5 ms·
an aside: why d nuclear reactors have to be built on the coast? does that not make them more vulnerable to natural disasters
by ptah 7y ago
an aside: why d nuclear reactors have to be built on the coast? does that not make them more vulnerable to natural disasters
- mytailorisrich 7y agoThey rely on water for cooling so are built near a source of it, be it the sea or a river.
- imtringued 7y agoRivers tend to have different flow rates over the course of the year. If there is a heat wave the plant may not have enough water for cooling. The ocean is more dependable.
- rjsw 7y agoFrance has some nuclear plants that are on rivers where this problem has been seen.
- shawabawa3 7y agoI believe the problem in France wasn't the flow rate of the river, but the maximum temperature the power plants are allowed to leave the river at During the heatwave the rivers were so warm the reactors weren't allowed to dump any more heat into them
- hokkos 7y ago"Seen" as a few percent only a few days every two years.
- lorenzhs 7y agoThe problem is not so much the flow rate as it is the river's temperature. You can't raise that too much without harming the river's ecosystem. This is what limits several of France's nuclear power stations during summer.
- dghughes 7y agoHere in Canada in my region the nuclear power plant is located on a bay in New Brunswick. The bay has the highest difference in tides in the world at high tide the water is 16m (53 feet) higher than low tide. But in Ontario where the biggest nuclear power plants are located. Two are next to Lake Ontario, and one is by Lake Huron.
- VLM 7y agoOP is probably asking some variation of why not build them on a canal rather than literally right on the coast, Fukishima-style. Part of the problem is the components are very large and very heavy even for industrial projects and coasts have barges and seaports. Some parts are too heavy even for railroad shipment, so its barge and crane or expensively fabricate on site, or expensively assemble on site. Its quite a logistical headache to build a large nuclear reactor. Yes, submarine scale plants are petite, but GW-class baseline generators have very large and heavy parts. WRT to Fukishima, its probably cheaper and more efficient from an engineering perspective to build a massive seawall than an unblockable long canal. The effort and concrete required to build an unblockable kilometer long canal that would survive a 30m tsunami would probably survive a 100m tsunami if put into a seawall instead. Or more likely, management would only permit a 10m rated seawall (or canal) "because that'll never happen" and we all know how that turned out.
- stjohnswarts 7y agoMost people live along the coasts in those countries that have them and power transmission is both lossy and has expensive infrastructure.