What is the average output MW of a nuclear power plant?
As of 2007, worldwide there were 439 operational nuclear reactors with total capacity of 372,002 MW; making the average output 846 MW. However, the average new reactor can be expected to be larger.
The reactors so far built in the US range up to about 1100 MWe electrical output, but new ones up to about 1500 MWe are planned
The reactors so far built in the US range up to about 1100 MWe electrical output, but new ones up to about 1500 MWe are planned
11 people found this useful
Not sure of the -starting- salary, but from the US Bureau of Labor Stats, the mean annual wage for all nuclear power plant operators is $70,800 USD.
The two designs built commercially in the US are the Pressurised Water Reactor (PWR) and the Boiling Water Reactor (BWR). Both these use ordinary water as moderator and coolant. In Canada the Heavy Water Moderated design (Candu) has been built in numbers. In France a large number of PWR's has be…en built. In the UK, the gas cooled design was the main build for many years. These use a graphite moderator and CO2 coolant. The first series used natural uranium with a magnesium alloy fuel cladding, but the temperature level permitted with this type of fuel was fairly low. The Advanced Gas Cooled reactor used enriched UO2 fuel with stainless steel cladding which allowed higher gas temperature. These were fairly successful, but expensive to build. Any future reactors in the UK will be PWR or BWR. It is possible to build a reactor which uses fuel in the form of large pebbles, with helium coolant, driving a gas turbine directly, without a steam circuit. Time may tell whether this is really a practical commercial design. Another possible design is a reactor that uses fast neutrons. A power producing prototype was built in Scotland at Dounreay, but ultimately it was found that material problems made it too difficult to bring into commercial use. ( Full Answer )
Meltdown/radiation leak- the plutoniu/uranium (can't remember) fuses with rod causing lose of control leading to radiation leaks.
It depends. Most, if not all, nuclear power plants are incapable of exploding in a nuclear fashion. Yes, it is possible to have super prompt criticality, where reactivity, or what we call K Effective is much greater than 1 and the reaction geometry degrades to the point where it can be sustained wi…th only thermal neutrons. Problem is, that physics intervenes. Fissionable material wants to expand when it is super prompt critical, and the pressures involved are astronomical. The core, in this case, then tends to go sub critical due to prompt dispersal, which is where the core gets suddenly, somewhat explosively, "larger", and the reaction stops. In order to have a true nuclear detonation, you need to hold the core together long enough for a sizeable portion of the fuel to convert to energy, and that is just not possible with a power plant - a bomb, yes - but not a power plant. Chernobyl went super prompt critical, and it did explode, but that explosion was not a complete detonation and, again, it just as suddenly went sub-critical due to prompt dispersal. There are other things involved, of course. You can have a hydrogen explosion, caused by a buildup of hydrogen gas (no, I'm not talking about a hydrogen bomb) due to a high temperature reaction with the zirconium cladding on the fuel pins, such hydrogen then being detonated perhaps by mixing with water. This is what happened recently in Japan. . Even Chernobyl had no nuclear explosion, it did have a strong nuclear energy excursion, but the resulting explosion was still entirely a steam explosion as water in the cooling system and steam generator tanks flashed into high pressure vapor. Also nuclear explosives operate on fast neutrons, not thermal neutrons, as they have no moderator to slow the neutrons. LLNL tried nuclear explosives with a moderator (Uranium Hydride fuel/moderator) in several tests in the 1950s, they all fizzled. This strongly suggests that any thermal neutron (moderated) reactor is incapable of a nuclear explosion (however fast neutron reactors like breeders might be a different issue). ( Full Answer )
We create "green" energy. As with everything in our world there always is the possibility of something going wrong or having a problem. Another good thing is that we generate over %20 of the electricity that is used in the united states.
