Nuke plant : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

I was at a function last night, y2k came up (subject)the person I was talking to said that " the power-plant is going to throttle back for the y2k change over". Also said that the fossil fueled plants would make up for the Nuke plants powering down. Limerick Power Plant in Pa. Owned by PECO

-- jhite (, December 26, 1999


"throttle back" and "powering down" are both rather vague phrases -- but I think most people would interpret them as NOT being synonyms of one another. I think of "throttle back" as a partial, but not complete, reduction in velocity, energy, momentum, or whatever ... whereas "powering down" implies a total shutdown.

Which one of these two interpretations did you have in mind?

-- Ed Yourdon (, December 26, 1999.

Any more details possible?

Art..... also in PA

-- art (, December 26, 1999.

UP TO DATE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT STATUS!!!!!!!!! ******************UPDATED DAILY*************

-- k (hh@mm.kk), December 26, 1999.

If you have any more info I'd like to hear it. I have relatives that live just across the river (within 3 miles) from Limerick. I'll ask them if they have heard anything.



-- charlie (, December 26, 1999.

thottle back

-- jhite (, December 26, 1999.

There are throttle valves on the turbine,which can be used to slow down the turbine and can be adjusted as needed. A nuclear plant is powered down. There are six modes,mode one is a plant at 100% power.Shift operators are reluctant to power down to another mode but will under some instances.such as,going to mode3 when some work that will take a few days to complete will be done in the containment (where the reactor is found). Mode5 is a cold reactor and can take 3 or 4 days to reach. Mode6 is when the fuel is out of the reactor vessel.

-- charles hatcher (, December 26, 1999.

There will probably be most of the power plants "throttling back" for the rollover due to the fact that there will be a lower demand for power just like every year during New Years when businesses close down for the Holiday.

As for the second statement, it is true that if, for some reason, a nuclear power plant is shut down (for normal maintenance etc) then the slack can be taken up by non-nuclear power plants.

-- Cherri (, December 26, 1999.

Out here in Central Arizona, Palo Verde, the largest Nuke on the Planet, will be operating in excess of 110% of design capacity throughout the Rollover period...

Gotta keep the Juice flowing to L.A.

-- K. Stevens (kstevens@ It's ALL going away in 122, December 26, 1999.

Saw the following posted a little earlier at the following link

EMAIL, 12/26/99 2:59:17 AM Pacific Standard Time: I usually keep bad news to myself, but iI have been told by someone in the know that the USA can expect major power shortages over the new year as it sounds like they may have to take all nuclear power stations off line, as computer malfunctions are expected by technicians in the states, this info is from a Honeywell computer expert ( the guys that have been trying to get all these hi-tech computers compliant for the last few years), I was told their prelim tests did not go well and they are expecting problems which means they may HAVE to pull all nuclear stations out of the grid!!! as you may know the USA depends heavily on nuclear power!! So folks expect problems, sorry about this, lets hope it's not too bad. Or they come right at the last minute. Have a good one anyway

Also this site keeps live links monitoring solar activity plus posts any kind of unusual, unexplained phenomenon from NASA feeds. Like the Solar Satellite camera images of the sun...(SOHO)... For the last 2 years picking up various bizarre objects that have been nicknamed by others as the "sun cruisers"... Check them out too. Legit pics from NASA.

-- Soho2C-U (, December 27, 1999.

SOHO2cu: Actually, we don't rely all that heavily on nukes for power. something like less than 25%, I believe. Most of our power comes from hydro and, especially, oil/coal plants. France is the big nuke user. I forget the percentage, but it is way over 50%. However, we do have a large number of nuke plants, and any problems could affect many millions of people, so the threat is there, but losing the nukes from the grid won't cripple the country much.

-- Little Pig (, December 27, 1999.

little piggy, We currently use 90% of ALL power created in our grid. If by YOUR measure we lose 25% of our capability we are left with 75% which is less than the power starved people of this country want. Overloading the system will occur if power rationing is not implemented. Breakers would pop and whole regions would go down. So don't be so chipper my little pig or y2k will huff and puff and turn YOUR power off.

-- doomed (, December 27, 1999.

The East Coast is primarily dependent on Nuke Power. They are the ones who would be in SERIOUS trouble. When I was following the Nukes more closely, last year, I noticed that quite a few plants, particularly out East were being sold; Three Mile Island, Yankee, and a few others. And, I may be incorrect, but I think the buyers were all primarily foreign. I remember being shocked that we could just sell a Nuclear power plant to a foriegn source like it was a hot dog stand. This may be a classic case of "let the buyer beware" and.... everyone else within a 50 mile radius.

Years ago, my job took me to all the Nuclear Plants in the US and Mexico. I will say that relatively speaking the job related competence on the US sites seemed (at least to me) to be fairly high. But Mexico! Now that's a different story. The last time I was down there, (before they fired the reactor up) it was brought to my attention that in order to use the concrete forms to make the reactor building, the Mexicans had patched them with beer cans (Dos Equixes) I'm sure I'm slaughtering the spelling of this beer; sorry beer- lovers. Anyway, the darn containment walls had these beer cans embedded in them. And the stories the QA and QC guys told were hair raising. The Mexican government allowed the big contractors to bring in their own Engineers to work the project, but the workers themselves were all local farmers...not familiar with the finer things in life like...electricty. The body count on these jobs from accidents caused by lack of knowledge by the workers was chilling. I'm just glad I do not live upwind to the Gulf of Mexico.

As a last note, there is an excellent book out entitled "Nuclear War Survival Skills" by Cresson H. Kearny. It's published by Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, Cave Junction, OR. I can't remember where I got my copy, I know it was over the Net. I havn't brought myself to read it yet, but after reading the threads I have been reading tonight, I think I'll break it out and start reading. Good Luck everybody.

-- meg davis (, December 28, 1999.

Doomer: I never said there wouldn't be problems. If we lose the nukes, there will certainly have to be power rationing or other measures to conserve what is left. So we go without some of the luxuries that waste so much electricity, big deal. Many people would find their lives filled with more meaning if they had to go without some of the things they currently think they need. For example, if Las Vegas shut down most of the lights for its casinos, that alone would free up a major amount of power that could be put to better use. Yes, the local economy would be stressed by the lower profits from the casinos, but is it more important to try to keep such cheap entertainment going, or rebuild the country to the point where we can afford such things again without worrying? I'm something of a utilitarian in regards to y2k, and accept that I may get caught up in it too. I know that I have enough skills to get food on my family's table until the economy recovers. I huess the point is not to mistake me for a polly. I am not. I merely wanted to point out that the nuke plants are not as large a part of the grid as was stated earlier.

To whomever mentioned the Yankee plant: which Yankee is that? If it is Rowe Yankee, I was under the impression that Rowe shut down several years ago. They took out the reactor vessel about two years ago, I believe. If someone bought it, they're not using it to generate power. At least not in New England.

Jes' Thinkin'...

-- Little Pig (, December 28, 1999.

that would be vermont yankee, yes it's operating and yes it's been sold. BTW nuke plants don't function well below 70%

-- melvin (, December 31, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