Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

marmar

(77,164 posts)
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 08:54 AM Mar 2013

Wind power is poised to kick nuclear’s ass


from Grist:


Wind power is poised to kick nuclear’s ass
By John Upton


In 2012, wind energy became the fastest-growing source of new electricity generation in the U.S., providing 42 percent of new generation capacity, according to the American Wind Energy Association.

Wind power is becoming so cheap and so commonplace that it appears poised to help blow up the country’s nuclear power sector, according to a recent Bloomberg article (which you really should read in full). Other highlights from the piece:

* $25 billion was spent on wind energy in the U.S. in 2012.
* The $25 billion outlay increased nationwide wind generating capacity by 13,124 megawatts – up 28 percent from 2011.
* That spending spree was fueled in large part by a mad scramble to qualify for federal tax credits that were set to expire at the end of last year (but were ultimately renewed by Congress).
* Wind-generated electricity met about 3.4 percent of of American demand in 2012, a figure that’s expected to reach 4.2 percent next year.
* $120 billion spent on wind turbines since 2003 has increased wind power supplies 1,000 percent and created as much new electricity generation as could be provided by 14 new nuclear power plants.


In addition to federal tax credits, state-level renewable energy requirements are helping to spur wind’s growth, and the nuclear industry thinks that’s unfair: ....................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://grist.org/news/wind-power-is-poised-to-kick-nuclears-ass/



53 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Wind power is poised to kick nuclear’s ass (Original Post) marmar Mar 2013 OP
Nearly 20% of the electricity generated in the US is from nuclear. Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #1
........ marmar Mar 2013 #2
I am a huge supporter of wind energy, but the mindset has to change. Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #3
I'm sorry but my mindset will not change in regard to nuclear power. snappyturtle Mar 2013 #5
The waste is a big issue for me, and a source of enormous irritation at the US "environementalists" Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #7
We can avoid some of the long term solution problem by adopting other alternative sources. imho nt snappyturtle Mar 2013 #12
The waste already exists, but opponents Jenoch Mar 2013 #17
Yikes... I agree... that storage situation makes it clear that Nuclear Power is not sustainable midnight Mar 2013 #45
Even if we were to shut down Jenoch Mar 2013 #53
And in the 15,000 years of operational experience of all of the nuclear plants worldwide combined AtheistCrusader Mar 2013 #22
and the lawsuits regarding nuclear waste are just beginning, so the tab is bound to rise magical thyme Mar 2013 #10
This is all Harry Reid's fault. UnrepentantLiberal Mar 2013 #14
Do you see this as a good thing? Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #15
it is reality. nuclear wastes require safe storage for a long, long time magical thyme Mar 2013 #19
The government has to pay, but it is not their fault. Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #21
The government agreed to take the waste as part of the original deal, so yes it is their fault magical thyme Mar 2013 #23
If several environmental lobbies, Las Vegas, and Nevada had not made Bush cave, ... Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #27
Why isn't Nevada willing to let us dump on them? RobertEarl Mar 2013 #48
It goes way beyond Nevada. Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #49
Nuclear waste is nothing to be concerned about? RobertEarl Mar 2013 #52
And where, oh where should we store all the waste generated by wind power...it has a half-life.... Tikki Mar 2013 #8
I suppose you oppose Yucca Mountain. Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #11
The whole environmental movement is based on "ignorance and unfounded fear"? UnrepentantLiberal Mar 2013 #16
Were those my words? Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #20
Words. Discuss. RobertEarl Mar 2013 #33
I spend far too much time at DU explaining that someone's hyperbole is ... hyperbole. Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #35
So, you are not an environmentalist? RobertEarl Mar 2013 #36
Do you have any rhetorical tools other than hyperbole? Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #37
Wait, hold on a minute longer RobertEarl Mar 2013 #38
I gave them already. Now you're just being annoying. Goodbye. Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #40
Hope you learned a lesson here. RobertEarl Mar 2013 #43
To both of you... xtraxritical Mar 2013 #26
I have no problem with nuclear Cosmocat Mar 2013 #18
Cost is another problem RobertEarl Mar 2013 #42
How many billions were spent on new nuclear power in 2012, without a single new megawatt going onlin AtheistCrusader Mar 2013 #25
Meh. You're not from Chernobyl or Fukushima, I take it? Zorra Mar 2013 #28
Not a very informed opinion, but it's your right to state it. Buzz Clik Mar 2013 #30
Maybe we just have different priorities in assessing the efficiency and value of energy systems. Zorra Mar 2013 #34
Good news on the solar front too, as costs are dropping Coyotl Mar 2013 #4
Need a way to store electricity not being used and that's it, nuke power is done uponit7771 Mar 2013 #6
I spoke to one engineer who said that water was the way to store it... mainer Mar 2013 #29
That's where pluggable hybrid and electric cars can help. kestrel91316 Mar 2013 #32
The 24/7/35 molten salt solar plants help to address this issue by constantly generating, Egalitarian Thug Mar 2013 #50
let it be... we have invested. looking for a hefty return. sigh.... nt seabeyond Mar 2013 #9
now if only solar can kick coal's ass! DonRedwood Mar 2013 #13
Not possible, without nuclear power there would be no wind snooper2 Mar 2013 #24
NNadir must be completely apoplectic at this news. kestrel91316 Mar 2013 #31
Important post malaise Mar 2013 #39
This blows! Remmah2 Mar 2013 #41
K&R This is good news.. I'm sorry that the nuclear industry feels this is unfair... midnight Mar 2013 #44
Conservation!! Chuuku Davis Mar 2013 #46
Why does it have to be a competition? blogslut Mar 2013 #47
We're already doing that you know Benton D Struckcheon Mar 2013 #51
 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
1. Nearly 20% of the electricity generated in the US is from nuclear.
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 09:16 AM
Mar 2013

