SapeleGuy:

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

Since Chernobyl, there have been 57 accidents. I am sure the people of Abuja now feel a lot safer about their nuclear facility because you have said it is safe.

You know that Wikipedia is not a reliable source for this kind of information so why post it even though you are conflating nuclear reactor accidents  and radiaton accidents.
How many fatalities post Chernobyl anyway 10? 20? No just 7 and in one country Japan. So what indeed are you on about Sapele Guy

The 'talk' will not see the light of the day,cos this is a disaster waiting to happen.chernobyl comes to mind here,i dont care if its 100 eons ago

Tmoni:

I am in total support of generating electricity through nuclear power

It is a clean and viable method, if managed properly

Although rather than a Russian company, I will suggest we disccus with Areva & Westinghouse (French & Japanese owned American company). these are experts in nuclear technology.

I believe it will also work well if the nuclear plant is situated in a relatively stable state like Ogun state which also has access to flowing water, to cool the reactors,

Security on the site will be fortified and maintenance will be initially udertaken by "expatriates" and later taken over by Nigerians.

It should also be a Private Public Partnership programme hence, it will be better managed, provide employement and boost the GDP of the country

God forbid at bolded!what happened to rivers state?

favouredjb:

The 'talk' will not see the light of the day,cos this is a disaster waiting to happen.chernobyl comes to mind here,i dont care if its 100 eons ago

You are just trolling. And what will you do to prevent it happening? However you should support it  except you don't want Nigeria to ever have cheap mains electricity.

tensor777:

You are just trolling. And what will you do to prevent it happening? However you should support it  except you don't want Nigeria to ever have cheap mains electricity.

tensor777, i believe nigeria is not ready for nuclear plant yet

if we can not maintain our dams then maintaining nuclear plant would mean disaster for nigeria

we really need to be careful of the thing we are talking about

why can't we use, coal, more dams, gas, solar energy using mirrors as a form of energy transfer, etc

alj harem:

tensor777, i believe nigeria is not ready for nuclear plant yet
if we can not maintain our dams then maintaining nuclear plant would mean disaster for nigeria
w really need to be careful of the thing we are talking about
why can't we use, coal, more dams, gas, solar energy using mirrors as a form of energy transfer, etc

So you want to consruct more hydo electric power stations, more coal fired stations in the country and increase the depletion of hydrocarbon reserves by having more thermal gas stations.
Who pays for all this. The FGN or the State Governments?? And how do they finance that
What would be the environmental impact of building more dams on the River Niger

tensor777:

So you want to consruct more hydo electric power stations, more coal fired stations in the country and increase the depletion of hydrocarbon reserves by having more thermal gas stations.
Who pays for all this. The FGN or the State Governments?? And how do they finance that
What would be the environmental impact of building more dams on the River Niger

u are right u know

Russia to construct Nigeria's Nuclear Power Plants?
Hmmm, Make Militants hear this one, NIGERIA WILL BE FINISHED!!!!!

tensor777:

Don't kid yourself there . It is NOW mandatory for[b] ALL[/b] signatories to the IAEA treaty to the stipulated rigourous safety standards and to submit to regular inspections,

Fine and well, but like I said, I prefer American and French technology in this matter over Russian. I also prefer Honda Civics over other cars of the same class, surely I'm allowed to have this preference

tonyville:

Russia to construct Nigeria's Nuclear Power Plants?
Hmmm, Make Militants hear this one,

Seriously who cares about these rag tag bandits? They could all be exterminated in a few days if the President were to give the Armed Forces the authorisation.
But again this topic has nothing to do with the Niger Delta question so why not open a thread for that.

alj harem:

u are right u know

Now look here, Alhaji Harem this is a very clear cut issue.
A typical nuclear reactor power plant has an electical generating capacity of 1000 MW. This power is provided by steam powered turbines which obtain their energy input from the 3000 MW of thermal power provided by the nuclear fission reaction.
The question is how much mass of the  uranium-235 isotope is needed each day to provide this 3000 MW of thermal power that produces the steam
Well we know that nuclear fission liberates about 200 mega electron volts per atom.  So in a single day the total amount of uranium consumed in such a plant is a meagre 3.2 grams!!!
Now compare this with a 1000 MW coal-fired plant. 
To produce the same 3000 MW of thermal power it is necessary to burn a total of 10 million kilograms of coal in a single day!!!
There really is no contest as to which method is the more efficient and economical.

KenGali:
^^^Just do not mind this tensor Guy, he or she is just lifting post or some web material and pasting it here in an attempt to sound familiar with Nuclear Tech. If he actually understands the energy potential of Nuclear fission, and that the energy output in case of an accident is not limited to the design value, I do not think we would be having these arguments. Whats the use of wasting my time with such a human being?

