Public acceptance in nuclear power is key to building such plants in Thailand

[Suradit69]

If they ever get around to building a Nuclear Power Plant here in Thailand,

I will be on the first plane out.with someone like Somchai Simpson at the

controls. Lets see how they get on with the Fast Trains first !.

regards Worgeordie

Predicated on the assumption that the "west" is free of incompetent numb nuts??

Don't fly to safety in the US, Japan or Russia.

Three Mile Island, Sequoayah Nuclear Power Plant, Fukushima Daiichi , Chernobyl ...

and don't fly on Allegiant Air with Clarabelle the Farang in the pilot's seat chatting with a demented air controller.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3177458/The-horrifying-recording-passenger-plane-pilot-THREE-minutes-fuel-left-told-air-traffic-control-t-land-airport-closed.html

A shocking recording has emerged of a passenger plane pilot with just three minutes of fuel being told that he can't land at an airport because the runway was closed.

Allegiant Air flight 426 was circling Fargo's Hector International Airport in North Dakota requesting permission to land, but was notified that the airport was out of service as the Navy's Blue Angels were practising for a forthcoming air show

[Brian Robson]

Get these so called geniuses to visit Fukushima and see how thats going 4 years and still not under control .

Fukishima had old design BWR (Boiling Water Reactors) which nobody builds any more. Nuclear generation has come a long way since Chernobyl, Three Mile Island and Fukushima.

Newer reactors like the Westinghouse AP1000® PWR are very safe to run. Compared to the death rate in coal mining, never mind CO2 production, nuclear is going to be a mainstay in the 'mix' of power generation for some time.

People need to educate themselves about it, instead of the knee jerk reactions I see on this forum.

http://www.westinghousenuclear.com/New-Plants

[soalbundy]

I would not trust Thailand with a nuclear plant!

or bridge building

[soalbundy]

Get these so called geniuses to visit Fukushima and see how thats going 4 years and still not under control .

Fukishima had old design BWR (Boiling Water Reactors) which nobody builds any more. Nuclear generation has come a long way since Chernobyl, Three Mile Island and Fukushima.

Newer reactors like the Westinghouse AP1000® PWR are very safe to run. Compared to the death rate in coal mining, never mind CO2 production, nuclear is going to be a mainstay in the 'mix' of power generation for some time.

People need to educate themselves about it, instead of the knee jerk reactions I see on this forum.

http://www.westinghousenuclear.com/New-Plants

you are so right, and the waste could be dumped in the sea or in Isaan, no ploblem

[NormanW]

Please please please no to nuclear! !!

Can never get rid of the waste and processing is complex and risky.

I used to work with the damn stuff! !!

[micmichd]

The day Thailand operates a nuclear reactor will mark my last day in the Kingdom.

A country which to date cannot operate a functioning, safe, pedestrian crossing system within its urban areas is not one yet ready for the storage of radioactive material.

And which country would you consider good enough for safe nuclear power?

More important: How do you make possible fallout stop at the border?

[pinkpanther99]

For the love of all humanity: let us hope Thailand never ever ever gets nuclear power.

Edited July 30, 2015 by pinkpanther99

[pinkpanther99]

I would not trust Thailand with a nuclear plant!

Me neither.

Somchai can barely wire a house adequately. The prospect of nuclear power in Thailand is utterly terrifying.

[Lupatria]

And the guys at the TAT are already busy to prepare press releases like: "The latest maximum credible accident (MCA) had no impact on the continuously increasing number of tourist arrivals."

[Shadychris]

This is great news!

Already lots of people who seem to love nothing better than to bash Thailand and criticise anything and everything are threatening to leave. Please, lets embark on a large scale program of nuclear facilities across the whole country.

[sitti]

Vietnam is going to have their own Nuclear power plants. Japan and Russian are going to construct them.

I know for a fact that Thai government has been quietly discussing about this with Japanese and a few others for many years now. For country's future power needs, I really don't mind Thailand taking nuclear path. Go for it.

[dotpoom]

More wasted oxygen......whilst a couple major players...Japan & Germany have decided to stop or reduce their dependence on nuclear energy, Thailand would be indebted for decades if only 1 power reactor was constructed.....and that after 10-20 years planning and developement.

Whether Thailand would be permitted to purchase the source is a major factor also.

The Philipines have a reactor, albeit rather old technology nowadays, but have been unable to purchase fuel for obvious reasons.

Renewable energy is the way of the future.....definately not coal, not nuclear......!

I seen a programme recently where it said Japan was in the process of building more plants...far too early at this point in time, some said?

[elgordo38]

More wasted oxygen......whilst a couple major players...Japan & Germany have decided to stop or reduce their dependence on nuclear energy, Thailand would be indebted for decades if only 1 power reactor was constructed.....and that after 10-20 years planning and developement.