If wind energy production continues grow at its current staggering pace of 0.8% more of our energy per year, it will catch nuclear in 25 years -- roughly the average life of a wind turbine. Are wind energy producers using some of their profits to save for replacing their equipment, or will they be lining up at the trough for more subsidies in 25 years?

We need to replace coal and gas generated electricity 100% in the coming years, and wind cannot do it alone. Nuclear is a logical option, but the abject fear from the public that is associated with the industry makes growth difficult.

marmar

(77,164 posts)
2. ........
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 09:22 AM
Mar 2013

But Exelon, the biggest nuclear-power producer in the country, gets plenty of government help itself. A 2011 report from the Union of Concerned Scientists found that the nuclear power industry wouldn’t even be viable without government support: “more than 30 subsidies have supported every stage of the nuclear fuel cycle, from uranium mining to long-term waste storage.”


Looks like that trough is already pretty crowded.

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
3. I am a huge supporter of wind energy, but the mindset has to change.
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 09:26 AM
Mar 2013

How many wind turbines would have been erected without government help? Will they plan for the future or simply go belly up when the profits start to fall? We know what we hope for, and we all hope that's how it turns out.

We should be pulling for safe, rational nuclear in this country, not fighting it. It's a power option that can take us deep into the future as we figure out other viable options.

snappyturtle

(14,656 posts)
5. I'm sorry but my mindset will not change in regard to nuclear power.
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 09:42 AM
Mar 2013

Using the word "safe" and nuclear in the same sentence boogles my mind. Even if all accidents could be avoided, we're still left with its nasty waste. Sorry, but.........

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
7. The waste is a big issue for me, and a source of enormous irritation at the US "environementalists"
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 09:56 AM
Mar 2013

It's unthinkable to block facilities for long-term solutions to nuclear waste.

 

Jenoch

(7,720 posts)
17. The waste already exists, but opponents
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 11:14 AM
Mar 2013

to nuclear power have consistently figured out ways to stop solutions to its long-term storage. Because there is no long-term storage, there are spent rods in casks on an island in the Mississippi River in Minnesota. That does not seem like the best storage solution to me.

midnight

(26,624 posts)
45. Yikes... I agree... that storage situation makes it clear that Nuclear Power is not sustainable
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 04:03 PM
Mar 2013

and we need to move away from it...

