According to the US Dept of Energy, the last reactor built was the "River Bend" plant in Louisiana. Its construction began in March of 1977. The last plant to begin commercial operation is the "Watts Bar" plant in Tennessee, which came online in 1996.
Note: The list I obtained only listed operational reactors.
Plants are still being built-for example Flamanville in France.
The last plant built in the US began construction in 1977. That's the "River Bend" plant in Lousiana.
Nuclear power does not last forever. A nuclear power plant in a large ship last approx. 25 years.
The last nuclear power plant built in Georgia, USA, was the Alvin W. Vogtle facility in Burke county, Georgia. It is a two unit Westinghouse PWR, completed in 1987 (Unit I) and 1989 (Unit II), rated 1215 MWe each. There are no nuclear power plants in Georgia, the country.
The last nuclear reactor has not been built yet.
Fukushima Daiichi, on March 11, 2011.
No new nuclear plants have been built in the US in the past 20 years. The Watts Bar plant was licenced in 1996, but had been built much earlier. The last plant actually built was the River Bend plant in Louisiana, which was licenced in 1986.
As far as I know the last failure requiring a write off of the reactor was at Chernobyl in 1986.
Radioactive wastes that can last thousands of years
a neuclear power plant will last about 50 to 75 years depending on the people that work there and if there is a radioactive leak.
Nuclear power isn't a solution it is just another method of producing energy, the reason it is not a solution is because it has a big disadvantage which is the disposal of nuclear waste. On the other hand more countries are building nuclear power plants because of the amount of energy that you get out of a nuclear power plant and the length of time the fuel will last in a nuclear reactor.
Nuclear power is one of the ways we can cut back on our reliance on fossil fuels.We have built a nuclear bomb and are not afraid to use it.In the modern era, the ideal family unit is what sociologists call the "Nuclear Family".I seem to have misplaced the nuclear launch codes at the bar last night.
New Nuclear plants continue to be built across the the world all the time. Here in the United States, it has become a political propaganda tool by some political groups who care nothing for what their stated goals are, but only for the leverage the subject can give them as a political power issue. This, along with safety concerns after the Three Mile Island accident, has led to a virtual halt to new nuclear plant construction here in the U.S., and an increase in coal and oil fired power plants that add to greenhouse gases and global warming. The rest of the world isn't quite as ignorant though. Japan is a good example of a country that gets most of its electricity from Nuclear Power. The only country where nuclear weapons have been used offensively, Japan uses Nuclear Power as their primary source of electricity. Japan is the 2nd largest user of Nuclear Power in the world. Though some incidents there have led to some construction slowdowns, new plants are still a priority for them.
According to a book, "It's Getting Better All The Time: 100 Greatest Trends of the Last 100 Years", by Stephen Moore and Julian L. Simon; from 1975 - 2000 there was not a single accident from a nuclear power plant (the book was published in 2000). Furthermore, the possibility of contracting cancer from radiation (not dying from it) for those who live in the immediate vicinity of a Nuclear Power Plant is approximately 1 in 70,000. In short, the death toll from Nuclear Power Plants and nuclear waste is very very small.
1. Africa, with exception of Republic of South Africa, which has one plant (Koeberg)2. Australia and New Zealand3. South East asia-Indonesia, Malaysia, Vietnam, Laos, Phillipines. The last built a plant but never operated it.4. South America, with exception of Argentina.
Here are a few advantages and disadvantages to using a nuclear reactorADVANTAGES:Nuclear fuel will last longer inside the reactor.Power output is significantly higher then any other fossil fuel power plant.Little Co2 is produced throughout the whole life of a nuclear reactor, compared to a coal power plant.Is safe providing a nuclear power plant follows safety procedures.DISADVANTAGES:Very expensive to build.Digging for Uranium is expensive and we have a limited source of it.Uranium must be enriched before it can be used inside a nuclear reactor which uses more energy to do and costs more money to prepare it.Nuclear waste must be disposed of safely and must be guaranteed that none of it will leak throughout its long lifetime(1000 years +).
