6 ms·

Yes, the dream team would be a combination of renewable and nuclear.

hannasanarion 7y ago
No it wouldn't, because nuclear isn't reactive enough to produce energy to match the extreme afternoon demand curves when solar capacity drops and demand jumps. To account for those rapid jumps in non-renewable demand, you need an energy source that can ramp up really fast on short notice, like hydrocarbon fire.
- lostapathy 7y ago
  Apparently this is less true for newer reactors, or older reactors with upgrades. I'm not an expert, but https://www.powermag.com/flexible-operation-of-nuclear-power-plants-ramps-up/ https://www.powermag.com/flexible-operation-of-nuclear-power... Even if reactors aren't as fast to react as a gas peaking plant is, perhaps batteries will soon be able to bridge that gap. The economics of batteries change greatly if you only need them to carry the load for tens of minutes for reactors to ramp up, vs needing to carry the load until the sun shines again.
- ianai 7y ago
  So make a big enough nuclear plant for those peaks.
  - namibj 7y ago
    AFAIK it's about Xenon poisoning.
    - NullPrefix 7y ago
      Xenon
  - NullPrefix 7y ago
    Too expensive. Bigger capacity means bigger costs up front and runtime.
    - ianai 7y ago
      How much more expensive? How much more capacity? I’d rather have way too much nuclear power than rely on any fossil fuels. If anything, energy demand seems posed to always increase.
- FullyFunctional 7y ago
  Or deploy storage to make the curve smoother
  - Scoundreller 7y ago
    You mean I can “bank” A/C in the form of ice???
    - namibj 7y ago
      Well, ammonia coolers offer cheap storage in the form of liquid ammonia. This applies to both absorption and compressor coolers.
- mprovost 7y ago
  ...or hydro.
- The_rationalist 7y ago
  Source for the latency of nuclear concerning spikes in electrical demand? > 70% of France electricity is made from nuclear and they don't seem to have the issue you claim.
  - bryanlarsen 7y ago
    Half of that 30% are natural gas peaker plants.
- audunw 7y ago
  > like hydrocarbon fire. Or batteries and other storage methods. It looks like battery solutions could get cheap enough in the next 10-20 years to smooth things out and take care of storage for a few hours (see for instance http://news.mit.edu/2018/metal-mesh-membrane-rechargeable-batteries-renewable-energy-0122 http://news.mit.edu/2018/metal-mesh-membrane-rechargeable-ba... .. Donald Sadoway has some good talks on YouTube) But yeah, for days that happen to have less wind/solar, I think the best thing is just keep gas power plants around. The CO2 impact for that will be minimal, the power plants are already built, and over time you could replace the fuel with synthetic gas made from renewables, which would basically be another energy storage mechanism. Cheaper renewable gas is something we need to make the world sustainable anyway. The only unsolved problem is seasonal variations in colder climates. But those areas could import more trash and burn it (for both electricity and heat), like Sweden does. Norway has a ton of hydroelectric power, and is building more HVDC power lines to other areas of Northern Europe which will help with that area. Not sure what the solution for North America is though. But it's not nuclear. Having a nuclear power plant idle for half a year is the exact opposite of what you want. The plant is expensive and the fuel is cheap - if you build it you want it to run 24/7.
  - femto 7y ago
    AGL in Australia is looking to turn disused coal mines into pumped storage. https://www.agl.com.au/about-agl/media-centre/asx-and-media-releases/2019/july/mou-signals-next-step-in-proposed-bells-mountain-pumped-hydro-project https://www.agl.com.au/about-agl/media-centre/asx-and-media-...
  - akvadrako 7y ago
