[ RadSafe ] Nuclear Power in Utah?
Dan McCarn
hotgreenchile at gmail.com
Sun Aug 31 12:41:40 CDT 2014
Joe - The maximum likely ground acceleration (Vertical, Horizontal, Shear,
Raleigh & Love) as the Peak Ground Acceleration define the safety
characteristics of a site. If you are hundreds of kilometers away from a
quake, the ground acceleration is significantly reduced since the energy
disperses radially. The ground acceleration from the earthquake (9.0) at
Fukushima did not exceed design specification. The tsunamis caused by that
earthquake did exceed the design. I don't think we are going to have
tsunamis on the Colorado Plateau.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_ground_acceleration
QUOTE The peak horizontal acceleration (PHA) is the most commonly used type
of ground acceleration in engineering applications, and is used to set
building codes and design hazard risks. In an earthquake, damage to
buildings and infrastructure is related more closely to ground motion,
rather than the magnitude of the earthquake. UNQUOTE
So your analogy is moot. No one will build next to or on top of the Wasatch
Range on the edge of the Colorado Plateau.
Dan ii
Dan W McCarn, Geologist
108 Sherwood Blvd
Los Alamos, NM 87544-3425
+1-505-672-2014 (Home – New Mexico)
+1-505-670-8123 (Mobile - New Mexico)
HotGreenChile at gmail.com (Private email) HotGreenChile at gmail dot com
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 10:52 PM, <JPreisig at aol.com> wrote:
> Hey Dan/Radsafe:
>
> Geologically stable, yes. Seismically stable, not so much. There's
> a reason UUtah has a good seismology group.
>
> google earthquake and wasatch ...
>
> Read what you find. People building a 1000 MWe reactor, or whatever,
> in Utah need to determine the actual level of seismic risk, and if one can
> engineer a reactor to be built in Utah.
>
> Go look at the Wasatch fault. Bring your Estwing and your Brunton
> compass.
>
> Joe Preisig
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> In a message dated 8/30/2014 7:39:01 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> hotgreenchile at gmail.com writes:
>
> The Wasatch Range forms the western boundary of the Colorado Plateau.
> Staying well within the bounds of the Colorado Plateau gives high
> assurance
> of a stable area. 500 million years of stability is a very, very, very
> long
> time.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Plateau
>
> QUOTE The province is bounded by the Rocky Mountains in Colorado, and by
> the Uinta Mountains and Wasatch Mountains branches of the Rockies in
> northern and central Utah. It is also bounded by the Rio Grande Rift,
> Mogollon Rim and the Basin and Range Province. Isolated ranges of the
> Southern Rocky Mountains such as the San Juan Mountains in Colorado and
> the
> La Sal Mountains in Utah intermix into the central and southern parts of
> the Colorado Plateau.The province is bounded by the Rocky Mountains in
> Colorado, and by the Uinta Mountains and Wasatch Mountains branches of the
> Rockies in northern and central Utah. It is also bounded by the Rio Grande
> Rift, Mogollon Rim and the Basin and Range Province. Isolated ranges of
> the
> Southern Rocky Mountains such as the San Juan Mountains in Colorado and
> the
> La Sal Mountains in Utah intermix into the central and southern parts of
> the Colorado Plateau. UNQUOTE
>
> Dan ii
>
> Dan W McCarn, Geologist
> 108 Sherwood Blvd
> Los Alamos, NM 87544-3425
> +1-505-672-2014 (Home – New Mexico)
> +1-505-670-8123 (Mobile - New Mexico)
> HotGreenChile at gmail.com (Private email) HotGreenChile at gmail dot com
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 11:06 AM, <JPreisig at aol.com> wrote:
>
> > Hmmmmm,
> >
> > Utah is still earthquake country. See the Wasatch fault, I
> think.
> >
> > Joe Preisig
> >
> > PS This fault has been active in the last 20 years.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 8/29/2014 4:30:15 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> > hotgreenchile at gmail.com writes:
> >
> > Just a brief comment... The Colorado Plateau is very stable
> geologically.