Whether Thailand would be permitted to purchase the source is a major factor also.

The Philipines have a reactor, albeit rather old technology nowadays, but have been unable to purchase fuel for obvious reasons.

Renewable energy is the way of the future.....definately not coal, not nuclear......!

Subs and nuclear reactors what is the next item up on the silly agenda awards. Renewables definitely is the way to go. There is so much sunshine here and I see few solar panels. We could be the Asian hub of solar.

[roblgs]

What, there's not enough sunlight here?

Surely too solar lends itself to a highly distributed grid, lots os small (household, school, factory... ) installations feeding into and off of a connected national grid... Large power plants are a targetable single point of failure

If government were to actively promote and even subsidise (who needs submarines) solar, then how far could the country get towards a distributed grid based on renewables?

[SPB65]

What does this button do ? .... Doh !

[saminoz]

The day Thailand operates a nuclear reactor will mark my last day in the Kingdom.

A country which to date cannot operate a functioning, safe, pedestrian crossing system within its urban areas is not one yet ready for the storage of radioactive material.

Well goodbye then because Thailand already has a functioning nuclear reactor in Chatuchak. It was comissioned in 1961 and has been operating from 1962 until today.

So don't let the door hit your dumbass on the way out.

Seeking (I assume the asylum you are seeking is the lunatic variety?)

That's a fairly ill researched and trolling post if ever I have seen one.

There is a very small research reactor in Chatuchak, NOT supplying any grid electricity.

Current plans don't call for the building of as plant, even if it ever got the go ahead, until 202 with the anticipated on-stream delivery in 2026.

Don't let the door swing back and smack you in the face! (but I won't insult or flame you!)

Edited July 30, 2015 by saminoz

[blundaman]

"EGAT said in the seminar that any construction plan for the power plant must base on three factors - production stability, environmentally friendly benefits and reasonable investment."

Hehe heh he he he he he he he he he he eheheheheheh they snuck that one in effortlessly didn't they hehehehehehe Jeezus fellas, get a half-life ..my guess is that no-one at EGAD did particle physics at school. The safest scenario would be to try and build one but never implement an operation plan, then it could be turned into a theme park later... just like Fuku

Which conveniently reminds me of the messy coal-fired plants we have here or are they just trying to blindside the Krabi confabulation?? dang steampunks, all of em

me.. I always prefer to cook with gas

BOOM BOOM!!

[allan michaud]

More wasted oxygen......whilst a couple major players...Japan & Germany have decided to stop or reduce their dependence on nuclear energy, Thailand would be indebted for decades if only 1 power reactor was constructed.....and that after 10-20 years planning and developement.

Whether Thailand would be permitted to purchase the source is a major factor also.

The Philipines have a reactor, albeit rather old technology nowadays, but have been unable to purchase fuel for obvious reasons.

Renewable energy is the way of the future.....definately not coal, not nuclear......!

Renewables are fine except when it's night time or when there's no wind. Oh and yeah, they'll need to make 3/4ths of the land area of the country available for solar and wind farms as well. So dream on !

Please read the story carefully. Thailand IMPORTS almost half of it's electricity! That presents a very big risk to the country. In the case of disruption of those supplies.

Nuclear is a sensible option. There is no reason for people to fear nuclear power plants. More people die each day from coal fired power plant emissions than have died from nuclear power plants in their entire history.

The Japanese accident is a perfect example. They have about 50 reactors.....49 of them were fine after the earthquake. Yet the one that was damaged was built in a tsunami danger zone that never should have been built there to begin with. That is, it was not cause by a design fault, but by the wrong location.

Technology no provides much safer reactors than the type built 30 to 40 years ago

China has several commercial nuclear reactors operating, and there safety standards are no better than thailands.

You are wrong about it being built in a danger zone. At the time it was built it was believed to be safe, all back ups were considered safe. Only with hindsight is it now considered a dangerous spot for a reactor. No one expected a tsunami of that size directly off the coast of the reactor. You seem to suggest the other 49 will not suffer a catastrophic failure in the future if something similarly unexpected occurs. Also you might want to look at a map, only 1 of the other reactors is close to the epicenter so of course the majority didn't suffer the maximum effect. Who can say for certain where/what is safe.? Nature can do things we are not prepared for and that is the lesson of Fukashima and why many countries are now reconsidering use of this outrageously expensive technology. The costs of waste disposal are simply insane, as is the thought of safely storing it for thousands of years.

[Transporter]

More wasted oxygen......whilst a couple major players...Japan & Germany have decided to stop or reduce their dependence on nuclear energy, Thailand would be indebted for decades if only 1 power reactor was constructed.....and that after 10-20 years planning and developement.

Whether Thailand would be permitted to purchase the source is a major factor also.