It works by Turbines and Generators put simply. The unstable element in the reactor unit is used to heat/pressurize water. The water is then pumped into pipes. These pipes are then run through a container (for lack of a better word) called a steam generator. There is water inside this container and …because of the heat the water changes into a gas state (aka water vapor). The vapor is then used to turn turbines, these turbines turn generators which create electricity (or movement of a shaft which could be put to other uses). There is a cooling pipe that runs through the area after (for lack of a better word) the turbine to condense the water vapor and return it to a liquid state. The cooling pipes get the cool water from the giant cooling towers. This water from area after the turbines then goes back to the steam generator to be used again. While this is happening the water in the reactor is going around again to get reheated and reused to heat the steam generator. ( Full Answer )
It is different for all reactor types, but I'll tell you about the CANDU, as it is widely used, and I know the most about it.. Each CANDU reactor holds 4500-6500 fuel bundles at one time, each 50cm long and 10cm in diameter, each weighing about 20kg. Each produces roughly 1GWh (gigawatt hour) of po…wer during its time in the reactor. ( Full Answer )
Nuclear power plants are expensive because they require specialconstruction. They must be heavily shielded, plus the requireconstant monitoring to insure that they remain cool enough.
A power plant which produces 500 million watts (500 megawatts) The actual rating would be 500MWh's ( the hours are implied in this case.) This is not always the output from the plant, but rather the plants uppermost limit of production capability under perfect conditions.
containment building, reactor core (control rods), steam generator, turbine, electric generator, cooling towers, power grid
The average nuclear power reactor in the US has an output of about 1000 MWe. This is for the 104 presently operating ones, new ones may be larger. The size of an area that consumes 1000 MWe varies considerably from heavily populated areas with industry, to lowly populated areas, so you can't put a s…ingle figure to it. 1000 MWe would supply 100,000 homes at 10 KW per home, or 500,000 homes at 2 KW per home which is probably more like the average consumption per home. Nuclear stations are usually operated as base load, that is at or near continuous full power, because the fuel costs are lower than for fossil fuels, but you can't separate differently produced electric power, it all comes through the same distribution system. In any particular area the grid controller will want to keep more than one source running, as nuclear units (and indeed others) sometimes suddenly shutdown unexpectedly. Therefore what you get in your home is always going to be coming from more than one source. ( Full Answer )
-if a generator in an oil-thermal power plant is 35 percent efficient and its output capacity is 3 000 MW what is the output power for the turbine generator system?
If the oil fired furnaces produce 3000 MW thermal, and the overall station efficiency is 35 percent, this means that the electrical power sent out is 1050 MWe. This assumes you do mean the overall station efficiency, ie that the power used for auxiliaries on the station is subtracted from the total …electric power generated, before this figure is calculated.. ( Full Answer )
There are 492 coal-fired power plants in the U.S., with an average size of 667 megawatts (MW) and an average age of 40 years. Source: "Form EIA-860 Database, Annual Electric Generator Report," U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration, 2005 data set. http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf…/electricity/page/eia860.html From: http://www.energyjustice.net/coal/igcc/factsheet-long.pdf ( Full Answer )
Does most of the radiation exposure for an average citizen in the US come from nuclear power plant operation and early atmospheric nuclear weapons tests?
No, radiation from these sources is negligible. Most comes from natural background, which depends a lot on the geology of the area. Radon is usually the biggest factor (see the link below)
The energy released in nuclear fissions usually of U-235 or Pu-239 (or both together) nuclear power is powered by uranium which is split in the reactor (main part of the plant) this creates a chemical reaction witch creates a lot of heat energy which boils water to turn some turbines that drive the… generators ( Full Answer )
A power plant burns coal and generates an average of 610.0 MW of electrical power while discharging 963.80 MW as waste heat Find the total electrical energy generated by the plant in a 30-day period.?
The power generated would just be 610.0 MW; it looks like the the amount of waste heat is irrelevant for the problem. Since power is defined as energy / time, you can calculate energy simply by multiplying power x time. To user compatible units: . Convert MW to kW . Convert days to hours . Afte…r multiplying, the result will be in kWh (which is an energy unit, and simply means kW times hours). ( Full Answer )
The cost of 1 MW power generation is Rs. 5.0 crores in thermal power plant.