> >
> > http://cpluhna.nau.edu/Places/places.htm
> >
> > QUOTE
> > "The Colorado Plateau is extremely ancient," says author F.A. Barnes,
> an
> > expert on the region's geology. "As a distinct mass of continental
> crust,
> > it is at least 500 million years old -- probably a lot older." Such
> > longevity is especially impressive when one considers the globetrotting
> > adventures of the North American continent from the perspective of
> > continental drift theory. Over a period of 300 to 400 million years,
> while
> > the land mass that would become the North American continent inched
> > northward from the South Pole, gradually disengaging itself from
> Africa,
> > Asia, and South America, the Colorado Plateau region drifted along
> > comfortably on its western edge. Now shoreline, now inundated by rising
> > seas, the entire region accumulated huge quantities of sediment,
> gradually
> > sinking under its own weight until heat and pressure hardened the
> deposits
> > into a mantle of sedimentary rock several miles thick. Even when the
> > entire
> > western United States began to rise some 10 million years ago,
> eventually
> > climbing to elevations as much as three miles above sea level, the
> > Colorado
> > Plateau region remained stable – perhaps "floating" on a cushion of
> molten
> > rock.
> > UNQUOTE
> >
> > Dan ii
> >
> > Dan W McCarn, Geologist
> > 108 Sherwood Blvd
> > Los Alamos, NM 87544-3425
> > +1-505-672-2014 (Home – New Mexico)
> > +1-505-670-8123 (Mobile - New Mexico)
> > HotGreenChile at gmail.com (Private email) HotGreenChile at gmail dot com
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 8:16 PM, Jeff Terry <terryj at iit.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > It is too bad that Westinghouse dropped out of the SMR market. They
> had
> > a
> > > great team.
> > >
> > > I was fortunate to talk with the Westinghouse group while we were
> > > conducting research to model SMR construction costs.
> > >
> > > The W design was similar to the AP1000 but was scaled down to 225
> MWe.
> > >
> > > Jeff
> > >
> > >
> > > On Aug 28, 2014, at 8:32 PM, "Thompson, Dewey L"
> <DThompson3 at ameren.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hummmmmmm
> > > >
> > > > No.
> > > >
> > > > There is no 100,000 mega-watt electrical fission reactor on earth.
> > > >
> > > > This is the hope and dream of starry-eyed idealists salivating
> over
> > > fusion.
> > > >
> > > > As the previous post mentioned, the Circle W AP 1000 is a pretty
> > > standard large block PWR reactor.
> > > >
> > > > Some older reactors are in the 500-800 MWe range.
> > > >
> > > > Most "modern" fission reactors are in the 1000 MWe range. The new
> > Areva
> > > PWR targets I think 1400-1600 MWe.
> > > >
> > > > I have no idea where your information originates from, you may be
> > > thinking about the Small Modular Reactors which the Department of
> Energy
> > > has been trying to seed. These are exciting, as they would be in the
> > range
> > > of 200-300 MWe (actually anywhere from 25 MWe to about 500 MWe). A
> small
> > > city could locate one nearby, and have reliable power costs. There
> are a
> > > fair number of approaches to the SMR, and as I think about it, Circle
> W
> > WAS
> > > planning to design a SMR using a baby AP-1000 design. I think it
> was in
> > > the 200 MEe range. They have abandoned that after losing out on the
> > DOE
> > > seed money.
> > > >
> > > > Dewey
> > > >
> > > > Sent from my iPhone
> > > >
> > > >> On Aug 28, 2014, at 12:10 PM, "Bean, Jennifer Marie" <
> > jmbean at lanl.gov>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> From: <jmbean at lanl.gov>
> > > >> Reply-To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health
> Physics)
> > > Mailing List" <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> > > >> Date: Thursday, August 28, 2014
> > > >> To: <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> > > >> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Nuclear Power in Utah?
> > > >>
> > > >> AP1000's produce much less power than a normal nuclear power
> plant.
> > > They are expected to have about 1000 MWe for a single reactor vs.
> > 100,000
> > > MWe for the older reactors. This allows the small modular reactors
> to
> > be
> > > placed in areas with smaller energy demands. And if the
> > demand/population
> > > grows another reactor can be built and added to the grid. It would
> be
> > > pretty exciting if these got off the ground in the US.
> > > >>
> > > >> Regards,
> > > >>
> > > >> Jennifer
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> In a message dated 8/27/2014 12:36:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight
> Time,
> > > sandyfl at cox.net writes:
> > > >>
> > > >> Joe, not only your well-taken comment, I wonder how they would
> build
> > > the distribution system to get the power to where it is needed, and
> last
> > I
> > > looked, there isn?t much of a demand in Utah! Normally units are
> built
> > > close to the area that it wishes to serve. Now it could be possible
> that
> > > the current grid in the area is able to ship he power to where it is
> > > needed, but what is around Utah where there is an energy demand?
