It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mitsubishi Blamed for Nuke Plant's Closure

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 03:00 PM
link   
I must have missed the announcement but they have decided to outright shut down and decommission the reactors at San Onofre. It wasn't planned and it wasn't scheduled like this. In fact, they had JUST had large upgrades to the turbines, replacing the old ones with the expectation of 40 years of service from the new ones.

Therein, lay the problem. Oh, and a problem I'd say it is, too.


SAN DIEGO (CN) - San Diego Gas & Electric Co. blames Mitsubishi for the planned decommissioning of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, claiming the Japanese company made and sold it $135 million worth of steam generators that began leaking radioactive coolant in their first year of service.

SDG&E 18 sued Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Mitsubishi Nuclear Energy Systems in Superior Court, for fraud, negligence, breach of contract and other charges.


Ouch.... Although, this isn't the worst of the news here. California, as many know, is short of a good number of things these days. Water, Affordable food, clean air and......electricity during peak times, especially. I'd say that shortage just became real serious for the long term. Thanks Mitsubishi.


SDG&E and the City of Riverside are minority owners of the plant, which is north of San Diego on the coast. The plant provided energy to 1.4 million homes in Southern California.

The Wall Street Journal last week estimated that losses from the plant's closure could come to more than $4 billion.


Indeed. Money... That other thing they are short of in California. Of course, I'm sure SDG&E Customers won't mind taking one for the team and ponying up the difference for making this all balance, right? (Does anyone think the lawsuit will really cover these kinds of numbers?)


After the Nuclear Regulatory Commission found the new generators non-compliant, Mitsubishi said it would take at least one year to replace them, SDG&E says.

One solution involved inserting thicker anti-vibration bars into the generators, but SDG&E claims Mitsubishi has "not provided adequate scientific evidence that the plan would function safely, effectively, or that it would be approved by the NRC [Nuclear Regulatory Commission]."

Edison announced in June that it would permanently retire the two nuclear reactors.
Source: Courthouse News

Well, I hope for the best toward those in California. They've never had what could be called an overflowing surplus of power generation. Now, chronic shortage seems the order of the day. At least they failed in a way that didn't kill anyone and didn't create an environmental catastrophe in the process. There is that to be thankful for.

I wonder how they go about replacing energy they couldn't afford to lose? Over a million homes powered by these....within a system regularly running near limits before this.




posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 03:57 PM
link   
Yeah, MHI definitely takes the lions share of the blame here. I don't see why the NRC wouldn't let SONGS run at 70% derated until they figured out a solution, but oh well. At least I am not in California and wont have to put up with the rolling blackouts and/or double digit electricity increases.



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by SirMike
 


You know the problem is, with this smart grid they have been pounding away on now for years and years, it's all interconnected. So if California bottoms out for supply, they'll just tap out other states to compensate. They'll pay a premium, but they don't care. The consumer pays it and since when have they been real careful with "reimbursable" expenses. I recall the whole energy supply and price fixing scam that foreshadowed the Enron collapse was energy manipulation into California, out of Texas and other Western generation points.

Oh how it was simpler when the nation was looked at as states eh? A state being stupid suffered it's consequences but didn't take 10 other states down the same hole with them.



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 09:46 PM
link   
CONSPIRACY: Mitsubishi parts were sabotaged so that competitor could gain their secrets. When Mitsubishi refused they were sued with contracts going to competitor!

Also, Mitsubishi is Evo. I hate Evo.



posted on Jul, 23 2013 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Domo1
 


Here's a wild conspiracy for ya. Maybe Mitsubishi really sold them bad turbines and hardware as a payback for Fukushima? After all, that was a General Electric design and construction ..with the insanely ignorant brainstorm to locate the backup generators where ground level flooding could erase them.

Nuke plant for Nuke plant? Naww... I've just been working too hard. That's what it is. lol



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 08:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Or maybe, just maybe they botched their vibration analysis. It was a steam generator, basically just a big shell and tube heat exchanger.
edit on 30-7-2013 by SirMike because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


There isnt enough capacity in the interconnect to supply California with power outside the state to compensate for SONGS being offline. Prices will rise, and thats what will moderate the demand (that or the rolling blackouts).



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Is this thing built on a Fault Line?

Many Plants are...............



edit on 30-7-2013 by sonnny1 because: typo



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


It doesn't seem to sit directly on a major fault that I can find but that's like telling someone at a firing range that they aren't holding the gun going bang, so they shouldn't need their own hearing protection, too.



San Onofre and Diablo Canyon nuclear power stations are both very much in the deep red of the USGS Seismic projection map there. I think building either of them yards from open ocean and sitting in one of the most seismically active zones on the planet was sheer idiocy and long term suicidal thinking. They just seemed to bet it would be long term enough to be someone else's problem. Ooops... Human greed in Japanese crap to replace parts trumped human green in building in a truly insane location.

Don't ya love it when sheer stupid cancels itself out with pure greed and incompetence? Now...Diablo Canyon is till there. Hmm..



I'm sure we're just paranoid about California's other nuke plant tho, right? What could possibly go wrong in such a pretty place with such a big facility...feet from open ocean water?



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Diablo Canyon sits nearly 30 meters above sea level. There's little chance a tsunami would overtop that.



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 01:41 PM
link   
reply to post by SirMike
 


I'm sure the Fukushima designers said precisely the same thing, almost word for word. Who knows what natural disaster could or will someday befall the Eastern Pacific to teach mankind humility. You'd think the lesson was more than sufficient in Japan ..but no. Alas... They're reopening everything they can and our side? Well, we're muddling along with 25-30 year old tech and just figuring worst case is so bad, why worry anyway?