Plant Load Factor varies widely with Hyrdo Plants because of Location and Control Method. Some large plants can produce up to 1000 Mega Watts (MW) while smaller Hyrdo Stations (About 60 - 80% or all active Hyrdo Generation is through Hydro Stations) can boost anywhere from 80 MW to 500 MW respectful…ly. I don't think there is a National Average but I think it's about 200 MW's. I personally factor in High Head/Low Power units because most of those locations historically do transconnect the National Grid and return, on average, about 50-100 KW's to the grid. That figure is loosely stated because we don't regulate their usage really and since we can't store power, we can only restrict it, that figure can be annually or daily. Depends on the location. ( Full Answer )
The fuel in most nuclear power plants is 92 U 235 . The most common isotope of Uranium, however, is 92 U 238 , which is harder to fission, so the manufacturing process for the fuel includes a process called enrichment, where the percentage of 92 U 235 is raised from its nominal 0.5%-1% to aroun…d 5%. ( Full Answer )
There are 104 nuclear power plants currently operating in theUnited States. These are divided by the Nuclear RegulatoryCommission into four districts. Region One (The Northeast) has plants in Maryland, Pennsylvania,New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, and NewHampshire. Region T…wo (The South) has plants in Virginia, North Carolina,South Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, andMississippi. Region Three (The Midwest) has plants in Minnesota, Wisconsin,Michigan, Ohio, Illinois, and Iowa. Region Four (The West) has plants in Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana,Mississippi, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Texas, Colorado,Arizona, Washington, Oregon, and California. This does not include plants that have been closed or have nevercome on line. Nor does it include Canadian plants, which are closeby. Nuclear power plants are built in places where there is a lot ofwater available for cooling. For this reason they are usually builtbeside rivers, lakes, or oceans. See the related link below for an interactive map. ( Full Answer )
Nearly 54 years. The first nuclear power plant to put power on an electric grid was the Obninsk Nuclear Power Plant, located in Obninsk, about 110 km southwest of Moscow, which began supplying power on June 27, 1954. The plant was regarded as "semi-experimental." The first commercial nuclear power p…lant was Calder Hall, at Sellefield, in Cumbria, England's northwesternmost county. This plant opened on October 17, 1956. The first nuclear power plant to operated in the United States was the Shippingport Atomic Power Station, which was about 40 km (25 miles) from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. It started operation on December 2, 1957. ( Full Answer )
There is a huge propaganda push by the nuclear industry to justify nuclear power as a panacea for the reduction of global-warming gases. At present there are 442 nuclear reactors in operation around the world. If, as the nuclear industry suggests, nuclear power were to replace fossil fuels on a larg…e scale, it would be necessary to build 2000 large, 1000-megawatt reactors. Considering that no new nuclear plant has been ordered in the US since 1978, this proposal is less than practical. Furthermore, even if we decided today to replace all fossil-fuel-generated electricity with nuclear power, there would only be enough economically viable uranium to fuel the reactors for three to four years. The true economies of the nuclear industry are never fully accounted for. The cost of uranium enrichment is subsidised by the US government. The true cost of the industry's liability in the case of an accident in the US is estimated to be $US560billion ($726billion), but the industry pays only $US9.1billion - 98per cent of the insurance liability is covered by the US federal government. The cost of decommissioning all the existing US nuclear reactors is estimated to be $US33billion. These costs - plus the enormous expense involved in the storage of radioactive waste for a quarter of a million years - are not now included in the economic assessments of nuclear electricity. It is said that nuclear power is emission-free. The truth is very different. In the US, where much of the world's uranium is enriched, including Australia's, the enrichment facility at Paducah, Kentucky, requires the electrical output of two 1000-megawatt coal-fired plants, which emit large quantities of carbon dioxide, the gas responsible for 50per cent of global warming. Also, this enrichment facility and another at Portsmouth, Ohio, release from leaky pipes 93per cent of the chlorofluorocarbon gas emitted yearly in the US. The production and release of CFC gas is now banned internationally by the Montreal Protocol because it is the main culprit responsible for stratospheric ozone depletion. But CFC is also a global warmer, 10,000 to 20,000 times more potent than carbon dioxide. ( Full Answer )
electrical - about 1000Mwatt, physical - varies with design, can't give exact figure. The reactor itself, in a typical 1 GW plant, is smaller than you might think: about the size of a large bathroom or small bedroom. The containment vessel is comparatively huge, and largely empty.
The typical usable life of a nuclear power plant is approximately 40 - 50 years to be economical to build and run. That does not mean that the fuel runs out but other things may become unusable.