 

Jenoch

(7,720 posts)
53. Even if we were to shut down
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 06:27 PM
Mar 2013

all of the nuclear power plants operating in the U.S. today we still need a long-term storage solution for the spent fuel. We don't have that now and the anti-nuclear power people are not helping that situation, they are making it worse.

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
22. And in the 15,000 years of operational experience of all of the nuclear plants worldwide combined
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 11:40 AM
Mar 2013

how many were erected without government help?

I'm guessing you could count the number on a single hand. Probably wouldn't even need all of the fingers to be present. Probably a very round number.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
10. and the lawsuits regarding nuclear waste are just beginning, so the tab is bound to rise
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 09:59 AM
Mar 2013

Maine just received a nice chunk of change from the US Gov, just the first installment to boot, for our long closed Maine Yankee nuclear plant.

The nuke waste supposed to have been removed from our storage many years ago. Still waiting.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
19. it is reality. nuclear wastes require safe storage for a long, long time
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 11:20 AM
Mar 2013

We Mainers have been forced to pay for the storage of our spent fuel for extra years while TPTB refused to come to terms with this fact. Now the real costs of nuclear will start to emerge. So yes, that is a good thing.

And now we will be compensated for the unplanned storage costs incurred as a result of a government agreement that wasn't kept. The money is to be distributed back to local electricity users in the form of lower rates. Personally, I'd rather it was re-distributed back in the form of a check to users for the last xyz years, pro-rata based on how much extra we paid out. That way, it would come directly to the people forced to bear the burden, versus giving newcomers who didn't pay the extra costs our money. But it is what it is, and no system is perfect.

 

magical thyme

(14,881 posts)
23. The government agreed to take the waste as part of the original deal, so yes it is their fault
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 11:44 AM
Mar 2013

The Federal Government contractually agreed to provide long-term storage for spent fuel. They have failed to do so and that is why we sued and why we won the suit. They failed on Yucca Mountain. I've also read that it can be stored very safely under the great salt lakes, IIRC.

So yes it is their fault.

In the meantime, Maine continues to make progress in renewable energy, with the Penobscot River to my north, wind in the far north, and is a leader in ocean current powered electricity to my east.

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
27. If several environmental lobbies, Las Vegas, and Nevada had not made Bush cave, ...
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 12:03 PM
Mar 2013

we'd have a functioning storage facility today. The facility exists, we just cannot use it.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
48. Why isn't Nevada willing to let us dump on them?
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 04:39 PM
Mar 2013

Who do they think they are telling us we can't dump all our deadly waste in their state?

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
49. It goes way beyond Nevada.
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 04:55 PM
Mar 2013

There are dozens of environmental groups who were blocking the transport of the waste through their state.

Abject, irrational fear combined with unparalleled ignorance -- those are powerful tools when in the hands of those who know how to use them. Just ask the fossil fuel industry how they are fighting controls on greenhouse gas emissions.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
52. Nuclear waste is nothing to be concerned about?
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 06:08 PM
Mar 2013

How in the world is it that environmental groups who can't get anything done about global warming, able to stop the nuclear industry? Did you know our Senator from Nevada is opposed to Yucca being used?

Blaming the environmental groups for stopping Yucca is ignorant. All they are asking is to make sure nuclear waste is not dumped. Rather that the waste be disposed of properly by the generation that made it and not foisted upon our children. If your only solution is to dump it in Nevada, then you are about the only one left. A member of a minority that blames everyone but themselves for the failure of everybody else to do what the wrong thing.

As for the fossil fuel industry.... you do know they are the same people who run nuclear plants, right? Don't tell me you just now discovered that.

Duke, TVA, Exelon, etc. They are creating the co2 and the nuclear waste. The same corps, in bed, making profits, spewing emissions. Destroying the environment together.

Environmentalists have been fighting both for years now. You should join in.

Tikki

(14,576 posts)
8. And where, oh where should we store all the waste generated by wind power...it has a half-life....
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 09:58 AM
Mar 2013

of like..huh?


Tikki

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
11. I suppose you oppose Yucca Mountain.
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 10:01 AM
Mar 2013

If so, you get the last word, but opposition to Yucca Mountain is based on nothing but ignorance and unfounded fear -- two of the pillars in the US environmental movement.

