QUOTE(ah liew @ Jun 20 2009, 09:59 PM)
waiting for confirmation now.. Physics Nuclear power?, Use nuclear reactor to generate energy
Physics Nuclear power?, Use nuclear reactor to generate energy
|
|
Jun 20 2009, 10:10 PM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
107 posts Joined: Nov 2008 From: UKM Bangi |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 20 2009, 10:17 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
829 posts Joined: Oct 2008 From: ☆柔弗洲 to 沙巴★ Status: Dori Dori |
QUOTE(profdrahhen @ Jun 20 2009, 10:10 PM) Should Malaysia build a nuclear power plant? Read all about it. |
|
|
Jun 20 2009, 10:44 PM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
107 posts Joined: Nov 2008 From: UKM Bangi |
QUOTE(ah liew @ Jun 20 2009, 10:17 PM) Let it be.. South Korea can be our role model.. there is no point escaping from this technolgy.. if we are worry about nuclear waste, its all political issues. Technology in managing waste is available and being use.. Integrated Used Fuel Management Under an integrated management approach, used nuclear fuel will remain stored at nuclear power plants in the near term. Eventually, the government will recycle it and place the unusable end product in a deep geologic repository. Used Nuclear Fuel Is Solid and Compact Used nuclear fuel consists of small ceramic uranium fuel pellets. All the used nuclear fuel produced by the U.S. nuclear energy industry in nearly 50 years—if stacked end to end—would cover an area the size of a football field to a depth of less than 10meters. Near- and Long-Term Plans for Managing Used Fuel Currently, used nuclear fuel is safely stored at nuclear plant sites, either in steel-lined, concrete vaults filled with water or in airtight steel or steel-reinforced concrete containers with steel inner canisters. Diligent monitoring and maintenance of safety systems ensures that the fuel is safely stored. Components of an Integrated Management System -interim storage of used fuel at centralized volunteer locations -advanced fuel reprocessing and recycling of used fuel to reduce the volume, heat and toxicity of nuclear waste and recover useful materials -permanent disposal of the byproducts of recycling and used nuclear fuel at a deep geologic repository. |
|
|
Jun 21 2009, 03:49 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,545 posts Joined: Dec 2004 From: Gombak |
yeah... pray the local council people don't forget about that wasted nuke stockpile they left in your backyard.
I remember reading someone's story about a university that once failed to properly dispose of dysfunctional machine that uses radioactive material. they left it on the corridor for God knows how long. along the way, a couple of professors whose rooms were nearby died from cancer. |
|
|
Jun 21 2009, 04:47 PM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
107 posts Joined: Nov 2008 From: UKM Bangi |
QUOTE(aranur @ Jun 21 2009, 03:49 PM) yeah... pray the local council people don't forget about that wasted nuke stockpile they left in your backyard. Well, in Malaysia we have Act. 304 for regulation in any nuclear related matters, need of licence, reporting to Atomic Energy Licencing Board (AELB)... etc.I remember reading someone's story about a university that once failed to properly dispose of dysfunctional machine that uses radioactive material. they left it on the corridor for God knows how long. along the way, a couple of professors whose rooms were nearby died from cancer. This law must be strictly followed by anybody. ![]() For more information, click on the link below Act. 304 |
|
|
Jun 21 2009, 05:15 PM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
201 posts Joined: Dec 2008 From: Los Angeles |
i think we should go for nuclear energy in the future but the question is when and are we ready for it...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 22 2009, 12:13 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
387 posts Joined: May 2008 |
Is Malaysia capable of using heavy water? I heard that CANDU reactors are supposedly the safer version of nuclear reactors. If Malaysia was more diligent in their record keepings and anti-corruption it would be a good idea to have a nuclear reactor, but thinking how people here built a highway (missing link) and spend so much money on it to see it not work an them stealing away or hoarding corrupt money, makes me wonder if we had a nuclear reactor, would it be safe or will some bureaucrat turn around and cheat somewhere and we'll all be part of a Chernobyl part 2 disaster?