    No, the battery solution is currently about 10000x too expensive. Even building a 1 day battery for each geographical region would be thousands of trillions of dollars. Only some unexpected breakthrough could make it feasible.
- NullPrefix 7y ago
  > the extreme afternoon demand curves when solar capacity drops and demand jumps Does the hourly schedule variate day by day or can it be predicted? If you can predict when and how much power you will need to produce then it can be ramped up slowly, I assume.
  - tofflos 7y ago
    The Nordic system operators are in the early stages of transitioning from a reactive to a predictive process. The schedule does vary from day to day but there isn't anyone there that doesn't believe it can't be predicted with an accuracy that is more safe, and economical, than the current reactive process. You can read more about it at http://nordicbalancingmodel.net http://nordicbalancingmodel.net.
  - hannasanarion 7y ago
    "ramping up slowly" isn't an option when the demand curve is changing quickly, because there's nowhere for that extra energy to go. Energy storage isn't really feasible, so all the electrical grids in the world need to match supply to demand 1:1 in real time. There are electrical dispatchers who are monitoring grid supply 24/7 and instruct plants on how much they are responsible for generating on a minute-by-minute basis.
    - nerpderp82 7y ago
      > Energy storage isn't really feasible You couldn't be more Dam wrong.
      - dredmorbius 7y ago
        Doesn't scale. Not enough sites. Mind, where it does work, it's phenomenally effective, efficient, and responsive. There are a few sites at which seawater-based systems might be possible, in which the ocean forms the "lower reservoir". These are dependent on suitable terrain. Matching terrain to consumption patterns is difficult: the Netherlands and much of Britain are sorely lacking. Some of the best potential sites are along the Balkan coast in Serbia and Croatia. Chile's Atacama Desert, along the Pacific coastline, is nearly ideal geographically, but is far from most use (North America, Europe, Asia). Portions of the US West Coast might be suitable, though would all but certainly face major political resistance for environmental impacts. And: working with seawater is complex from an engineering standpoint: it's corrosive and sea life has a pronounced tendency to foul large-scale water-handling systems, though this may be tractable. There've been several pilot projects, though those have since been decomissioned, excepting Rance in France, designed as a tidal power plant, though capable of working as a pumped-hydro facility.
- nerpderp82 7y ago
  The power supply and the energy supply will not have a single solution. It is analogous to the levels of caching in a Von Neumann cpu. L1 will capacitors, L2 batteries, bulk storage is pumped hydro and other GWh energy stores. The duck curve is a smoke screen and should only exist for a region that doesn't have solar to the west of it. Those solar farms in CA should be feeding users a timezone over to the east. Any source can then feed into those stores, wind, solar, hydro. If your power solution is involves hydrocarbons, it should be a closed cycle.
- 08-15 7y ago
  You're a victim of a common misconception. Nuclear reactors can ramp up and down as quickly as the control rods move. Check out the Borax experiments (from shutdown to full power in seconds) and the TRIGA reactor (from shutdown to gigawatts and back to shutdown in milliseconds). What can't ramp quickly is the steam turbine connected to the reactor, but that's more of a design decision than a technical limitation. The German nuclear plants ("Konvoi" series) can in fact ramp faster than the German gas turbine plants, because that was a design requirement.
grecy 7y ago
> Yes, the dream team would be a combination of renewable and nuclear So long as you don't care how to dispose of the nuclear waste. But we'll be dead by then anyway, so who cares right.