But don't fool yourself about waste. With tens of thousands of wind turbines spinning away, they do wear out and they do generate waste.

=======

By the way, trying to construe that I oppose wind energy is just silly.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
33. Words. Discuss.
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 01:27 PM
Mar 2013

These were your words before edit:

"".... is based on nothing but ignorance and unfounded fear -- two of the pillars in the US environmental movement. ""

What it looks like you believe is that two of the pillars of the US environmental movement are "ignorance and unfounded fear".


 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
35. I spend far too much time at DU explaining that someone's hyperbole is ... hyperbole.
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 02:47 PM
Mar 2013

First, my edit was submitted one minute after my original post and a full hour prior to your comment. So, your quote is exactly what I intended to say and exactly what you commented on.

And, yes, I do believe that fear and ignorance are two pillars of the US environmental movement. Two shining examples and DU favorites:

1) Unfounded fear of GMOs
2) Complete ignorance about the reason behind colony collapse disorder in bees

That's not to say that everyone in the US environmental movement bases their opinions on fear and ignorance, but it is pervasive with some.

Gratefully, there are other pillars like scientific research and education. However, when the science isn't there, we are sometimes treated to some amazing lies.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
36. So, you are not an environmentalist?
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 03:00 PM
Mar 2013

Because if you were you labeled yourself as being pilliared on unfounded fear and ignorance of the environmental movement.

Now you are bactracking pretty quickly from your bold, unfounded and ignorant statement. Good for you. Mistakes happen. You'll not forget this one, will you? Hope to never see such ignorant and unfounded statements again about people who are environmentalists. We have enough enemies.

You learn anything here?

 

Buzz Clik

(38,437 posts)
37. Do you have any rhetorical tools other than hyperbole?
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 03:10 PM
Mar 2013

No, I am not backtracking from my original comment. I fully believe that fear and ignorance are two of the pillars of the US environmental movement. I am, however, distancing myself from your ridiculous insinuations.

By the way, I find the reactions to nuclear energy we find at DU to be propped up by the intentional spreading of fear and ignorance.

You get the last word.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
38. Wait, hold on a minute longer
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 03:17 PM
Mar 2013

Don't run away just yet with your tail between your legs...

You have identified two pillars of the environmental movement, can you tell us of any other pillars? Or are you ignorant of any other pillars?

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
43. Hope you learned a lesson here.
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 03:30 PM
Mar 2013

Don't mouth off about something you have unfounded fears about and are ignorant of.

The American environmental movement is pillared by Muir, Leopold, land ethics, sustainability, information, observations, science, and feelings (we are only human).

It is not founded on profits, pollution, degradation, kicking our problems down the road, and dumping our wastes on our children.

Proceed, Buzz.

 

xtraxritical

(3,576 posts)
26. To both of you...
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 11:59 AM
Mar 2013

Most of the US population centers are located near the coasts. Ocean currents are much more reliable than wind currents. Turbines located in the oceans do not obstruct anyone's view and are not noisy. At end of life they can be removed more easily than they were installed. No storage or safety problems either. Nuclear and wind are not the best options. Solar on every roof top is a much better option than wind or nuclear too.

Cosmocat

(14,618 posts)
18. I have no problem with nuclear
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 11:16 AM
Mar 2013

it definitely can be part of the puzzle. Problem is the cost benefit.

I don't know how you get enough from wind short of turbines all over the place, and that is asking a lot.

Solar SHOULD be a bigger piece of the puzzle.

Gotta really focus on the technology and keep refining it.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
42. Cost is another problem
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 03:25 PM
Mar 2013

I am with you. They need to refine the technology of nuclear waste. It is the most serious and long lasting problem that we are faced with. Burying it somewhere for the 1,000 years is not a solution.

So, yes, the technology needs to be refined and a real solution found for nuclear waste. Who is going to pay for it? And what happens if the tech never is refined?

AtheistCrusader

(33,982 posts)
25. How many billions were spent on new nuclear power in 2012, without a single new megawatt going onlin
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 11:49 AM
Mar 2013

e?

