R
RMK7SledHead
Well-known member
ya....attempt to get the greenies to build a new dam. I'd rather sandpaper the a$$hole of an alligator in a phone booth.
I love being a wind turbine tech.... OUCH
- Thread starter matt22
- Start date
ya....attempt to get the greenies to build a new dam. I'd rather sandpaper the a$$hole of an alligator in a phone booth.
he beat me to it...
QUOTE: sorry matt but i am going to call bs on this statement. with all the hydro power we have around here that cost a fraction of the price of nuc and with all the stand by power that you are able to have if the nuc plant goes off line and you have to wait 48 hrs before you can bring it back. plus you have no worries about storing the waste from the rods that are spent that you have to find a spot to store for a 1000 years. hydro is the way to go.
_______________________________________________________________
Very true...
I was speaking of the near future. I know at least in Wa there won't be any more dams. That's all I've heard any way. I've also heard from a friend in the business up in Anchorage that there are some companies realy persuing the Thermo Energy thing. I'd like to learn more about that actualy. But you would have a hard time arguing the fact that right now nuclear energy isn't the biggest bang for the buck. I'm definatly no expert by any means though!
This site is full of some pretty savy energy people. I know of at least 4 HP's, Jeeper, Tech A, Idaho Slim and Snojo. All these people could realy lay out the Nuc stuff for you. I do know that we work our butts off to keep 30 to 88 MW on the line when there's wind and I look at our companies BWR nuc plant and it constantly pumps out close to 1200 MW every hour.
QUOTE: sorry matt but i am going to call bs on this statement. with all the hydro power we have around here that cost a fraction of the price of nuc and with all the stand by power that you are able to have if the nuc plant goes off line and you have to wait 48 hrs before you can bring it back. plus you have no worries about storing the waste from the rods that are spent that you have to find a spot to store for a 1000 years. hydro is the way to go.
_______________________________________________________________
Very true...
I was speaking of the near future. I know at least in Wa there won't be any more dams. That's all I've heard any way. I've also heard from a friend in the business up in Anchorage that there are some companies realy persuing the Thermo Energy thing. I'd like to learn more about that actualy. But you would have a hard time arguing the fact that right now nuclear energy isn't the biggest bang for the buck. I'm definatly no expert by any means though!
This site is full of some pretty savy energy people. I know of at least 4 HP's, Jeeper, Tech A, Idaho Slim and Snojo. All these people could realy lay out the Nuc stuff for you. I do know that we work our butts off to keep 30 to 88 MW on the line when there's wind and I look at our companies BWR nuc plant and it constantly pumps out close to 1200 MW every hour.
R
RMK7SledHead
Well-known member
H
Hairy Mark
Well-known member
yes it is "clean power" it is not all that clean if you look at the billions of dollars that have been spent to clean up hanford and that is only one of the sites that we have had to clean up. i am not negative on nuclear but like everything we have to look at it with our eyes wide open. nuclear is good for a constant power level. just like all steam generation. like garbage burning and in some ways wind power. but they have to have hydro to be used for large swings in power consumption. it takes about 24 to 48 hrs to bring a steam plant back on line. a hydro plant can be brought on in 7 min. big difference for power swings. bpa tells wpps to send us all the power they can and then we regulate the power levels on the dams they can flucuate almost instantly and much more effienctly. and with almost no pollution. if the greenies would just realize that the return on the investment is tremendous.
yes hydro can move quickly, but they do have limits based on water flows. There are restrictions for maximum and minimum amount of flows so that the impacts to a river are minimized. If the water has to run, they would rather it generate that let the water pass by....
I don't think there are many (if any) good sites available for use in hydro left anymore. I think the best locations have all been taken.
H
Hairy Mark
Well-known member
there are many still very usable site available left for dams just getting them built is another thing.
right now the columbia river is being run to save the fish and make power is the second concern.
right now the columbia river is being run to save the fish and make power is the second concern.
More dam questionss
Do you guys know if the Army Corp of Engineers still have the service contract for the Dams on the Columbia? This is just here say, but a long time ago I heard that there are a lot of turbines in all of the dams on the Columbia that need overhauled or even replaced and they are being left down and unrepaired or unreplaced. Do you guys know if there is any truth to this?
Do you guys know if the Army Corp of Engineers still have the service contract for the Dams on the Columbia? This is just here say, but a long time ago I heard that there are a lot of turbines in all of the dams on the Columbia that need overhauled or even replaced and they are being left down and unrepaired or unreplaced. Do you guys know if there is any truth to this?
Cant speak for the Core, but the USBR is updating all its plants, just takes time and money, I just replaced all the Turbines at Flaming Gorge in Utah, They have started replacements at Glen canyon in Arizona and Grand Coulee is about half way through 1 power house.
We are using the drought years to update everything.
I really don't think the Core would let any unit fall out of service, they get paid a lot for standby/reserve units, they may not be spinning but there making money.
For those that are curious
Old rusty steel Turbine/Runner and shaft from Flaming Gorge and shiny new Stainless Turbine/Runner, Runner is about 10 foot across.