|
|
|
Jun 22 2009, 01:19 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
4,852 posts Joined: Aug 2006 |
QUOTE(december88 @ Jun 19 2009, 09:40 PM) Fission may not be tomorrow's energy but just like fossil fuels we need all the energy we need in order to get fusion. The earliest year that a proper electric generating fusion reactor would be 2060,provided ITER starts in the next few years.Even after ITER,the scientists and engineers have to build another experimental reactor codename DEMO which will cost even more than ITER.Fusion is a huge challenge in engineering and science.But the research on fusion currently in France codename 'Iter' is overbudget. If you read the article fusion could only be possible within decades to come not years. As far as i know,ITER cost more then the "Doom's Day Machine",Large Hardon Collider.It's probably be one of the tech we wont see in our lifetime,as it is lacking of funds now. I did read an article on fusion.It's pretty promising,IMO,as if we have functional fusion tech,a lot of today's problems like lack of sources to power the hydrogen economy for cars etc,exploration to space or even green house effects could be solved by fusion. I do think fusion is the key to make our sci fi dreams come true. QUOTE(johnsonwps @ Jun 20 2009, 12:49 AM) Nuclear power??? Not for me, if Malaysia wants to build nuclear reactor, think twice please. Solar still have very poor efficiency in terms of generating electricity.Thats why it's still a heater for our house.For Malaysia, we can have better option like solar power or wind power.. We have endless sun, for those who lived at Sitiawan, you'll understand my point. Solar or wind power would not attract too much attention from other country. QUOTE(chezzball @ Jun 20 2009, 01:03 AM) i mean... the current method of producing energy is not bad either.. i mean.. the world is not running out of petroleum or natural gas... tankers are still moving right? ppl said petrol is finishing soon tat's why price so high... actually it's all about the futures market.. these speculator wanna untung money so purposely play the price til high.... earth still haz a LOT of natural resources... why not spend more on enhancing the current method.. instead of wasting money on nuclear power... because the total sum will shows more negative value in the government's account book if we wanna spend on nuclear No doubt earth have a lot of natural resource,like there are a lot more fuel in the north pole,but still,dont forget that these resource are finite that will run out sooner or later.Humans might as well look for alternatives while there are still time before it run out.Improving the current method isnt the best solution,like solar still have pathetic power output.It isnt as easy as pressing a research button Starcraft. QUOTE(NicJolin @ Jun 20 2009, 02:09 AM) Don't think it will lead to eutrophication. I still think it's because of the low power output of solar panels.It isnt enough to power our needs,and it's still not cheap.Anyway solar energy can be harvested not only be solar cell which the efficiency is utterly low. There's some other method like focusing the light beam from sun and use it to boil water which powers a steam turbine. Such solar power plant is much more efficient and since we're on the equator which is 365days summer, we can really consider about this. But still...the govt wouldn't bother of it |
|
|
Jun 22 2009, 05:04 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
479 posts Joined: Nov 2007 From: KL |
QUOTE(ah liew @ Jun 20 2009, 09:59 PM) See spoiler for source.» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... « Based on the article i can assumed TNB is seriously considering going nuclear. Probably good for their bottom line also since they are bleeding alot of money. So now fellow Malaysian if the feasibility study is positive, which nuclear design you wanna go with? China, Russia or US? Will be interesting where they gonna build the nuclear plant. |
|
|
Jun 22 2009, 07:24 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,032 posts Joined: Nov 2005 From: kuala lumpur |
nuclear waste are practically harmless and can only be harmfull if exposed for a long long time.