We had a single 1000mw plant under construction in 2011. And 2012. Might be done by 2020.
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-T-Z/USA--Nuclear-Power/#.UUNCK2bn-Uk

Four plants by 2020. Yay. Fun.

Zorra

(27,670 posts)
28. Meh. You're not from Chernobyl or Fukushima, I take it?
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 12:05 PM
Mar 2013

Nuclear power is clearly dangerous in on a planet that has an unpredictable environment.

Nuclear power is just plain flat out fucking stupid, and since we can't fix stupid, the only other option is to eliminate it.

Zorra

(27,670 posts)
34. Maybe we just have different priorities in assessing the efficiency and value of energy systems.
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 01:41 PM
Mar 2013

Акимов, Александр Фёдорович
1953-05-06
1986-05-10 radiation burns on 100% of body, caused by an estimated 15 Gray (Gy) dose. Unit #4 shift leader A senior reactor operator, at the controls in the control room at the time of the explosion; received fatal dose during attempts to restart feedwater flow into the reactor; posthumously awarded the Order "For Courage" of third degree.[8]
Ananenko, Alexei ?
1986-05/6-? acute radiation sickness engineer One of the three divers who opened the sluice gates allowing water to evacuate the basement below the reactor on May 1. Congratulated upon return, he died afterwards.
Baranov, Anatoly Ivanovich

Баранов, Анатолий Иванович
1953-06-13
1986-05-20 acute radiation sickness electrical engineer, senior electrician Posthumously awarded the Order "For Courage" of third degree.[8]
Baranov, Boris ?
1986-05/6-? acute radiation sickness soldier One of the three divers (he carried a lamp, which later failed) who opened the sluice gates allowing water to evacuate the basement below the reactor on May 1. Congratulated upon return, he died afterwards.
Bezpalov, Valeri ?
1986-05/6-? acute radiation sickness engineer One of the three divers who opened the sluice gates allowing water to evacuate the basement below the reactor on May 1. Congratulated upon return, he died afterwards.
Brazhnik, Vyacheslav Stepanovych

Бражник, Вячеслав Степанович
1957-05-03
1986-05-14 acute radiation sickness turbine operator, senior turbine machinist operator In the turbine hall at the moment of explosion; received fatal dose (over 1000 rad) during firefighting and stabilizing the turbine hall, died in Moscow hospital; posthumously awarded the Order "For Courage" of third degree;[8] irradiated by a piece of fuel lodged on a nearby transformer of turbogenerator 7 during manual opening of the turbine emergency oil drain valves.
Degtyarenko, Viktor Mykhaylovych

Дегтяренко, Виктор Михайлович 1954-08-10
1986-05-19
acute radiation sickness reactor operator At the moment of explosion close to the pumps; posthumously awarded the Order "For Courage" of third degree,[8][12] face scalded by steam or hot water[13] .
Dyatlov, Anatoly Stepanovich

Дятлов, Анатолий Степанович 1931-03-03
1995-12-13 heart failure, possibly a delayed consequence of the 400 rads radiation Plant vice chief engineer Fomin's assistant; supervised the test, present in the control room at the moment of explosion; received about 400 rads when surveying the reactor damage from the outside with Nikolai Gorbachenko; radiation burns on face, right hand, legs; after the disaster stripped of Communist party membership, arrested in August 1986, spent a year in Kiev prison awaiting trial in August 1987; found guilty of gross violation of safety regulations, sentenced to 10 years of labor camp, released after five years.
Hanzhuk, Nikolai Aleksandrovich

Ганжук, Николай Александрович 1960-06-26
1986-10-02 helicopter crash helicopter pilot Was sent to help extinguish the fire of the reactor with a clay load from the air and helicopter crashed above the reactor. However, crash was not directly related to radiation exposure, as it is obvious from crash video [14] that helicopter rotor hit a construction cable.
Ignatenko, Vasyli Ivanovych