The Philipines have a reactor, albeit rather old technology nowadays, but have been unable to purchase fuel for obvious reasons.

Renewable energy is the way of the future.....definately not coal, not nuclear......!

Renewables are fine except when it's night time or when there's no wind. Oh and yeah, they'll need to make 3/4ths of the land area of the country available for solar and wind farms as well. So dream on !

Please read the story carefully. Thailand IMPORTS almost half of it's electricity! That presents a very big risk to the country. In the case of disruption of those supplies.

Nuclear is a sensible option. There is no reason for people to fear nuclear power plants. More people die each day from coal fired power plant emissions than have died from nuclear power plants in their entire history.

The Japanese accident is a perfect example. They have about 50 reactors.....49 of them were fine after the earthquake. Yet the one that was damaged was built in a tsunami danger zone that never should have been built there to begin with. That is, it was not cause by a design fault, but by the wrong location.

Technology no provides much safer reactors than the type built 30 to 40 years ago

China has several commercial nuclear reactors operating, and there safety standards are no better than thailands.

How can you possibly compare Japaness to Thainess?

[maanoi]

Can't see this happening. And if it does, pretty sure me and most members here will already be in the ground.

[wabothai]

Show, show, show....face, face, face.

In stead of hiding from the sun, use her.

[SuwadeeS]

That would be the nightmare for Thailand

[Red Queen]

I doubt Thailand will ever build a nuclear power station. A while back they said they would build their own rockets to explore space, then they said thay had found a cure for Ebola (and iirc, HIV. The major Thai export is BS.

I don't much care but I would really like to know ahead of time so I can be sure to stay far away. They can't even build good roads and their bridges show an alarming propensity for falling down, as do their military aircraft.

Still, even saying they're considering nuclear power has some bragging rights so 50% of the Thai agenda is satisfied right there.

Might be a useful solution to the violence in the south though. Nothing else they do seems to work so it's worth a try.

Edited July 30, 2015 by Red Queen

[wandasloan]

Lets try wind powered turbines first, take baby steps.

It is amazing how far behind almost (almost) everyone in this alleged discussion is.

Wind powered turbines have been producing electricity into the national grid for years. Chatuchak's functioning, accident-free nuke reactor effectively powers most of the x-ray machines in this and neighbouring countries. Bangkok's nuke plant ALSO produces the isotopes for probably the most modern and efficient food irradiation plant in Asia, which is why so much Thai food is certified for export.

And yes to some ignoramus up there ^^ rice is irradiated and is, indeed "nuked" before it leaves for most markets, including the US. The government doesn't deny it - the government brags about subjecting rice to radiation, along with tonnes of fresh fruit and vegetables. It's almost impossible that you haven't eaten some of that fine radiation yourself since so much of it gets on the local market, by design.

With current knowledge and possible public/private spending, enough electricity to meet demand will not, CAN not be produced from the standard, unimaginative methods so tiringly brought up over and over - wind, solar, waves.... It can NOT meet demand for generations, and that's if there are technological inventions and development we currently know nothing about. We may be able to adapt, but not (say) in 20 years.

In that 20 years, nuclear COULD be set up to be sustainable for many, many further generations. I doubt strongly it will be, but the thing is I *know* wind/solar/wave won't be. And I know you're as eager to charge your phone from a plug-in charger as I am, and as eager to watch a ball game on your electric TV set as I am and as joyful to log on to Thai Visa on your new-fangled electric computer as I am.

That's why the marvelous, developed carbon plants will be used into the foreseeable future. They are all that actually work, now or in the near (50-year) future, except for nuclear which most people view as most people here view - with a combination of ignorance and uninformed opposition - which will drive actual events anyhow. I've got well past hating nuclear ignorance, it's just a fact and it will drive government policy for now, for which I'll shrug and breathe that lovely coastal coal-flecked air from the power plant along with y'all.

[Time Traveller]

More wasted oxygen......whilst a couple major players...Japan & Germany have decided to stop or reduce their dependence on nuclear energy, Thailand would be indebted for decades if only 1 power reactor was constructed.....and that after 10-20 years planning and developement.

Whether Thailand would be permitted to purchase the source is a major factor also.

The Philipines have a reactor, albeit rather old technology nowadays, but have been unable to purchase fuel for obvious reasons.

Renewable energy is the way of the future.....definately not coal, not nuclear......!

Renewables are fine except when it's night time or when there's no wind. Oh and yeah, they'll need to make 3/4ths of the land area of the country available for solar and wind farms as well. So dream on !

Please read the story carefully. Thailand IMPORTS almost half of it's electricity! That presents a very big risk to the country. In the case of disruption of those supplies.

Nuclear is a sensible option. There is no reason for people to fear nuclear power plants. More people die each day from coal fired power plant emissions than have died from nuclear power plants in their entire history.

