.

Terra stated:

QUOTE

I mean once the temperature of the water is raised so high - that forever changes the temperature of down river temperatures.

Nature makes sure it's not forever because/thanks of/to evaporation.

Yes, evaporation of surface waters is a function of surface temperature and surface area ...

As surface temperature increases, the rate of evaporation goes up ...

As the rate of evaporation goes up, the amount of water vapor in the air increases ..

As the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere increases, the potential for greater and greater amounts of precipitation increases ...

Which is to say higher and higher amounts of rain are going to fall back down to earth, somewhere ....

And so ...

"UN chief: Next US president must lead on climate - UN chief wants next US president to show greater leadership in tackling climate change"

By FRANK JORDANS, Associated Press

Last updated: 3:42 p.m., Sunday, August 31, 2008

GENEVA -- The next U.S. president must show greater leadership than previous administrations in tackling climate change, the head of the United Nations said Sunday.

"All the countries in the international community are looking for more and greater leadership from the United States," U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said after a celebration to mark the 20th anniversary of the founding of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Ban praised the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush for playing an "important role" in discussing how countries can minimize greenhouse gas emissions, thought to be the main reason for global warming.

But the United States has not done enough to turn talk into action, considering it is one of the biggest emitters of greenhouse gases, he said.

Emerging powers such as China and India point to the U.S. rejection of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol when arguing against making commitments on climate change.

Ban told journalists in Geneva that all developed countries need to take part if emissions are to be cut by at least half by 2050.

In a report published last year, the IPCC said such a reduction would be necessary to stop global temperatures rising more than 3.6 degrees above preindustrial levels.

Failure to do so will lead to severe droughts and cause massive hunger and poverty, it said.

"I think that, whoever may be elected as the president of the United States, may be in a better position to lead this process," Ban said.