They certainly can be, as Japan shows. Given the highest standards of design, building, and operation, and so long as events don't happen that are worse than the designers expected, they can operate safely for the design life. The problem of what to do with the spent fuel afterwards still exists tho…ugh, and nobody has a complete answer to this. ( Full Answer )
The moderator in a nuclear power plant is the substance that is used to slow down neutrons that are generated by the fission reactions. When fissile material fissions, fission fragments appear, as do neutrons. These neutrons, which leave the fission reaction with a heap of kinetic energy, might go o…n to cause more fissions (in a chain reactions) if they can be thermalized (slowed). Slowing (moderating) the neutrons increases the probability that they will be absorbed to cause another fission. Depending on the plant design, a few common ones now are: . water . heavy water . graphite . none (in fast breeder reactors) ( Full Answer )
PWR's and BWR's have thermal efficiencies around 33%, that is the generated power as opposed to the reactor thermal power.
Mechanical and heat losses in the generating plant aside, the current generation of Light Water Reactors is about 33%. Newer technologies such as Supercritical Water Reactors can reach efficiencies of up to around 45%.
If you have a very large amout of capital and a good reason for doing so then yes, otherwise no.
Nuclear fuels like uranium or plutonium release huge amounts of heat energy, this heats water which tuns to steam. This steam turns turbines, which turn a generator, whch creates electricity.
There are four operating plants per the NRC: . Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 - Glen Rose, TX . Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 2 - Glen Rose, TX . South Texas Project, Unit 1 - Bay City, TX . South Texas Project, Unit 2 - Bay City, TX There are 104 plants licensed to ope…rate in the US currently. ( Full Answer )
Close to a cooling source IE the sea, hence why most are on the coast. Cooling turns the dry steam from the turbines back into water and the process restarts.
Nuclear has many hidden costs. the power plants have to be dismantled after their useful life at large expense. The issue of disposing of the radioactive waste is still a hot topic. There is an underground disposal depot in Nevada intended for this. One problem with that is that the waste still h…as to be transported there by truck and rail from all over the U.S. Many feel that there are too many chances for accidents in the transport. "Civilian nuclear power producers benefit greatly from shifting a substantial portion of their liability for radioactive releases from accidents or attacks away from owners and investors and onto the taxpayer and the surrounding population. These costs, both through higher insurance premiums and higher cost of capital, would properly be reflected in the price of nuclear electricity. This subsidy has never been quantified comprehensively, but affects not only reactors, but nuclear fuel cycle facilities and nuclear materials transport as well. On a global level, the subsidy is likely to be well in excess of $10 billion per year. In the United States, current surcharges on nuclear power too low to cover expected disposal costs. In addition, the US government foolishly absorbed all risk for an on-time opening of a repository for commercial nuclear waste -- despite longstanding technical and political challenges associated with making this happen. Taxpayers are now paying the industry millions per year for the delays, a figure that could rise sharply in years to come. Between inadequate fees, payments for delays, and most importantly, the shifting of disposal risks away from investors, subsidies to nuclear waste management likely run into the billions of dollar per year." Is nuclear safe enough? Advocates say the reactors are much safer now. I'll give them the benefit of the doubt on that. Still, if and when an accident does occur, the results could be devastating. Large areas could be made uninhabitable for a long long time. This is still much safer then the known annual deaths due to coal operations worldwide. I don't rule out nuclear entirely. It could be part of our energy mix as it already is. It might make sense for certain parts of the country. _______________________________________________________________ Another Answer: With any power generation there is associated risk. Nuclear has received bad press from two very bad accidents over the past thirty plus years. These two accidents have cost us dozens of lives. There is also a problem with radiation in the immediate area of the Japan plant for the next several years. This is all very real. Other forms of fuel for power exist though. Coal plants being the most common. It is far less dramatic to talk about the 13,000 a year deaths annually due to mine accidents. We accept this loss. The acid rain and the CO2 emissions are a problem some claim, but yet we refuse to open our eyes to the only real and workable solution because of possible problems. Perhaps it is time to understand that we have a safer alternative to coal in Nuclear. Even if we had a Chernobyl event every five years it still would be fewer lives lost and less damage then we know we get from the fossil fuel alternatives. While we wait and hope that renewables will someday become feasible for real power generation. Isn't it time we invest in a technology we know works? ( Full Answer )
The most significant part is the spent fuel which is highly radioactive and must be stored away from the possibility of people becoming exposed to it, for centuries to come.
