What's new

China's Nuclear Power set to Increase Sevenfold by 2020

Lankan Ranger

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Aug 9, 2009
Messages
12,550
Reaction score
0
China's Nuclear Power set to Increase Sevenfold by 2020

China has to raise its nuclear power capacity to 75 megawatts by 2020, eight times that of the current nine-megawatt capacity, to offset the pressure of emission reduction, Shanghai Securities News reported Friday citing an official close to the matter.

"At least 15 percent of China's total energy consumption must be non-fossil energy by 2020 to meet the nation's commitment at the Copenhagen Climate Conference. Nuclear power should contribute up to six percentage points," said an unidentified senior official at the Energy Bureau of the National Development and Reform Commission. The official is among those who reviewed the nation's 12th five-year energy plan.

"China's immediate need in cutting energy consumption makes nuclear power a crucial energy source. The advantage of nuclear power is in high stability and high utilization," the report quoted Zhang Shuai, an analyst at Sinolink Securities, as saying.

Nuclear power generation costs less than other power generation too, Zhang added.

Nuclear power generation costs $50 per megawatt-hour, the report said citing data from the International Atomic Energy Agency. China's mature nuclear power plants need less than 0.4 yuan (6 US cents) per kilowatt-hour.

"China's two nuclear power giants are buying overseas uranium mines in a speedy manner to meet demand from a huge installed nuclear power capacity, laying the foundation for a great leap of the nuclear power generation industry," added Zhang.

China's nuclear power set to increase sevenfold by '20
 
lol this will provoke indians

thye will start posting we indians need to increase ours too

HA HA AHAHA HAHAHAHAHHA
 
lol this will provoke indians

thye will start posting we indians need to increase ours too

HA HA AHAHA HAHAHAHAHHA

That is not necessarily a bad thing.

Both China and India and growing economic powers and the said growth can't be sustained unless there is a clean, steady supply of energy.

Nuclear energy is the best answer right now, which is the reason why I am a nuclear power advocate.

People here in the States are too terrified by nuclear energy after the Chernobyl and Three-Mile Island meltdowns. The states, however, have a choice since there is a steady supply of oil from the Middle East, Alaska, and Texas. China and India, however, won't have such luxuries.
 
That is not necessarily a bad thing.

Both China and India and growing economic powers and the said growth can't be sustained unless there is a clean, steady supply of energy.

Nuclear energy is the best answer right now, which is the reason why I am a nuclear power advocate.

People here in the States are too terrified by nuclear energy after the Chernobyl and Three-Mile Island meltdowns. The states, however, have a choice since there is a steady supply of oil from the Middle East, Alaska, and Texas. China and India, however, won't have such luxuries.

Good post!:tup:

We predict the same for India too when the nuke-deal takes effect i.e in tangible terms.
 
lol this will provoke indians

thye will start posting we indians need to increase ours too

HA HA AHAHA HAHAHAHAHHA

dumb comment !!..you do realize they are talking about electricity and not nuclear weapons..why should India match china in electricity production....is Pakistan trying to match India in electricity production??:disagree:
 
Personally I am against nuclear power for the simple reason of the waste problem. Mankind so far has simply refused to deal with the long term consequences of how to store the waste safely and effectively.
 
Personally I am against nuclear power for the simple reason of the waste problem. Mankind so far has simply refused to deal with the long term consequences of how to store the waste safely and effectively.

Nuclear waste is a bigger problem with nuclear fission, which is why everyone is going for nuclear fusion (generating more electricity than the amount used to start it right now).

As for the waste problem I think the way that we are dealing with them in the U.S. (or planning to, last time I heard it) is fine. Store them underground in uninhabited areas in Arizona sounds fine (as long as they don't hit underground water deposits). This may be a problem in China and India, however, where every inch of the land is precious although China may be able to store the waste in the Gobi Desert. Perhaps they could outsource waste storage at huge fees to Russia and the U.S.?
 
Personally I am against nuclear power for the simple reason of the waste problem. Mankind so far has simply refused to deal with the long term consequences of how to store the waste safely and effectively.

The problem is over stated. Large scale facilities can store waste safely and cheaply.

paz_02_img0192.jpg


Most of the noise about nuclear energy comes from stupid environmentalists who don't understand the science behind any of the issues they argue.
 
The problem is over stated. Large scale facilities can store waste safely and cheaply.

paz_02_img0192.jpg


Most of the noise about nuclear energy comes from stupid environmentalists who don't understand the science behind any of the issues they argue.

Which is ironic since nuclear power is, as of today, the most sensible alternative to fossil fuel.

Let us look at the alternatives:

Solar: woefully inefficient (most commercial solar panels are 15% efficient). The solar power generation plants (using mirrors to focus the sunlight and power a steam turbine) require huge amounts of space). Also depends on the weather.

Wind: Limited to "windy" locations. Can be a major eyesore (or wonder, if you are weird like me). Environmentalists also ***** about how the turbines kill birds.

Hydro: Limited to locations with rivers (preferably large ones). Environmentalists ***** far more about this one than the other two (they are mostly justified, however) since it hampers fish migration and allows sediments to build up under the dam, causing erosion in the lower reaches. Construction of major dams also tend to cause major population displacements (Yangtze Dam for textbook illustration).

Unless the hippies want to go back to living in caves they'd better support atomic power. More donations to fusion research guys :D.
 
Unless the hippies want to go back to living in caves they'd better support atomic power. More donations to fusion research guys

Very true... These hippies will shout against anything and everything
 
Am I getting this correctly?

Does the article say Chinese nuclear capacity to be 75 MW by 2020?

Shouldn't it be 75000 MW ?
 
Nuclear waste is a bigger problem with nuclear fission, which is why everyone is going for nuclear fusion (generating more electricity than the amount used to start it right now).

As for the waste problem I think the way that we are dealing with them in the U.S. (or planning to, last time I heard it) is fine. Store them underground in uninhabited areas in Arizona sounds fine (as long as they don't hit underground water deposits). This may be a problem in China and India, however, where every inch of the land is precious although China may be able to store the waste in the Gobi Desert. Perhaps they could outsource waste storage at huge fees to Russia and the U.S.?

export it to the US. we can pay them in treasury bills.
 
i too dont support nuclear energy due to the obvious reasons,radioactive hazards and disposal problem

U.S and Russia dont have a problem to dispose it either underground or through storage facility as they have plenty of space

China too even having a big population will dont have that much problem as it is also a big country

But this is not the same about India

I think we should go fo more solar,wind energy and should effectively engage in process of tapping tidal energy(though very much costly)
 
first things first, we need a super grid my friends, that alone will save tons in power usage(of course it costs though)
 
Back
Top Bottom