If a non-compliant reactor is shut down safely (4-5 months to do that, according to what I've been reading), at what point does the reactor actually quit generating electricity for the grid?

Does that happen right away, or does the shutdown happen in stages that allows the reactor to still be a part of the grid for part of the 4-5 mon

-- Anonymous, June 17, 1999

Answers

Only take a couple of weeks.

-- Anonymous, June 17, 1999

If a non-compliant reactor is shut down safely (4-5 months to do that, according to what I've been reading)

Nancy,

The server ate my first response, so I'll try again. You haven't been reading the 4-5 month figure on this discussion group. Try a keyword search of the archives using the search function, or look under the topic "nuclear". A nuclear power plant can be shutdown in literally nanoseconds. You are probably referring to the assertations on some websites that it takes a long time to cool down a nuclear plant. Again, not so.

Does that happen right away, or does the shutdown happen in stages that allows the reactor to still be a part of the grid for part of the 4-5 mon

When a nuclear reactor is shutdown, it is no longer generating the heat necessary to produce steam. So, the turbine is removed from service. No power is then being produced. Bottom line - when a nuclear plant is shutdown, it is no longer generating power.

Here's a link that I haven't posted in awhile, and it's a good one for anyone who would like a bit of background on how nuclear power plants operate. The site is geared toward the layperson, and it's really a very good primer - The Virtual Nuclear Tourist. I highly recommend this site for anyone desiring an easily understandable background in how these places operate.

-- Anonymous, June 17, 1999

I groan to myself every time I see this rumor at this late stage. Rick seems to be faced with a never-ending task in trying to kill this one. Still, I have to admit it's getting better. The story started out with 6 months, now we're down to 4 to 5.

-- Anonymous, June 17, 1999

tom,

i disagree... when we see these questions popping up it is indicative that 'new' people are asking questions. i believe that we have a responsibility to dispel the myths but not the risks inherent in the overall problem.

anyone that has been seriously ruminating the issues for over a year is, by this point, somewhat jaded. we have assumed our positions and nothing short of the second coming is going to change our minds.

my reason for interacting in an open forum and on ng's is for the newbies. i marvel how, especially in some ng's, newbies are 'tolerated' or sometimes insulted and ridiculed... these are people we see on the street everyday, some we might want to meet others are just there. they are our garage mechanics, accountants, lawyers, grocers, teachers... you get the picture.

newbies are usually scared and ask questions that are not very informed, i know... i remember how i felt when i 'got it.' when we take the time to help one understand the numbers grow exponentially.

if the government isn't going to help us... we have to help ourselves.

-- Anonymous, June 19, 1999

Okay... hear comes another newbie. Maybe the reactor can be shut down within nanoseconds, but the spent fuel must still be cooled, right? Looks like from this page that happens for at least 5 years, as that is the time before the rods could be placed in dry casks.

http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/NUREGS/SR1628/part06.html#_1_3

So.. doesn't the plant have a continuing need for power to maintain safe conditions in the spent fuel pools? And if power is lost???

-- Anonymous, June 20, 1999