Игнатенко, Василий Иванович 1961-03-13
1986-05-13 acute radiation sickness fireman Senior sergeant, first crew on the reactor roof, received fatal dose during attempt to extinguish the roof and the reactor core, died two weeks later in Moscow Hospital 6[15]
Ivanenko, Yekaterina Alexandrovna

Иваненко, Екатерина Александровна 1932-09-11
1986-05-26 acute radiation sickness Pripyat city police guard Guarded a gate opposite to the Block 4, stayed on duty for the entire night until morning.[16]
Khodemchuk, Valery Ilyich

Ходемчук, Валерий Ильич 1951-03-24
1986-04-26 initial explosion main circulating pumps, senior operator Stationed in the southern main circulating pumps engine room, likely killed immediately; body never found, likely buried under the wreckage of the steam separator drums; has a memorial sign in the Reactor 4 building; posthumously awarded the Order "For Courage" of third degree.[8]
Khrystych, Leonid Ivanovych

Христич, Леонид Иванович 1953-02-28
1986-10-02 helicopter crash helicopter pilot Was sent to help extinguish the fire of the reactor with a clay load from the air and helicopter crashed above the reactor. However, crash was not directly related to radiation exposure, as it is obvious from crash video [14] that helicopter rotor hit a construction cable.
Kibenok, Viktor Mykolayovych

Кибенок, Виктор Николаевич 1963-02-17
1986-05-11 acute radiation sickness fireman Lieutenant, leader of the second unit, fighting fires in the reactor department, separator room, and the central hall; in 1987 posthumously named a Hero of the Soviet Union.
Konoval, Yuriy Ivanovych

Коновал, Юрий Иванович 1942-01-01
1986-05-28 acute radiation sickness electrician Posthumously awarded the Order "For Courage" of third degree.[8]
Kudryavtsev, Aleksandr Gennadiyevych

Кудрявцев, Александр Геннадиевич 1957-12-11
1986-05-14 acute radiation sickness SIUR trainee Present in the control room at the moment of explosion; received fatal dose of radiation during attempt to manually lower the control rods as he looked directly to the open reactor core; posthumously awarded the Order "For Courage" of third degree.[8]
Kurguz, Anatoly Kharlampiyovych

Кургуз, Анатолий Харлампиевич 1957-06-12
1986-05-12 acute radiation sickness operator, central hall Scalded by radioactive steam entering his control room; his colleague, Oleg Genrikh, was spared the worst and survived.
Lelechenko, Aleksandr Grigoryevich

Лелеченко, Александр Григорьевич 1938-07-26
1986-05-07 fatal radiation exposure, 2500 rads plant worker, deputy chief of the electrical shop Former Leningrad power plant electrical shop shift leader;[17] at the central control room with Kukhar; at the moment of explosion just arrived to the block 4 control room;[18] in order to spare his younger colleagues a radiation exposure he himself went through radioactive water and debris three times to switch off the electrolyzers and the feed of hydrogen to the generators, then tried to supply voltage to feedwater pumps; after receiving first aid, returned to the plant and worked for several more hours. Died in Kiev hospital.
Lopatyuk, Viktor Ivanovich

Лопатюк, Виктор Иванович 1960-08-22
1986-05-17 acute radiation sickness electrician Received fatal dose during switching off the electrolyzer[19]
Luzganova, Klavdia Ivanovna

Лузганова, Клавдия Ивановна 1927-05-09
1986-07-31 radiation exposure, est. 600 rad Pripyat city police guard[10] Guarded the construction site of the spent fuel storage building about 200 meters from Block 4[16]
Novyk, Aleksandr Vasylyovych

Новик, Александр Васильевич 1961-08-11
1986-07-26 acute radiation sickness turbine equipment machinist-inspector Received fatal dose (over 1000 rad) during firefighting and stabilizing the turbine hall, died in Moscow hospital; posthumously awarded the Order "For Courage" of third degree;[8] irradiated by a piece of fuel lodged on a nearby transformer of the turbogenerator 7 during attempts to call the control room.
Orlov, Ivan Lukych

Орлов, Иван Лукич 1945-01-10
1986-05-13 acute radiation sickness physicist Received fatal dose during attempts to restart feedwater flow into the reactor.
Perchuk, Kostyantyn Grigorovich