No it wouldn't, because nuclear isn't reactive enough to produce energy to match the extreme afternoon demand curves when solar capacity drops and demand jumps. To account for those rapid jumps in non-renewable demand, you need an energy source that can ramp up really fast on short notice, like hydrocarbon fire.

lostapathy 7y ago
Apparently this is less true for newer reactors, or older reactors with upgrades. I'm not an expert, but https://www.powermag.com/flexible-operation-of-nuclear-power-plants-ramps-up/ https://www.powermag.com/flexible-operation-of-nuclear-power... Even if reactors aren't as fast to react as a gas peaking plant is, perhaps batteries will soon be able to bridge that gap. The economics of batteries change greatly if you only need them to carry the load for tens of minutes for reactors to ramp up, vs needing to carry the load until the sun shines again.
ianai 7y ago
So make a big enough nuclear plant for those peaks.
- namibj 7y ago
  AFAIK it's about Xenon poisoning.
  - NullPrefix 7y ago
    Xenon
- NullPrefix 7y ago
  Too expensive. Bigger capacity means bigger costs up front and runtime.
  - ianai 7y ago
    How much more expensive? How much more capacity? I’d rather have way too much nuclear power than rely on any fossil fuels. If anything, energy demand seems posed to always increase.
FullyFunctional 7y ago
Or deploy storage to make the curve smoother
- Scoundreller 7y ago
  You mean I can “bank” A/C in the form of ice???
  - namibj 7y ago
    Well, ammonia coolers offer cheap storage in the form of liquid ammonia. This applies to both absorption and compressor coolers.
mprovost 7y ago
...or hydro.
The_rationalist 7y ago
Source for the latency of nuclear concerning spikes in electrical demand? > 70% of France electricity is made from nuclear and they don't seem to have the issue you claim.
- bryanlarsen 7y ago
  Half of that 30% are natural gas peaker plants.
audunw 7y ago
> like hydrocarbon fire. Or batteries and other storage methods. It looks like battery solutions could get cheap enough in the next 10-20 years to smooth things out and take care of storage for a few hours (see for instance http://news.mit.edu/2018/metal-mesh-membrane-rechargeable-batteries-renewable-energy-0122 http://news.mit.edu/2018/metal-mesh-membrane-rechargeable-ba... .. Donald Sadoway has some good talks on YouTube) But yeah, for days that happen to have less wind/solar, I think the best thing is just keep gas power plants around. The CO2 impact for that will be minimal, the power plants are already built, and over time you could replace the fuel with synthetic gas made from renewables, which would basically be another energy storage mechanism. Cheaper renewable gas is something we need to make the world sustainable anyway. The only unsolved problem is seasonal variations in colder climates. But those areas could import more trash and burn it (for both electricity and heat), like Sweden does. Norway has a ton of hydroelectric power, and is building more HVDC power lines to other areas of Northern Europe which will help with that area. Not sure what the solution for North America is though. But it's not nuclear. Having a nuclear power plant idle for half a year is the exact opposite of what you want. The plant is expensive and the fuel is cheap - if you build it you want it to run 24/7.
- femto 7y ago
  AGL in Australia is looking to turn disused coal mines into pumped storage. https://www.agl.com.au/about-agl/media-centre/asx-and-media-releases/2019/july/mou-signals-next-step-in-proposed-bells-mountain-pumped-hydro-project https://www.agl.com.au/about-agl/media-centre/asx-and-media-...
- akvadrako 7y ago
  No, the battery solution is currently about 10000x too expensive. Even building a 1 day battery for each geographical region would be thousands of trillions of dollars. Only some unexpected breakthrough could make it feasible.
NullPrefix 7y ago
> the extreme afternoon demand curves when solar capacity drops and demand jumps Does the hourly schedule variate day by day or can it be predicted? If you can predict when and how much power you will need to produce then it can be ramped up slowly, I assume.
- tofflos 7y ago
  The Nordic system operators are in the early stages of transitioning from a reactive to a predictive process. The schedule does vary from day to day but there isn't anyone there that doesn't believe it can't be predicted with an accuracy that is more safe, and economical, than the current reactive process. You can read more about it at http://nordicbalancingmodel.net http://nordicbalancingmodel.net.
- hannasanarion 7y ago
  "ramping up slowly" isn't an option when the demand curve is changing quickly, because there's nowhere for that extra energy to go. Energy storage isn't really feasible, so all the electrical grids in the world need to match supply to demand 1:1 in real time. There are electrical dispatchers who are monitoring grid supply 24/7 and instruct plants on how much they are responsible for generating on a minute-by-minute basis.
  - nerpderp82 7y ago
    > Energy storage isn't really feasible You couldn't be more Dam wrong.
    - dredmorbius 7y ago
      Doesn't scale. Not enough sites. Mind, where it does work, it's phenomenally effective, efficient, and responsive. There are a few sites at which seawater-based systems might be possible, in which the ocean forms the "lower reservoir". These are dependent on suitable terrain. Matching terrain to consumption patterns is difficult: the Netherlands and much of Britain are sorely lacking. Some of the best potential sites are along the Balkan coast in Serbia and Croatia. Chile's Atacama Desert, along the Pacific coastline, is nearly ideal geographically, but is far from most use (North America, Europe, Asia). Portions of the US West Coast might be suitable, though would all but certainly face major political resistance for environmental impacts. And: working with seawater is complex from an engineering standpoint: it's corrosive and sea life has a pronounced tendency to foul large-scale water-handling systems, though this may be tractable. There've been several pilot projects, though those have since been decomissioned, excepting Rance in France, designed as a tidal power plant, though capable of working as a pumped-hydro facility.
nerpderp82 7y ago
The power supply and the energy supply will not have a single solution. It is analogous to the levels of caching in a Von Neumann cpu. L1 will capacitors, L2 batteries, bulk storage is pumped hydro and other GWh energy stores. The duck curve is a smoke screen and should only exist for a region that doesn't have solar to the west of it. Those solar farms in CA should be feeding users a timezone over to the east. Any source can then feed into those stores, wind, solar, hydro. If your power solution is involves hydrocarbons, it should be a closed cycle.
08-15 7y ago
You're a victim of a common misconception. Nuclear reactors can ramp up and down as quickly as the control rods move. Check out the Borax experiments (from shutdown to full power in seconds) and the TRIGA reactor (from shutdown to gigawatts and back to shutdown in milliseconds). What can't ramp quickly is the steam turbine connected to the reactor, but that's more of a design decision than a technical limitation. The German nuclear plants ("Konvoi" series) can in fact ramp faster than the German gas turbine plants, because that was a design requirement.

grecy 7y ago

> Yes, the dream team would be a combination of renewable and nuclear So long as you don't care how to dispose of the nuclear waste. But we'll be dead by then anyway, so who cares right.