6 ms·

If you want nuclear to happen: 1) Disrupt the nuclear construction contracting process. Until fleet contractors like Bechtel et al are stopped from parasitiz

If you want nuclear to happen: 1) Disrupt the nuclear construction contracting process. Until fleet contractors like Bechtel et al are stopped from parasitizing the industry, it's going nowhete due to spiralling costs. 2) Lower the cost of reinforced concrete. 3) Close the fuel cycle. 3 is technically feasible, 2 isn't very sexy, but possible. 1 seems insurmountable.

jlnthws 6y ago
What about Terrapower and Nuscale? They are building new type of reactors, much smaller and allegedly safer/cleaner.
- thinkcontext 6y ago
  Nuscale is targeting the end of the decade for its first project to come online. Terrapower does not have a licensed design yet, so it will be longer.
- AstralStorm 6y ago
  Good developments, but we cannot wait for them. Even the coal grids are falling apart now, and building gas to replace them is not sane. On the other hand, once they're available, switching to them is perfectly fine, and the 50+ lifetime of LWRs exists for a reason. Maybe we will even have workable fusion by then.
- jasonwatkinspdx 6y ago
  It appears the NuScale pilot project is floundering. They announced cost raising about 50% and about a 3 year delay. Several of the utility customers have backed out of the project as a result, putting it on iffy grounds.
toomuchtodo 6y ago
The only way it works is if the power consumer owns the entire lifecycle (construction, ongoing O&M, etc) (the US Navy, for example). There is absolutely no way any commercial power purchase agreement buyer is going to spec nuclear when they can get renewables backed by storage for pennies per kwh [1], both of which have install lead times measured in months (versus a decade for nuclear). Tesla committed to having the Hornsdale Power Reserve built in 100 days or it was free [2]. That is what nuclear is up against. Please don't argue base load; there is no need for base load, only diverse firm dispatchable generation assets [3], robust transmission, and demand response for non-essential industrial loads. [1] https://www.utilitydive.com/news/solar-plus-storage-poised-to-become-more-financially-attractive-but-season/589857/ https://www.utilitydive.com/news/solar-plus-storage-poised-t... [2] https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/11/28/16709036/elon-musk-biggest-battery-100-days https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/11/28/167090... [3] https://energypost.eu/dispelling-nuclear-baseload-myth-nothing-renewables-cant-better/ https://energypost.eu/dispelling-nuclear-baseload-myth-nothi...
- sir_bearington 6y ago
  There isn't remotely enough storage available to make wind and solar feasible. To put this in perspective, the world consumes 60 TWh of electricity daily, about 2.5 TWh per hour. We have only a couple GWh of battery storage. Hydroelectric provides more, but that's harder to scale because you need the right geography. Once solar saturates daytime demand, provisioning further solar power doesn't contribute to decarbonization. This is why nuclear is really the only known path to decarbonization. Maybe we'll figure out scalable ways to provision hundreds of terawatt hours of storage, but we might be waiting a long time.
  - toomuchtodo 6y ago
    https://gspp.berkeley.edu/faculty-and-impact/news/recent-news/the-us-can-reach-90-percent-clean-electricity-by-2035-dependably-and-without-increasing-consumer-bills https://gspp.berkeley.edu/faculty-and-impact/news/recent-new... ("The US can reach 90 percent clean electricity by 2035, dependably and without increasing consumer bills") https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/europe-wind-turbines-power-world-renewable-energy-a9057251.html https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/europe-win... ("Europe has space for enough wind turbines to power the entire world, study finds") https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/uploads/ee2523dc632c9b01df11ecc6e3dd2184.pdf https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/uploads/ee2523dc632c9b01df... ("Australia is the sunniest country in the world and one of the windiest. Australia’s potential for renewable energy generation is 500 times greater than current power generation capacity.") https://www.afdb.org/en/news-and-events/why-africa-is-the-next-renewables-powerhouse-18822 https://www.afdb.org/en/news-and-events/why-africa-is-the-ne... ("Africa has an almost unlimited potential of solar capacity (10 TW), abundant hydro (350 GW), wind (110 GW), and geothermal energy sources (15 GW). The International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) estimates that renewable energy capacity in Africa could reach 310 GW by 2030; which would put the continent at the forefront of renewable energy generation globally.")
    - andromeduck 6y ago
      yeah and we'll have fusion in 10 years
paganel 6y ago
> Lower the cost of reinforced concrete. Is this doable? What's keeping it up? Is it anything artificial, like a business cartel or something similar? If not, lowering the price would practically mean subsidies.
- throwaw4ybio 6y ago
  Cost of materials (e.g. sand) are going up, plus the "nuclear grade" upcharge. Add a 2x to 4x multiplier for "accidents" that require demolition and rework. :)
PaulHoule 6y ago
No it is the steam turbine (& associated heat exchangers) that makes the economics of the lwr impossible. It is what made the economics of the old-school coal burning power plants impossible in most places compared to the methane fueled gas turbine not to mention wind and other renewables. The power density of a gas turbine is so much greater than that of a steam turbine that a closed-cycle gas turbine powerset for a sodium cooled fast reactor would fit in the employee break room of the turbine hall of an lwr. Running at higher temperatures with liquid metal, molten salt, or gas-cooled reactors poses many practical problems, but means building a machine that processes more energy with less mass thus drastically lower capital cost.
- DennisP 6y ago
  Also, a big reason LWRs use so much reinforced concrete is that they have huge containment domes. The reason they're so big is that the water is pressurized at around 100 atmospheres, and if there's a pipe break it'll flash into steam at a thousand times the volume. You need plenty of space for the steam to expand inside containment. A molten salt reactor is at atmospheric pressure and has nothing to cause a chemical explosion. You still need containment, but you don't need to contain a large empty space.
  - PaulHoule 6y ago
    Yep. A supercritical CO2 turbine runs at 1000+ psi but if the pipes broke and the CO2 sprayed out into that salt, you might get an overpressure around 10 psi in a not-too-big confinement because the volume of working fluid is tiny.
    - pfdietz 6y ago
      You would not even run the CO2 plumbing into the containment building. There would be a secondary salt loop leaving that building.
- andromeduck 6y ago
  By gas turbines do you mean scCO2 tech?