Перчук, Константин Григорьевич 1952-11-23
1986-05-20 acute radiation sickness turbine operator, senior engineer In the turbine hall at the moment of explosion; received fatal dose (over 1000 rad) during firefighting and stabilizing the turbine hall, died in Moscow hospital; posthumously awarded the Order "For Courage" of third degree;[8] irradiated by a piece of fuel lodged on a nearby transformer of the turbogenerator 7 during manual opening of the turbine emergency oil drain valves.
Perevozchenko, Valery Ivanovich

Перевозченко, Валерий Иванович 1947-05-06
1986-06-13 acute radiation sickness foreman, reactor section Received fatal dose of radiation during attempt to locate and rescue Khodemchuk and others, and manually lower the control rods; together with Kudryavtsev and Proskuryakov he looked directly to the open reactor core, suffering radiation burns on side and back; posthumously awarded the Order "For Courage" of third degree.[8]
Popov, Georgi Illiaronovich

Попов, Георгий Илларионович 1940-02-21
1986-06-13 acute radiation sickness Kharkov turbine plant Vibration specialist, mobile laboratory in the car at Turbine 8; buried in Mitinskoe Cemetery.[3]
Pravik, Vladimir Pavlovych

Правик, Владимир Павлович 1962-06-13
1986-05-11 radiation burns fireman Lieutenant, first crew on the reactor roof, repeatedly visited the reactor and the roof of Unit C at Level 71 to supervise the firefighting; received fatal dose during attempt to extinguish the roof and the reactor core, died two weeks later in Moscow Hospital 6; his eyes are said to have been turned from brown to blue by the intensity of the radiation;[5] in 1987 posthumously named a Hero of the Soviet Union.
Proskuryakov, Viktor Vasilyevich

Проскуряков, Виктор Васильович 1955-04-09
1986-05-17 acute radiation sickness SIUR trainee Present in the control room at the moment of explosion; received fatal dose of radiation during attempt to manually lower the control rods as he looked directly to the open reactor core; posthumously awarded the Order "For Courage" of third degree;[8] 100% radiation burns.
Savenkov, Vladimir Ivanovych

Савенков, Владимир Иванович 1958-02-15
1986-05-21 acute radiation sickness Kharkov turbine plant Vibration specialist, mobile laboratory in the car at Turbine 8; first one to become sick; buried in Kharkov in a lead coffin.[3]
Shapovalov, Anatoliy Ivanovych

Шаповалов, Анатолий Иванович 1941-04-06
1986-05-19 acute radiation sickness electrician Posthumously awarded the Order "For Courage" of third degree.[8]
Shashenok, Vladimir Nikolaevich

Шашенок, Владимир Николаевич 1951-04-21
1986-04-26 thermal and radiation burns, trauma Atomenergonaladka, adjuster of automatic systems (Chernobyl startup and adjustment enterprise) Stationed in Room 604, found pinned down under a fallen beam, with broken spine, broken ribs, deep thermal and radiation burns, and unconscious; died in hospital without regaining consciousness.
Shevchenko, Volodimir Mikitovich

Шевченко, Владимир Никитович 1929-12-23
1987-03-29 Cancer, complication of Acute Radiation Sickness Ukrainian Filmmaker A film maker who took much of the iconic footage of the early days in recovering from the Chernobyl disaster. He filmed the famous clip of the destruction of a helicopter when it clipped a guy wire while dropping sand on the open reactor; see Hanzhuk, Nikolai Aleksandrovich above. See a video of his work at.[20]
Sitnikov, Anatoly Andreyevich

Ситников, Анатолий Андреевич 1940-01-20
1986-05-30 acute radiation sickness deputy chief operational engineer, physicist Received fatal dose (about 1500 roentgens or 15 Sv), mostly to head, after being sent by Fomin to survey the reactor hall and look at the reactor from the roof of Unit C.
Telyatnikov, Leonid Petrovich

Телятников, Леонид Петрович 1951-01-25
2004-12-02 died of cancer, received an estimated 4 Gy firefighter Head of the plant fire department; in 1987 named a Hero of the Soviet Union.
Tishchura, Vladimir Ivanovych