the plant in Chernobyl blew up because at that time the russians cant even differentiate a tractor from a monkey wrentch. neways, nuclear is the way to go and if you are looking at fusion of hydrogen. wait another 50 yrs as CERN scientist just only cracked the code. but it is currently consuming more energy than it can produce. |
|
|
Jun 24 2009, 08:20 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
425 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Seremban |
QUOTE(chezzball @ Jun 20 2009, 01:03 AM) i mean... the current method of producing energy is not bad either.. i mean.. the world is not running out of petroleum or natural gas... tankers are still moving right? ppl said petrol is finishing soon tat's why price so high... actually it's all about the futures market.. these speculator wanna untung money so purposely play the price til high.... earth still haz a LOT of natural resources... why not spend more on enhancing the current method.. instead of wasting money on nuclear power... because the total sum will shows more negative value in the government's account book if we wanna spend on nuclear I disagree. Current energy production is mostly powered by coal, which pollute environment so much than nuclear power. Nuclear power does pollute environment BUT only when disaster kicks in. It is one of the cleanest power on earth beside solar. Ferrari can send you to your destination if you know how to control it or send you to hell if you do not know how to control it. Same theory. Nuclear power is sustainable compared to most of the energy production right now. Coal, oil are simply not sustainable. It won't last long. What I meant by long is 100 years? or even 200 years? By using carbon fuels, we are subjected to the fluctuation of international fuel price. That means we gonna pay more when someone jack the price up, but nuclear power is not. Indeed, implementing nuclear power is very costly, but in the long run, it is considered cheap, compared to carbon fuel powered energy production.Added on June 24, 2009, 8:23 am QUOTE(selenium @ Jun 22 2009, 07:24 PM) nuclear waste are practically harmless and can only be harmfull if exposed for a long long time. Yes, they failed their own reactor when they tried to TEST it out WITHOUT following standard operating parameters. They blew themselves off. There is no accident. It was caused by human error.the plant in Chernobyl blew up because at that time the russians cant even differentiate a tractor from a monkey wrentch. neways, nuclear is the way to go and if you are looking at fusion of hydrogen. wait another 50 yrs as CERN scientist just only cracked the code. but it is currently consuming more energy than it can produce. This post has been edited by SurpriseZZZZZ: Jun 24 2009, 08:23 AM |
|
|
Jun 28 2009, 03:44 PM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
131 posts Joined: Sep 2006 |
Yeeeaaaaaaa !! We gonna kill ourself if we DONT KNOW HOW TO ACT IN EMERGENCY REGARDING NUKE POWER IF ANYTHING HAPPEN.
But as you know malaysian standard of seriousness in working area. VERY SLACKING and NO DISIPLIN !! |
|
|
Jun 30 2009, 10:15 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
6,562 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Kuala Lumpur |
will uranium supplied deplete?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 2 2009, 02:35 PM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
50 posts Joined: Jun 2009 From: selangor |
QUOTE(profdrahhen @ Jun 21 2009, 04:47 PM) Well, in Malaysia we have Act. 304 for regulation in any nuclear related matters, need of licence, reporting to Atomic Energy Licencing Board (AELB)... etc. YUP, totally agree with profdrahhen! in my university, my lecturer is a RPO (radiation protection officer) and he will check the dose of radiation, make sure that it is still "As Low As Reasonably Achievable"This law must be strictly followed by anybody. ![]() For more information, click on the link below Act. 304 |
|
|
Jul 2 2009, 11:48 PM
|
|
VIP
1,780 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Somewhere |
|
|
|
Jul 3 2009, 04:12 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,468 posts Joined: Nov 2004 From: Earth |
|
|
|
Jul 3 2009, 03:32 PM
|
![]()
Junior Member
49 posts Joined: Jun 2009 From: JB |
God bless if Malaysia is really building a nuclear plant...
|
|
|
Jul 3 2009, 03:58 PM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
313 posts Joined: Mar 2009 From: ✡ ✈ ▌▌ |
20 years ago.
we think that we can't and will never be able to dig out oil and gas from the deep sea with our own expertise.everybody think that it is almost impossible for us locals to manage the oil platform, let alone the search for new wells.but now?Malaysian expertise is seek by a big oil company all around the world, especially in geological science, malaysian is very good at that. that's 50 years of independence only..dont compare with those who already enjoying 100years of independence and a stable politics and corruption (this is our main problem). and i think 20 years later we might already cracks that helium butts ourself and produce fusion power! don't follow others but lead them.some brainiac at MIT already managed to produce fusion power but only with low efficiency and they said they need more 50 years to make it 100% efficient. |
|
|
Jul 4 2009, 11:19 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
3,348 posts Joined: May 2006 From: The Matrix |
Fusion technologies is the way to go.. But currently nuke energy is being consider .. I would said it is a good time to do it in malaysia provide it is taken care off by some expert.. dont let them being taken care by some third world metality people enough la.. The danger of leaking is a risk but with timely care and check it can be prevented and control.. Jus hope ur nuke expert is up to mark...b4 they considering bringing in the technologies..
|
|
|
Jul 4 2009, 06:28 PM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
122 posts Joined: Nov 2007 |
we don't have the technology, resources or people to handle this kind of thing at the moment.
even have to import contractors, otherwise get faulty reactor and if we want to enrich our own uranium obama will think we're building nukes |
| Change to: | 0.0650sec
0.27
6 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 26th November 2025 - 12:38 AM |