Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Article states that China's nuclear ambitions far outpacing the rest of the world.
Comment section of the article is worth a read.
Actually, the United States is the global leader in the construction of cheap, safe, powerful nuclear reactors. They just happen to all be owned and operated by the United States Navy (563 reactors over the past 75 years, at last count.) So if the Navy and China can build reactors, but US power companies can't, we should probably look at why that is.
One obvious reason seems to be that neither the US Navy, nor the Chinese nuclear program needs to satisfy shareholders. Since they don't have to constantly cut costs to drive up stock price, they can instead focus on good design and safe operation. (I would have loved to see a Navy bean counter try to tell Admiral Rickover that there wasn't any money in the budget for something he wanted.)
It's unrestrained capitalism that causes the problem, not the technology.
Wow. Crazy. Can count about a half-dozen harrowing experiences in my long life that could / should have ended it. Escaped thus far. Was not aware of the shock hazard. Did a lot of foolish stuff with electricity as a kid but never tried replacing a tube. I do have a large bug zapper that even unplugged for several minutes retains quite a charge as I’ve learned the hard way. Suspect vacuum tubes may also be that way.
...
The shock you can get from a bug zapper is due to capacitors. The hold a charge, like a battery, but give it up all at once. And the charge is much higher in voltage. The risk with vacuum tubes is mainly while under power, as they are essentially amplifiers. With standard line voltages of 120VAC, they can generate hundreds or thousands of volts in output. And because of the high voltages, they can get quite hot. The risk in sticking one's hand into an old TV, was they also used capacitors to filter/store energy. Those needed to be discharged before handling.
In some of the old power plant equipment that I worked with, you would "charge" the capacitors on the equipment being fed by putting a plain old incandescent light bulb in series with the power feeder. Then you could insert the main fuse, remove the bulb and insert the pilot fuse in its place. Failure to do so would pop the main fuse on initial insertion, due to the surge of the capacitor charging suddenly. You could tell that the capacitor was charged when the light bulb went out. If the bulb did not extinguish, there was a short or power drain somewhere. Or the capacitor was blown (dead short).
Article states that China's nuclear ambitions far outpacing the rest of the world.
Comment section of the article is worth a read.
Actually, the United States is the global leader in the construction of cheap, safe, powerful nuclear reactors. They just happen to all be owned and operated by the United States Navy (563 reactors over the past 75 years, at last count.) So if the Navy and China can build reactors, but US power companies can't, we should probably look at why that is.
One obvious reason seems to be that neither the US Navy, nor the Chinese nuclear program needs to satisfy shareholders. Since they don't have to constantly cut costs to drive up stock price, they can instead focus on good design and safe operation. (I would have loved to see a Navy bean counter try to tell Admiral Rickover that there wasn't any money in the budget for something he wanted.)
It's unrestrained capitalism that causes the problem, not the technology.
Good points. The other problem (besides spent fuel) is that the public doesn't trust nuclear power generation. Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, etc spooked everyone pretty good. Few people would want it near their neighborhood. Maybe it is a problem with education, or trust?
Vacuum tubes themselves do not "generate" much of anything but heat. They do, however, frequently require high or very high DC voltages to perform their amplification function. The high voltages required typically were output from a transformer with a 120 volt AC input, and a secondary with a high voltage AC output. This high voltage AC was then routed through a vacuum tube configured as a rectifier, which converted the AC input to a DC output, which was then routed to capacitors to filter and smooth that output.
The vacuum tubes used in a small battery-operated portable radio required around 80-90 volts. The vacuum tubes used in a typical high wattage audio amplifier required around 250-500 volts. The vacuum tubes used in Coast Guard Loran amplifiers required several thousand volts, and a bank of 12 tubes output 1,000,000 watts of pulse power.
I worked on all of that sort of equipment for many years. When I retired as a SF Public Safety radio tech the SF Water Dept transmitters still used vacuum tubes. They were the cheapest city department of all, and never wanted to pay for anything new, like transistors, for example.
Speaking of shocks though, I did receive a few, including from an 800 volt DC Coast Guard radio transmitter. That burned a bit. But the two worst shocks in my entire life were from plain old 120 volts AC. Came close to killing me, for sure- froze my reflexes making it almost impossible to move and free myself from the voltage source.
Excellent explanation of a typical vacuum tube circuit configuration. I am struck by how much that CG Loran equipment resembles 1950/1960/1970 Western Electric telephone equipment. Which is not surprising, given how much WECO produced for the military.
"Westinghouse also manufactured some of the first refrigerators. My great uncle possessed one of the very first models (maybe from 1925) and the company recognized his fridge as one of the longest living. It was still functioning in the mid-1950's, a box on legs with its cylindrical cooling coils mounted on top of the whole shebang. It was so ugly that it had to be put out of sight in a pantry. Not that the radio @hank found would have won any beauty contest."
We had one of those in a school dormitory in 1979-1980. If I recall correctly it was either a 1927 or 1929 model. Every time it turned itself on all lights in the building dimmed a bit.
Haha. Yeah, that is the downside to keeping ancient appliances running for decades, they may cost as much as a new one in a year's worth of energy consumption.
I do have an early 1990s freezer that still operates fine. Made back when people lamented, "they don't make them like they use to". Still works like new.
Comments
Comment section of the article is worth a read. https://nytimes.com/interactive/2025/10/22/climate/china-us-nuclear-energy-race.html
In some of the old power plant equipment that I worked with, you would "charge" the capacitors on the equipment being fed by putting a plain old incandescent light bulb in series with the power feeder. Then you could insert the main fuse, remove the bulb and insert the pilot fuse in its place. Failure to do so would pop the main fuse on initial insertion, due to the surge of the capacitor charging suddenly. You could tell that the capacitor was charged when the light bulb went out. If the bulb did not extinguish, there was a short or power drain somewhere. Or the capacitor was blown (dead short).
Next lesson:diodes... LOL
The vacuum tubes used in a small battery-operated portable radio required around 80-90 volts.
The vacuum tubes used in a typical high wattage audio amplifier required around 250-500 volts.
The vacuum tubes used in Coast Guard Loran amplifiers required several thousand volts, and a bank of 12 tubes output 1,000,000 watts of pulse power.
I worked on all of that sort of equipment for many years. When I retired as a SF Public Safety radio tech the SF Water Dept transmitters still used vacuum tubes. They were the cheapest city department of all, and never wanted to pay for anything new, like transistors, for example.
Speaking of shocks though, I did receive a few, including from an 800 volt DC Coast Guard radio transmitter. That burned a bit. But the two worst shocks in my entire life were from plain old 120 volts AC. Came close to killing me, for sure- froze my reflexes making it almost impossible to move and free myself from the voltage source.
We had one of those in a school dormitory in 1979-1980. If I recall correctly it was either a 1927 or 1929 model. Every time it turned itself on all lights in the building dimmed a bit.
I do have an early 1990s freezer that still operates fine. Made back when people lamented, "they don't make them like they use to". Still works like new.