Тищура, Владимир Иванович 1959-12-15
1986-05-10 radiation burns fireman Sergeant, Kibenok's unit, fighting fires in the reactor department, separator room, and the central hall.
Titenok, Nikolai Ivanovych

Титенок, Николай Иванович 1962-12-05
1986-05-16 radiation burns external and internal, incl. blistered heart fireman Senior sergeant, Kibenok's unit, fighting fires in the reactor department, separator room, and the central hall; received fatal dose during attempt to extinguish the roof and the reactor core, died two weeks later in Moscow Hospital 6.
Toptunov, Leonid Fedorovych

Топтунов, Леонид Федорович 1960-08-16
1986-05-14 acute radiation sickness SIUR, senior engineer for management of the reactor (reactor operator) In the control room at the reactor control panel at the moment of explosion, with Akimov; received fatal dose during attempts to restart feedwater flow into the reactor; posthumously awarded the Order "For Courage" of third degree.[8]
Vashchuk, Nikolai Vasilievich

Ващук, Николай Васильевич 1959-06-05
1986-05-14 fireman Sergeant, Kibenok's unit, fighting fires in the reactor department, separator room, and the central hall.
Vershynin, Yuriy Anatoliyovych

Вершинин, Юрий Анатольевич 1959-05-22
1986-07-21 acute radiation sickness Turbine equipment machinist-inspector In the turbine hall at the moment of explosion; received fatal dose (over 1000 rad) during firefighting and stabilizing the turbine hall, died in Moscow hospital; posthumously awarded the Order "For Courage" of third degree;[8] irradiated by a piece of fuel lodged on a nearby transformer of the turbogenerator 7 during attempts to call the control room.
Vorobyov, Volodymyr Kostyantynovych

1956-03-21
1986-10-02 helicopter crash helicopter crew Was sent to help extinguish the fire of the reactor with a clay load from the air and helicopter crashed above the reactor. However, crash was not directly related to radiation exposure, as it is obvious from crash video [14] that helicopter rotor hit a construction cable.
Yunhkind, Oleksandr Yevhenovych

1958-04-15
1986-10-02 helicopter crash helicopter crew Was sent to help extinguish the fire of the reactor with a clay load from the air and helicopter crashed above the reactor. However, crash was not directly related to radiation exposure, as it is obvious from crash video [14] that helicopter rotor hit a construction cable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deaths_due_to_the_Chernobyl_disaster



 

Coyotl

(15,262 posts)
4. Good news on the solar front too, as costs are dropping
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 09:33 AM
Mar 2013

Wait until China gets the cheaper solar cells in high production.

mainer

(12,042 posts)
29. I spoke to one engineer who said that water was the way to store it...
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 12:08 PM
Mar 2013

If you have proximity to a lake, and you use wind energy to pump water against gravity, that's stored energy.

 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
50. The 24/7/35 molten salt solar plants help to address this issue by constantly generating,
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 05:08 PM
Mar 2013

but storage is one of the areas we need to put more research into.

Chuuku Davis

(565 posts)
46. Conservation!!
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 04:10 PM
Mar 2013

Is much more important than new sources.

How many leave their computers and TVs plugged in thru the day??

blogslut

(38,045 posts)
47. Why does it have to be a competition?
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 04:17 PM
Mar 2013

Why can't we conserve and implement sustainable energy generation simultaneously?

Benton D Struckcheon

(2,347 posts)
51. We're already doing that you know
Fri Mar 15, 2013, 05:40 PM
Mar 2013

I posted this elsewhere, but the following trends are already in place:

1 - Households are using less energy per unit due to better insulation, more efficient heating & cooling systems, and the switch out of incandescent bulbs.
2 - Young people are driving less due to being less infatuated with cars and more infatuated with their digital devices. Studies have shown this to be a lifetime effect: the less you drive when you're young, the less you'll drive over your lifetime.
3 - On the energy front, the move to wind and solar and out of coal to natural gas are all reducing the amount of CO2 pumped into the air.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Wind power is poised to k...