[ RadSafe ] Coal fired replacement power -was: -RE: More on San Onofre - Engineer's input needed

Mon Apr 9 01:18:20 CDT 2012

A very large fraction of the coal-fired electric generation of the Four
Corners, NM and San Juan, NM [gross nominal output of 2100 MWe] is
transported to various cities in CA. Until late 2010 SCE, operator of San
Onofre, owned 48% of the generation of Units 4 & 5 [ nominal output 1,500
MWe at the Four Corners, NM coal plant complex]. In early 2011, I think SCE
had to divest its formal interest in the Four Corners plants due to certain
regulations as to greenhouse gas emissions per MWe capacity imposed on SCE. 

We can be quite sure that more of the coal-fired power output from the Four
Corners, NM  [about 700 miles from LA] will be directed to S. California if
San Onofre stays offline this summer. The local option for replacement power
for San Onofre is a now a shuttered 2 unit gas fired power plant [total
generation capacity 1,500 MWe] The pipelines bringing gas to this local gas
plant have been severed, and 3' holes cut in the boiler so bringing these
stations back on line will take a bit of work. But it could be done by
summer.

It is reassuring that the SG tubes are carefully inspected and can be easily
plugged at nuclear plants. However on the natural gas transport pipeline
side of things, there was the large PG&E [ 30 inch diameter installed in
1956] gas pipeline explosion in San Bruno, CA in Sept. 2010 that killed 8
and burned down a neighborhood. PG&E just entered into a $70 million
settlement with some of the survivors of this gas pipeline explosion a few
months ago. 

It's unfortunate Federal regulatory agencies don't do a bit more to promote
interstate gas pipeline inspections, which would help to limit deaths from
pipeline explosions and fires. Apparently Federal regulatory resources are
directed primarily to seeking absolute "safety" in nuclear plant tubing and
operations,  and not such mundane items as ensuring enhanced safety with
large diameter gas pipelines, or oil drilling activities.

Nationwide, about 200 explosions, fires, and major natural gas pipeline
leaks occur each year in large gas transport pipelines.  While this may seem
high, it is down from about 1,400 accidents at major gas pipelines a few
decades ago.  I always get a chuckle when I hear a commercial for "clean,
safe, natural gas". Good luck to CA in firing up the gas power plant in the
area and to bringing in the gas it takes to power a 1,500 MWe gas power
plant.

Stewart Farber
203-441-8433

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of William Lipton
Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2012 9:19 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] More on San Onofre - Engineer's input needed

The new EPA clean air regulations s effectively preclude any new coal
generating plants.

Bill Lipton
It's not about dose, it's about trust.
 On Apr 8, 2012 8:18 PM, "ROY HERREN" <royherren2005 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Sandy,
>
>     I was surprised to read your e-mail about the Steam Generators 
> being "relatively new".  I had initially assumed that they had merely 
> replaced the old tubing in the old generator with new tubes; I didn't 
> know that they had completely replaced the Steam Generators.  Given 
> that these are "relatively new"
> generators it is all the more disconcerting that some of the tubes are 
> already leaking.  Hopefully the root cause of the leak(s) will be 
> determined and a timely solution can be applied to get the units up 
> and operating.
>
>    We are in a quandary of sorts regarding electrical energy production!
> Some
> folks don't want coal fired electrical generating plants, some folks 
> don't want oil or gas fired electrical generating plants, some folks 
> don't want Solar thermal plants, some folks don't want windmills, and 
> some folks don't want Nuclear Power plants (hell, here in northern 
> California some folks want to tear down some old dams and do away with 
> water reservoirs and the hydroelectric
> energy produced by those systems).   Clearly there doesn't appear to be
any
> practical solutions that will please all of the parties.   What are we to
> do to
> produce electricity for a (post) industrial society?  Solar voltaic, 
> Fusion?  At least Solar voltaic is a proven technology, but we can't 
> possible produce enough panels in a short enough time frame to replace 
> the loss of San Onofre, much less all of the other Nuclear Power 
> plants.  What are we to do?
> Roy Herren
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: "Perle, Sandy" <sperle at mirion.com>
> To: "SAFarber at optonline.net" <SAFarber at optonline.net>; 
> TheInternational Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List < 
> radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> Cc: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing 
> List <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> Sent: Sun, April 8, 2012 2:27:17 PM
> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] More on San Onofre - Engineer's input needed
>
> Stu,
>
> Correct. Only a couple of tubes have had issues. The question is will 
> others fail and at what rate. This could be an isolated random issue 
> since the SG is relatively new. I drive by the plant frequently. The 
> NRC may over-react due to public concerns, and the media is giving 
> into the anti-hype, as expected.
> Count
> p. this being the scenario whenever any issue arises.
>
> Regards,
>
> Sandy Perle
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Apr 8, 2012, at 3:22 PM, "Stewart Farber" <SAFarber at optonline.net>
> wrote:
>
> > The two SG at San Onofre have about 10,000 individual tubes in total.
> > Depending on whether all tubes have a manufacturing defect and are
> likely to
> > keep failing regularly, I know in the past it was a routine 
> > procedure
> for a
> > plant to weld defective  SG tubes shut so that nothing from the 
> > primary
> side
> > can get carried over to the secondary loop. Back some time, Prairie
> Island
> > for example had to plug about 600 SG tubes and continued operations.
> It's a
> > question of how many tubes get welded shut and how much efficiency 
> > lost
> is
> > acceptable as a fraction of the approx. 5000 tubes in each SG.
> >
> > I would think it all comes down to how many plugs are defective or 
> > are likely to fail soon and can be repaired before the plant goes 
> > back
> on-line.
> > The grid operators, and regulatory agencies involved,  are likely to 
> > give alternatives like welding defective tubes closed serious 
> > consideration
> when
> > they think about the consequences of a shortage of generating 
> > capacity by taking San Onofre offline.
> >
> > Of course the NRC, may just torpedo the whole idea of SG repair and 
> > keep
> the
> > plant offline in their pursuit of what they state is the need for 
> > zero
> risk.
> > I guess operating old coal and gas plants with the significant
> environmental
> > and health effects to be realized with certainty is OK with zealous
> forces
> > against nuclear electric generation.
> >
> > Stewart Farber
> > SAFarber at optonline.net
> > ==============
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
> > [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Joel C.
> > Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2012 1:35 PM
> > To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> > Subject: [ RadSafe ] More on San Onofre - Engineer's input needed
> >
> > It sounds like SCE spent $670 million on defective steam gennies.  
> > I'd
> like
> > to hear from a knowledgable engineer about that.
> >
> >
> > Joel Cehn
> > joelc at alum.wpi.edu
> > _______________________________________________
> > You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> >
> > Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and 
> > understood
> the
> > RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> > http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
> >
> > For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other 
> > settings
> visit:
> > http://health.phys.iit.edu
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> >
> > Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and 
> > understood
> the
> >RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> >http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
> >
> > For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other 
> > settings
> visit:
> >http://health.phys.iit.edu
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and 
> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and 
> understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>
_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:
http://health.phys.iit.edu