I'll bet if we really spent time looking at what has befallen that coast line across history, recent enough to matter in geologic terms, people living anywhere near this would have issues ever sleeping well again.

Of course tho... It's 30 meters over the waterline, so perfectly safe. Nothing to see here ....unless of course a major quake were to help a little in the damage before more came. Err..... They never think of combined disasters, huh? Precisely what caused Fukushima to go from "real bad day" to "Name known for generations".

It took multiple things going wrong. It always does.



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Yes yes, from the school of thought that the safest plant is one thats never built. Risks are quantifiable and manageable but can never be eliminated and the benefits of stations like San Onofre and Diablo Canyon far outweigh the risks.



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by SirMike
 


I'll just have to disagree. I thought much the same way about 1:Million odds being long enough to reap the benefits of what the plants bring. I still would if they were built outside the MOST dangerous places our nation can possibly offer for the effort. They have none dead center in the New Madrid Zone (How kind of them) but the two built along California's coast line are sheer lunacy.

It's not so much that nuclear power is bad by nature. It's not. Handled with solid technology and care beyond greed? It's probably the best tech man has to develop for energy needs. It's a shame we'll never see that advance as long as we're watching accidents and screw ups from that greed though. It was far easier and cheaper to build them ON the water than build the pipeline infrastructure necessary to keep them full on coolant, miles inland. :shk:

For that, we get to hope, pray and just pretend like Tsunami's and natural disasters which could wipe out a place like Diablo Canyon only happened in the distant past..and of course, can never happen again.

*Fukushima blew enough downwind to likely wipe out a good % of the Japanese national population if downwind hadn't been out to sea. Look at the wind patterns and prevailing weather around Diablo Canyon and San Onofre. Downwind? That's a lot of dead people to gamble on "It can never happen!"

........when building a few miles further east would haven made that statement true.

edit on 30-7-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2013 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by SirMike
 


I'll just have to disagree. I thought much the same way about 1:Million odds being long enough to reap the benefits of what the plants bring. I still would if they were built outside the MOST dangerous places our nation can possibly offer for the effort. They have none dead center in the New Madrid Zone (How kind of them) but the two built along California's coast line are sheer lunacy.


Power plants are built where people need power and the infrastructure and utilities exist to support them. That’s why plants are built on the coast.


It's not so much that nuclear power is bad by nature. It's not. Handled with solid technology and care beyond greed? It's probably the best tech man has to develop for energy needs. It's a shame we'll never see that advance as long as we're watching accidents and screw ups from that greed though. It was far easier and cheaper to build them ON the water than build the pipeline infrastructure necessary to keep them full on coolant, miles inland. :shk:


Optimizing a design isn’t “greed”, it’s the only way a project goes forward because without optimization nothing would ever be built.


For that, we get to hope, pray and just pretend like Tsunami's and natural disasters which could wipe out a place like Diablo Canyon only happened in the distant past..and of course, can never happen again.


That’s the purpose of risk assessment and risk management. At some point in time an earthquake or tsunami powerful enough to critically damage the plant will occur, but the estimated frequency is so low that the risk of such an event is acceptable.


*Fukushima blew enough downwind to likely wipe out a good % of the Japanese national population if downwind hadn't been out to sea.


No, actually it didn’t.



posted on Jul, 31 2013 @ 03:33 AM
link   
reply to post by SirMike
 



Power plants are built where people need power and the infrastructure and utilities exist to support them. That’s why plants are built on the coast.


Golly... I never thought of that. What a novel idea and concept!

Now.. maybe if they built them A FEW MILES from the open water of the ocean? It would be a touch safer than a matter of meters off the water itself. Diablo Canyon doesn't even have a breakwater to compare to Fukushima for primary protection and containment out to sea.


Optimizing a design isn’t “greed”, it’s the only way a project goes forward because without optimization nothing would ever be built.


Then let them optimize them. San Onofre started life in 1968. (Unit 2 in 1983) Diablo Canyon, in 1985. Optimal is technology that wasn't 'tried and true' when Lyndon Johnson or Ronald Reagan was President, respectively. Nuclear Power with something like modern technology to support modern designs might hold promise. Modern is nothing we're talking about much relates to. With an average age pushing 32 years, there is absolutely nowhere to fit the word modern into a discussion about a good % of the nuclear stations in the U.S.


That’s the purpose of risk assessment and risk management. At some point in time an earthquake or tsunami powerful enough to critically damage the plant will occur, but the estimated frequency is so low that the risk of such an event is acceptable.


Yup.... Fukushima put the exception to the rule and blew the risk assessments to crap. We're talking about churning out guesses based on assumptions, working off best evidence (which means..whatever they've found to look at so far) on land humans haven't even lived to record events on for more than a few hindered years in any proper way. (In the case of the U.S./North America)

Like I said. Building Nuclear Power Stations close enough to open, unprotected ocean is bordering on psychotic for the level of pure ignorance and stupidity. Defending it is baffling to the point of wonderment.


No, actually it didn’t.

Well, actually, YES...had it blown inland and south rather than out into the open Pacific. The Ronald Reagan got a dose of radiation across the deck 100 miles offshore with enough to record and make enough about to get into the news. Like many, I did and have followed this story very closely. Whatever B.S. TEPCO and Tokyo is babbling this week to make a nightmare sound nice nice, this sucker was still multiple, independent nuclear cores going into full meltdown and they STILL have weird things like spikes in radiation and steam events they cannot explain, while only guessing just where the cores actually are.

A few sites follow this on a very close basis...so it's been interesting to follow and enlightening to see what happens when pencil pushers assigning 1:million odds to something are no more gifted for numbers than they are in Vegas. Meanwhile, the full extent and damage from an event that is still very much on going and without a firm end yet, keeps on being tallied and assessed.
edit on 31-7-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join