> > > >>
> > > >> Regards,
> > > >>
> > > >> Sandy
> > > >> Retired, Consultant
> > > >>
> > > >> From: <JPreisig at aol.com>
> > > >> Reply-To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health
> Physics)
> > > Mailing List" <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> > > >> Date: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 at 9:32 AM
> > > >> To: <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> > > >> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Nuclear Power in Utah?
> > > >>
> > > >> Radsafe,
> > > >>
> > > >> Utah is earthquake country. Read about it in Bolt's book on
> > > >> earthquakes. No tsunami hazard, thank goodness. Bad idea to
> > build a
> > > >> nuclear plant
> > > >> in Utah??? Engineer it very well....
> > > >>
> > > >> Joe Preisig
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> In a message dated 8/27/2014 10:56:03 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> > > sandyfl at cox.net writes:
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks Brent,
> > > >>
> > > >> This would be a real achievement if it ever gets off the ground.
> > > However, with the politics out west, including Utah, there is a
> strong
> > > anti-nuclear stance and seriously doubt that this project has any
> legs
> > to
> > > stand on. I hope that I am wrong!
> > > >>
> > > >> Regards,
> > > >>
> > > >> Sandy
> > > >> Retired, Consultant
> > > >>
> > > >> From: Brent Rogers <brent.rogers at optusnet.com.au>
> > > >> Reply-To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health
> > Physics)
> > > Mailing List" <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> > > >> Date: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 at 4:24 AM
> > > >> To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)
> > > Mailing List"
> > > >> <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> > > >> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Nuclear Power in Utah?
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> >
>
> http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN-AP1000s-mooted-for-Utah-site-2108147.ht
> > > >> ml
> > > >>
> > > >> Brent Rogers
> > > >> Sydney Australia
> > > >>
> > > >> Sent from my iPad
> > > >>
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> 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
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> ------------------------------
> > > >>
> > > >> Message: 2
> > > >> Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 16:22:52 -0700
> > > >> From: Sander Perle <sandyfl at cox.net>
> > > >> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Nuclear Power in Utah?
> > > >> To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics)
> Mailing
> > > >> List" <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> > > >> Message-ID: <D023B60B.67410%sandyfl at cox.net>
> > > >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
> > > >>
> > > >> Joe, could be in all directions. California?s demand has dropped
> over
> > > the
> > > >> years, even to the point where the San Onofre Nuclear Plant has
> been
> > > >> shutdown without any apparent ramifications.
> > > >>
> > > >> Regards,
> > > >>
> > > >> Sandy Perle
> > > >> Retired, Consultant
> > > >>
> > > >> From: <JPreisig at aol.com>
> > > >> Reply-To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health
> Physics)
> > > Mailing
> > > >> List" <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> > > >> Date: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 at 3:47 PM
> > > >> To: <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
> > > >> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Nuclear Power in Utah?
> > > >>
> > > >> Sandy/Radsafe,
> > > >>
> > > >> Wonder if the power will be sent to California??? An
> > > updated/revised
> > > >> version of the USGS USA Seismic risk map is probably on the USGS
> > > website
> > > >> now.
> > > >>
> > > >> Joe Preisig
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> In a message dated 8/27/2014 12:36:40 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
> > > >> sandyfl at cox.net writes:
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> ------------------------------
> > > >>
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> RadSafe mailing list
> > > >> RadSafe at health.phys.iit.edu
> > > >> http://health.phys.iit.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/radsafe
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> End of RadSafe Digest, Vol 1665, Issue 1
> > > >> ****************************************
> > > >> _______________________________________________
> > > >> 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
> > > > The information contained in this message may be privileged and/or
> > > confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this
> > message
> > > is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible
> for
> > > delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > notified
> > > that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication
> is
> > > strictly prohibited. Note that any views or opinions presented in
> this
> > > message are solely those of the author and do not necessarily
> represent
> > > those of Ameren. All e-mails are subject to monitoring and archival.
> > > Finally, the recipient should check this message and any attachments
> for
> > > the presence of viruses. Ameren accepts no liability for any damage
> > caused
> > > by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. If you have received this in
> > > error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to the
> message
> > and
> > > deleting the material from any computer. Ameren Corporation
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
More information about the RadSafe
mailing list