By the way while I was reading  some post on nuclear waste, I started to think of how best to dispose such waste. The only natural nuclear reactor is the sun. If we can find a way to send wastes to the sun using unmanned vehicles. The waste and the vehicle will definitely heat-up and vaporise before getting to the sun, but I believe if they had already acquired momentum, the gas will keep heading in the direction of the Sun.

but some things are doubtful though: the first is that if solar wind (particle and photon radiations) are very strong near the sun they may reverse the momentum of the hurtling gas, but again the Suns gravity might compensate for that.  

The second is the long term loss of mass to the earth which can affect her orbit pattern, but we might compensate  by picking up equal mass of materials from other planets.

The third is that I doubt if the sun is actually stationary, hence may not be approached in a straight line

If you're really interested, read on:

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19780015628_1978015628.pdf

^^^^ Nice one, just did a quick scan of the doc.
Unfortunately it is comparing the options based on the transport capability at the time and
. . . thats 1978. Based on that it concludes that a solar impact would require 24Km/s and would be impractical.
I do not really get how they did that calculation, in the case of solar system escape I can justify a very high velocity since one is escaping the suns gravity, but for the impact case I think the velocity need only be sufficent to prevent mercury and venus from swerving the vehichle of its path. but again am not an expert in astronomy.

All in all, I think todays space vehicles are much more capable than those of 1978.
All the lunar option are unacceptable to me since we would be cluttering the nearest escape in case of huge earth wide disaster. Same might be applied to Low and High earth orbits. We just might need the moon tommorrow.

Then the solar escape option will mean that we do not really know where the waste is going. Thi option will be best if we had the intention of annihilation. Kind of sending the waste a long way of with some anti-matter, when sufficiently away for us to escape serious radiation, we shoot anti-matter into the waste. But again, anti-matter technology is still in its infancy.

I still think solar impact is the best option, but I have always seen thermal  energy as the major impediment to approaching the sun not velocity.  I could be wrong.

Nuclear power is not the way for us. It will expose us and our neighbours to very serious dangers. We are lumbered with unpatriotic leaders who are ready to sell the nation for their personal gains.

Have we considered the Isrealis?

Isreal is a wonder working nation. They have efficient solar generators that will wipe away our PHCN induced tears.

Let us talk with Isreal

The solar generators work on the principle of concentrating the sun's rays and channeling the heat energy to drive massive turbines for power geberation. So I am referring to MEGA watts of electricity.

^^
So Israel has such an advanced solar-power industry!

By the time the whole world adopts alternative energy sources like these, and move away from reliance on oil, people will be amazed at how Nigeria will start to get her act together.

The solar technology from Israel looks like a better option than nuclear but you can always bank on our leaders to devise creative ways to chop money.

I mean, in some Niger-delta states, the gas bursting out of wells is just flared, but in keeping with the Nigerian federal character, the mandate to convert the million cubic meters of gas to electricity (in turbines) must come from Abuja.

We can only wait and see what comes out of these nuclear intentions, hopefully we don't end up with one massive, radioactivity-emitting, white elephant after a decade or two like we now have many abandoned power stations (hydro and gas).

Edenitis:

Nuclear power is not the way for us. It will expose us and our neighbours to very serious dangers. We are lumbered with unpatriotic leaders who are ready to sell the nation for their personal gains.

Just shut it Edentis as you have just exposed your ignorant negativism.
You think you know more than well trained technocrats

Edenitis:

Nuclear power is not the way for us. It will expose us and our neighbours to very serious dangers. We are lumbered with unpatriotic leaders who are ready to sell the nation for their personal gains.

And can you imagine when corrupt leaders will decide to sell nuclear waste to rogue states or terrorists for their personal gain. Can you imagine a truck bomb containing stockpiles of nuclear waste crashing into a building. So far nuclear waste has been dumped into the sea of third world countries like Somalia.

Horus:

And can you imagine when corrupt leaders will decide to sell nuclear waste to rogue states or terrorists for their personal gain. Can you imagine a truck bomb containing stockpiles of nuclear waste crashing into a building. So far nuclear waste has been dumped into the sea of third world countries like Somalia.

Ask the rabidly supportive nairalanders who desperately need a nuclear reactor and totally ignore all other considerations as being either tribalistic ethnically motivated, or acceptable risk (seeing our history of handling risk from all sectors of the economy) and waow, i love this one, Nuclear reactor technology has changed since chernobyl so it is safer

^^Nice one Voltron

Hello My Fellow Nigerians,
I have seem how most of you who cannot tolerate the nations blackout anymore are here supporting the country aim to build a nuclear power plant.
Most of you are throwing your support out of ignorance while others are just doing so because they are tired of been the victims of our blackout situation.
In my own opinion most of you should take a few minutes of your time while reading this lines here to take a peep into this documentary because ignorance is a disease that can plunge your entire life and change the course of things or history as we know it today (
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSRC1_OZPIg&feature=related).