You remove the fuel and store it in a place where decay heat removal can be permanently sustained. You either keep it in the spent fuel pool, you give it or sell it to another facility that has a compatible reactor, or you transport it to a high level waste facility. You decontaminate the facilit…y as best you can. For those areas which cannot be decontaminated, such as the Reactor Pressure Vessel, you cut it apart and ship the pieces to a high level or mid level waste facility. Once you remove the fuel and adequately decontaminate the facility, assuming that is even possible, you de-certify the facility per the applicable regulations in force, and have the license revoked. Some facilities can never be adequately decontaminated, such as those that have been in service for more than a very short period of time, which means that the obligation to maintain monitoring, control and security never goes away. ( Full Answer )
Nuclear fuel (uranium) is not renewable. The plant itself has a life based on deterioration of important components, especially the main reactor pressure vessel. This is subject to intense neutron bombardment during operation, and at present can only be licensed (in the US) for up to 60 years. At th…e end of life it would have to be scrapped, so it is not renewable. ( Full Answer )
There are two operating nuclear power plants in Minnesota: . Monticello: A single 613 megawatt boiling water reactor located in Monticello, Minnesota. . Prairie Island: A 1,076 megawatt plant with two pressurized water reactors located in Red Wing, Minnesota.
NO Australia Doesn't Have "nuclear power plant" Since It Need High Source Of Water Content
There are at least two nuclear power plants in Nebraska including the one at Fort Calhoun and another called the Cooper Nuclear Station operated by the Nebraska Public Power District.
Japan has nuclear power plants for the same reason that other countries have them - they need the power - and nuclear power has the lowest impact of all the various other options. It also happens that Japan is limited for space, having a large population in comparison to their land area. Nuclear …power has a low requirement for infrastructure, such as oil or gas pipelines, transfer facilities for coal, etc. and it has a high density of output compared to real estate. ( Full Answer )
converts the rotation of the steam turbine shaft to electricity. same as in a coal fired plant.
Yes, and a lot of it too! There is no permanent storage so they put the casks in a pool of boric acid so the waste can cool down. A problem is that the pools are becoming overcrowded and people need to fine a permanent storage instead of a temporary one..They found a place in Yucca Mountain a while …back ago and i dont know what has happened since but it was supposed to be 1500 feet underground (personally i think thats not enough). A lot of questions have come up though. One of them being if the waste can be shot into space. I think we've messed up Earth enough so why mess up space? ( Full Answer )
The controlled nuclear reaction generates large amounts of heat. That heat boils water, which creates steam. The steam turns turbine blades, and the turbine generates electricity.
Nuclear power plants don't explode, in the style of a nuclear bomb. That particular super prompt criticality is impossible to maintain for the length of time necessary to consume the core, leading to a true, nuclear detonation. If you are thinking about the explosions that occurred at the Fukushi…ma Daiichi Nuclear Plant, those were hydrogen gas explosions. Hydrogen gas built up as a consequence of the high temperature of the zircalloy fuel pins in contact with water. When additional water was added to help cool the fuel, the hydrogen combined with the oxygen in the water under temperature and exploded. Again, it was not a nuclear explosion. ( Full Answer )
Currently, it can produce more than 1650 MW electric (or more than 5000 MW thermal)
there is 4.1858 joules in a calorie 1 kg of steam requires 538 kilocalories to be produced plus superheat for use in a steam engine of about another 400 Kc approximately. If the engine has a watering rate of 2.2 KG per Kw using the 938 Kc / Kg that would require 2.0636 Mc / Kw. This is equivalen…t to 8.6378 MJ/Kw x 1000 Kw/Mw = 8.6378 GJ/Mw of heat energy in the steam. With the efficiency of the best boilers of ~25% conversion of heat from combustion to steam output the amount of heat from Natural gas required would be about 34.551 GJ energy input. These numbers are only an estimate, actual boiler and engine/ generator efficiencies will differ as will steam conditions. ( Full Answer )
Yes, Iran has only one nuclear power plant operating of power 915 Megawatt electric. This is according to the statistics of the International atomic Energy Agency as of April 2004.
You rip apart an atom which releases great energy in the form of heat. The energy causes water to evaporate which turns a turbine. The turning turbine creates electricity. This is how a nuclear reactor works.
Zero , there are no practical fusion reactors. All existing prototype designs for fusion reactors take far more energy input to make them run than they generate.
A BSA, or Birmingham Small Arms, engine ranges from 125cc to 175cc, making the average output 150cc. The 125cc engines were manufactured in 1948 and the engines became increasingly more powerful.