The spinning parts, Turbine, Shaft and Generator Rotor weigh about 175 Ton,
Old rusty steel Turbine/Runner and shaft from Flaming Gorge and shiny new Stainless Turbine/Runner, Runner is about 10 foot across.
The spinning parts, Turbine, Shaft and Generator Rotor weigh about 175 Ton,
R
RMK7SledHead
Well-known member
This was what I thought too...but as I said in my post, it just isn't the case.
I called 4 different manufacturers of flatbed semi trailers...the engineers I talked to at each place said the same thing to me: "We bent them upwards cause we had to choose one way to bend them." There was no real reasoning behind it.
S
Snow Flake
Guest
This was what I thought too...but as I said in my post, it just isn't the case.
I called 4 different manufacturers of flatbed semi trailers...the engineers I talked to at each place said the same thing to me: "We bent them upwards cause we had to choose one way to bend them." There was no real reasoning behind it.
Okay I'll bite. If they are not bent to increase strength, why are they bent at all???? I say it is for strength and the engineers are toying with you.
Last edited:
just for the record....
HANFORD is NOT, nor was it ever a commercial nuclear power generating facility. The original Hanford mission invovled certain aspects of weapons production. Today's mission primarily includes clean-up and restoration, as well as several research facilities.
HANFORD is NOT, nor was it ever a commercial nuclear power generating facility. The original Hanford mission invovled certain aspects of weapons production. Today's mission primarily includes clean-up and restoration, as well as several research facilities.
H
Hairy Mark
Well-known member
well as far as we are concerned with it, it is there to produce the 1200MW of electricity that we use. it is a constant load that we can count on for a 23 consecutive month period. then it is shut down and refueled. maybe i am wrong and usually i am, but i thought that hanford one, which is being disassembled at this time, was there to process waste from nuclear weapons waste. but hanford two was built with wpps money and it was to be used as a nuclear generating station. built with bonds that when they went bankrupt bpa came to the plate and assumed the debt of those bonds keepinjg most of the utilities in the nw afloat. we are still paying funds for those bonds. i think we are on the 20 refinance of those. lol.
i do know that the dams are being repaired and fixed as fast as the problems are coming up. my bro at libby says they are real busy. they have to get a unit on line before the spring runoff is here in may.
Wow
Dave, that is an impressive turbine! Thanks for the pics. I'll see if I can dig up some cool wind tur bine tear down pics.
Jeff, there's a couple reasons off the top of my head for wind turbines to have a break.
1) The hub were the three blades fasten to the turbine is full of electrical boxes and hydraulics. When we perform service or trouble shoot the hub we have to open a hatch door on the nacelle (cab) and another door on the hub to get in. Once you get the hub in the exact position you need to to expose the door you've chosent, you set the brake and insert two safety pins in the gear box's brake rotor. Only then is it safe to enter the hub.
2) There are lots of errors that can occur with these turbines. Some of the errors that can occur require the turbine to stop as fast as possible to prevent main cables from over twisting, hyraulic failures, ect. On a number 1 stop the turbine can come to a complete stop in a little less than one revolution. That break is a combination of three things working together to get hub to stop so quickly, the generator, the pitching of the blades out of the wind and the brake caliper on the gear box rotor.
Dave, that is an impressive turbine! Thanks for the pics. I'll see if I can dig up some cool wind tur bine tear down pics.
Jeff, there's a couple reasons off the top of my head for wind turbines to have a break.
1) The hub were the three blades fasten to the turbine is full of electrical boxes and hydraulics. When we perform service or trouble shoot the hub we have to open a hatch door on the nacelle (cab) and another door on the hub to get in. Once you get the hub in the exact position you need to to expose the door you've chosent, you set the brake and insert two safety pins in the gear box's brake rotor. Only then is it safe to enter the hub.
2) There are lots of errors that can occur with these turbines. Some of the errors that can occur require the turbine to stop as fast as possible to prevent main cables from over twisting, hyraulic failures, ect. On a number 1 stop the turbine can come to a complete stop in a little less than one revolution. That break is a combination of three things working together to get hub to stop so quickly, the generator, the pitching of the blades out of the wind and the brake caliper on the gear box rotor.
One small correction, We are updating the Hydro Power Plants, replacing the Turbines and Generators with more efficient units, not repairing the Dams, the Dams are fine, we don't want to scare the Village people down stream now do we
This always get confused
Mark, people that live here in the Tri-Cities even get this mixed up.
What Jody's saying is that "Hanford" was built for weapons grade plutonium ect. WPPS, or now Energy Northwest, which is the company I work for, just leases a little bit of land that the only current operating reactor in the Northwest is on. It's not Hanford owned or DOE owned, only the land is. Even our badging and clearances are different.
Hope this helps.
Mark, people that live here in the Tri-Cities even get this mixed up.
What Jody's saying is that "Hanford" was built for weapons grade plutonium ect. WPPS, or now Energy Northwest, which is the company I work for, just leases a little bit of land that the only current operating reactor in the Northwest is on. It's not Hanford owned or DOE owned, only the land is. Even our badging and clearances are different.
Hope this helps.
R
RMK7SledHead
Well-known member
At four different companies? Doubtful. I wouldn't lie to another engineer about the stuff I design.
Similar threads