After viewing this videos you can make your own judgment with the knowledge you must have acquired from the documentary.
There are many other ways a nation like ours can solve the blackout problem or electricity shortage i should say.
Do the risk assessment and you will know that:

(1) Hydro-Power is better than Nuclear-Power Energy
(2) Solar-Power is better than Nuclear-Power Energy
(4) Gas-Turbine Power is better than Nuclear-Power Energy
(5) Geo-therminal Power is better than Nuclear Power Energy
(6) Natural gas, coal fired and fired steam turbines Power are better than Nuclear-Power Energy
(7) Wind Turbines are better than Nuclear-Power Energy

The list just goes on and on, and there are dozens of alternative energy solutions seating in the labs of many western university of which some have been tested on a very small or limited scale around the universities campus and factories etc, which i have been witness to it.

I still wonder why most of you are so much in support of nuclear-power energy while there are other cheap and affordable ways to our energy problem, perhaps Nigerians as traditional record breakers, some of you just want Nigeria to make it to the list of nuclear-power technological advanced countries like most countries in the west, while for your informations the west are leading the race in scouting for alternate power supply while you are seating there welcoming the government awkward decision to take us to the technology that many countries are seeking for ways to escape from using it, including the countries offering to build it for us.(Even some pledged to build it for us on loan) can u imagine!!!

No wahala make una go ahead go build nuclear power plant na, when the disaster come like we dey see for many countries, na still the same westerners wey build am, go enter inside our pockets and foreign reserves to help us control the disaster, then our corrupt politicians go take advantage of the situation do what they do best, IN THE END NA ORDINARY PEOPLE LIKE ME AND YOU GO PAY THE PRICE FOR YEARS TO COME. JUST AS MANY PEOPLE DEY SUFFER FOR THE NIGER DELTA REGION AND GOVERNMENT AND WESTERNS DEY ENJOY THE TREASURE.

Most of you can insult me for what i have said, i don't care!! After all, Fela came with his government criticism, we no care until dem kill am, today na me and you dey pay the price.

ONE NIGERIA --- ONE GOAL FOR ALL!!
SPEAK-OUT WITH ONE VOICE!!!!
I dey sign out i beg,

Nigeria does not need to go nuclear at all. We have more than enough gas to meet our power generation needs. The risk is too high and we cannot manage a nuclear catastrophe in Nigeria. Even Japan (one of the most developed countries in the world) is having serious problems with their nuclear facility right now. We are talking about nuclear and busy flaring gas everywhere.

Do you know there are places in Nigeria where we have close to 100% power availability? They are the small areas around gas plants and large oil terminals. Places like Forcados, Escravos, Ajaokuta (Fed by the gas plant) etc. With these projects we have proven that we can have all the power we need. We have experience with gas plants, we have the expertise. Saudi Arabia uses its gas to support its domestic needs.

We rely heavily on oil in everything. We can drastically reduce products import by switching to gas (which doesnt need refining). If we can generate our power from gas, we will stop wasting billions on gasoline and diesel for generators. That will mean less subsidy. We can then maximize local refining to meet the transport sector needs.

But wait a minute, we know these things already!!! These and more is what the gas master plan is all about. So who will execute it

[table]
Offline Offline


Re: Russia To Construct Nigeria’s Nuclear Power Plants
« #138 on: November 21, 2010, 12:51 PM »

Quote from: alj harem on November 21, 2010, 11:50 AM
people this is a shot at constant electricity which we all have been clamouring for

i notices that the location was not put down because from 2003 the south west have said they do not want it

about the same time the igbo leaders said that nuclear reactors should not be in the south region were the economy is

now my question:::::::::: should a nuclear reactor be in the north or middlebelt were it is atleast 20 degrees hotter that a typical southern state

most of u do not know how a reactor works

the best location is cross river or port harcount, because there are near riverran areas were if it is too hot, it can be cooled down



if it is not in those states mention above, then i think we are not ready for constant electricity yet Angry Angry

i think we should just stick to the safer forms of electricity for now so as not to cause fight between ourselves Angry [table][/table][/table]


***************************************************************************************************************************

This Your post na very wicked post,
You definitely sound like a northerner pretending to be from the south west.
Go build una nuclear power for north where there is enough land in the dessert to contain the plant, even if na underground they wan build am after all there is uranium as natural resource in the north to support the nuclear fuel.
I say build it in the desert far far north, bury it under-ground if you will, so we don't have to worry too much about containing any spill.
If na water front you want, build a lake around it like some small island, there more than enough land in those deserts for all this, If they like make them build a enclosed HULL the size of port-Harcourt city around the nuclear plant and call Nuke City --- My dear there is more than enough land in those desert states. Forget the temperature they can urban cooler for it,
But not in my Niger Delta or Port - Harcourt.
Please stop posting offensive things like that!!!
We as one Nigerians must stand up with one voice and oppose the government plans to bring us ARMAGEDDON,
Peace to all.
Cheers, !!!!

Where is that chap who wanted Nuclear Energy soo bad he was willing to overlook Emergency/Safety Strategies because Nuclear Reactors are inherently Safe. Take a look at Japan, we don't need a Tsunami to destroy our Nuclear Station, One Boko Haram Security guard will simply toss a dynamite into the Reactor Core. simple as ABC