It depends where. In the U.S., it takes several years, mostly because of all the environmental studies and impact statements, permits and other government paperwork. Also, in the U.S., each one has some level of custom engineering. Also, unions slow down the work considerably. (I would not have made that last statement before I worked with some engineers who had been involved in building a nuclear power plant. They told me that the plumbing, for example, took between 2 - 3 times as long as it would have with non-union plumbers, and there is A LOT of plumbing in a nuclear power plant.)A conventional plant without any site-specific engineering or red tape could be built in less than a year.
The last reactor to be licensed in the US was approved in 1973 (TVA Watts 2). The last to come online was the TVA's Watts 1 reactor in Tennesee, which went active in May of 1996.
I believe a PWR can be expected to last 40 years or so. The main worry would be the integrity of the primary circuit. Some people are pushing to be increased to 80 years.
About 100 years.
Nuclear power is cleaner. · The problem of radioactive waste is still an unsolved one. The waste from nuclear energy is extremely dangerous and it has to be carefully looked after for several thousand years (10'000 years according to United States Environmental Protection Agency standards).· High risks: Despite a generally high security standard, accidents can still happen. It is technically impossible to build a plant with 100% security. A small probability of failure will always last. The consequences of an accident would be absolutely devastating both for human being as for the nature (see here , here or here ). The more nuclear power plants (and nuclear waste storage shelters) are built, the higher is the probability of a disastrous failure somewhere in the world.· Nuclear power plants as well as nuclear waste could be preferred targets for terrorist attacks. No atomic energy plant in the world could withstand an attack similar to 9/11 in Yew York. Such a terrorist act would have catastrophic effects for the whole world.· During the operation of nuclear power plants, radioactive waste is produced, which in turn can be used for the production of nuclear weapons. In addition, the same know-how used to design nuclear power plants can to a certain extent be used to build nuclear weapons (nuclear proliferation).· The energy source for nuclear energy is Uranium. Uranium is a scarce resource, its supply is estimated to last only for the next 30 to 60 years depending on the actual demand.· The time frame needed for formalities, planning and building of a new nuclear power generation plant is in the range of 20 to 30 years in the western democracies. In other words: It is an illusion to build new nuclear power plants in a short time.Sustainability: Is nuclear energy sustainable?For several reasons, nuclear power is neither «green» nor sustainable:· Both the nuclear waste as well as retired nuclear plants are a life-threatening legacy for hundreds of future generations. It flagrantly contradicts with the thoughts of sustainability if future generations have to deal with dangerous waste generated from preceding generations. See also here . · Uranium, the source of energy for nuclear power, is available on earth only in limited quantities. Uranium is being «consumed» (i.e. converted) during the operation of the nuclear power plant so it won't be available any more for future generations. This again contradicts the principle of sustainability.Nuclear Power Plant Accidents and Terrorism· According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, regulated safety procedures are not being followed to ensure that nuclear power plants are safe. Even if all safety precautions are followed, it is no guarantee that a nuclear power plant accident will not occur. If a nuclear power plant accident occurs, the environment and surrounding people could be exposed to high levels of radiation. Terrorism threats are another concern that needs to be addressed. A satisfactory plan to protect nuclear power plants from terrorism is not in place.
New ones built now would be expected to last for 60 years, this is mostly dependent on the main pressure vessel steel and its embrittlement under irradiation.
See the Wikipedia article 'Nuclear power in France'. The two sites most recently finished and in power operation are Chooz on the Belgian border, and Civaux in western France. These are 1450 MWE N4 types. From the rather sparse figures given, the build time seems to be about 12 years The station being built now is Flamanville in Normandy, this is the so-called EPR or European Pressurised Reactor, 1600 MWe per unit.
The last two steps in an electrical power plant include steam entering the turbine. Lastly, energy of the steam is converted into a rotational energy.
Iowa's main source of energy is nuclear power. There are over 50 nuclear stations called mps (nuclear power station). And has only had 50 accidents in teh last ten years!