3 ms·
> This is huge. Not only are micro reactors far more economical No, they aren't. They are more expensive per unit of power produced, by far bigger than any oth
by baybal2 6y ago
> This is huge. Not only are micro reactors far more economical
No, they aren't. They are more expensive per unit of power produced, by far bigger than any other powerplant in practical use.
The only way I see nuclear getting economical is it getting bigger. Nuclear's biggest advantage after the cost of fuel is its huuuuuuge power density, and power scalability. With currently technology level, it's possible to generate multiple gigawatts from a single reactor.
> it dramatically reduces the need to maintain a massive nationwide grid
It would not. Grid maintenance are quite non-linear, and high voltage lines are actually much cheaper per unit of electricity transferred than residential links.
Very high voltage DC transfer is very economical, efficient enough for intercontinental connections, but very expensive.
- kortex 6y agoBigger means bespoke. More NRE, more paperwork, more one-offs. Smaller means the entire supply chain is simpler and easier. Management is easier. And of course, the more times you do something, the easier and cheaper it gets. Mass production is a no-brainer.
- jhayward 6y ago> Mass production is a no-brainer. This is very much an unproven assumption. There is nothing in the history of nuclear technology to suggest that what most industries experience, an industrial learning curve that lowers production cost, will be found for these reactors. In fact, just the opposite - the more experience we get with them the more likely we are to find problems that are very expensive to fix. This is even more true now that they've given up on doing serial production in a single factory.