The Japanese accident is a perfect example. They have about 50 reactors.....49 of them were fine after the earthquake. Yet the one that was damaged was built in a tsunami danger zone that never should have been built there to begin with. That is, it was not cause by a design fault, but by the wrong location.

Technology no provides much safer reactors than the type built 30 to 40 years ago

China has several commercial nuclear reactors operating, and there safety standards are no better than thailands.

Denmark has just produced more renewable energy than it actually needs. What about technology such as Tesla batteries

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/may/07/teslas-batteries-could-be-bigger-business-than-electric-cars-elon-musk

There is no need for nuclear which, knowing this country, will take decades to come into operation whereas solar, wind & wave power can be harnessed in a relatively short time. You might want to look at the huge solar farms in Spain where they are now growing food on what was once arid land. Surely these are better options than nuclear.

Denmark is a country of 2 million people who get around on bicycles and has little if any heavy industry. Nor does if suffer from droughts.

[Jim walker]

Thailand will become a nuclear super power after the next military coup you can almost see what the Junta would want from this. And stick even more medals on some obscure generals chest. Bad idea even to be thinking of a nuclear plant in Thailand and some of the untested uncertified planes accidently crash into it another chance then for Thailand to bury its head in the sand and blame someone else., when things go wrong.

[eliotness]

Thailand already has a functioning nuclear reactor in Chatuchak. It was comissioned in 1961 and has been operating from 1962 until today.

Can you site your sources please? I haven't been able to find anything that verifies your claim.

Easy, just google chatuchak. It's a research reactor. No commercial power generating reactor has a lifespan of over 50 years. Thailand could of course get all the nuclear material and hardwear from N Korea, but they would find the IAEA would be all over them like the swarm of flies currently driving everyone nuts in my part of Thailand.

Big Boys Toys to the worse possible degree. It would take 20 years plus to design and build and by that time who knows where the world will be. To quote a phrase "Don't Panic", not just yet anyway !

[Remi080]

Oh wow, Cool ! a Thai-modify nuke power plant.

So thailand will come to its end.

Look around you, its a mess, streets are garbage, lazy people, pour infra structure, and they are talking about nuclear power.

Get a grip!

[Red Queen]

Lets try wind powered turbines first, take baby steps.

It is amazing how far behind almost (almost) everyone in this alleged discussion is.

Wind powered turbines have been producing electricity into the national grid for years. Chatuchak's functioning, accident-free nuke reactor effectively powers most of the x-ray machines in this and neighbouring countries. Bangkok's nuke plant ALSO produces the isotopes for probably the most modern and efficient food irradiation plant in Asia, which is why so much Thai food is certified for export.

And yes to some ignoramus up there ^^ rice is irradiated and is, indeed "nuked" before it leaves for most markets, including the US. The government doesn't deny it - the government brags about subjecting rice to radiation, along with tonnes of fresh fruit and vegetables. It's almost impossible that you haven't eaten some of that fine radiation yourself since so much of it gets on the local market, by design.

With current knowledge and possible public/private spending, enough electricity to meet demand will not, CAN not be produced from the standard, unimaginative methods so tiringly brought up over and over - wind, solar, waves.... It can NOT meet demand for generations, and that's if there are technological inventions and development we currently know nothing about. We may be able to adapt, but not (say) in 20 years.

In that 20 years, nuclear COULD be set up to be sustainable for many, many further generations. I doubt strongly it will be, but the thing is I *know* wind/solar/wave won't be. And I know you're as eager to charge your phone from a plug-in charger as I am, and as eager to watch a ball game on your electric TV set as I am and as joyful to log on to Thai Visa on your new-fangled electric computer as I am.

That's why the marvelous, developed carbon plants will be used into the foreseeable future. They are all that actually work, now or in the near (50-year) future, except for nuclear which most people view as most people here view - with a combination of ignorance and uninformed opposition - which will drive actual events anyhow. I've got well past hating nuclear ignorance, it's just a fact and it will drive government policy for now, for which I'll shrug and breathe that lovely coastal coal-flecked air from the power plant along with y'all.

Tell me more about the BKK reactor powering X-Ray machines in TL and neighbouring countries . Because I don't believe you.

Tell me more about the irradiation plants; do they use Cobalt or Caesium isotopes? Or something else? Because I don't believe you again. In any event, do you really not see a difference between the risks present in producing radiation sources for food plants and uranium based power-stations? Really?

Does Chernobyl not ring a bell somewhere in your mind? Fukushima? Three-mile island?

The point is that the education system in Thailand produces neither well-educated people nor competent people. This is indisputable. And yet you seem to be saying that they're OK with X-Ray machines so that's good enough. You cannot be serious.

Edited July 30, 2015 by Red Queen

[carter1882]

So much hot air on here...if only they could harness it, Thailand's energy problems would be over.