jlnthws 6y ago

What about Terrapower and Nuscale? They are building new type of reactors, much smaller and allegedly safer/cleaner.

thinkcontext 6y ago
Nuscale is targeting the end of the decade for its first project to come online. Terrapower does not have a licensed design yet, so it will be longer.
AstralStorm 6y ago
Good developments, but we cannot wait for them. Even the coal grids are falling apart now, and building gas to replace them is not sane. On the other hand, once they're available, switching to them is perfectly fine, and the 50+ lifetime of LWRs exists for a reason. Maybe we will even have workable fusion by then.
jasonwatkinspdx 6y ago
It appears the NuScale pilot project is floundering. They announced cost raising about 50% and about a 3 year delay. Several of the utility customers have backed out of the project as a result, putting it on iffy grounds.

toomuchtodo 6y ago

The only way it works is if the power consumer owns the entire lifecycle (construction, ongoing O&M, etc) (the US Navy, for example). There is absolutely no way any commercial power purchase agreement buyer is going to spec nuclear when they can get renewables backed by storage for pennies per kwh [1], both of which have install lead times measured in months (versus a decade for nuclear). Tesla committed to having the Hornsdale Power Reserve built in 100 days or it was free [2]. That is what nuclear is up against. Please don't argue base load; there is no need for base load, only diverse firm dispatchable generation assets [3], robust transmission, and demand response for non-essential industrial loads. [1] https://www.utilitydive.com/news/solar-plus-storage-poised-to-become-more-financially-attractive-but-season/589857/ https://www.utilitydive.com/news/solar-plus-storage-poised-t... [2] https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/11/28/16709036/elon-musk-biggest-battery-100-days https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2017/11/28/167090... [3] https://energypost.eu/dispelling-nuclear-baseload-myth-nothing-renewables-cant-better/ https://energypost.eu/dispelling-nuclear-baseload-myth-nothi...

sir_bearington 6y ago
There isn't remotely enough storage available to make wind and solar feasible. To put this in perspective, the world consumes 60 TWh of electricity daily, about 2.5 TWh per hour. We have only a couple GWh of battery storage. Hydroelectric provides more, but that's harder to scale because you need the right geography. Once solar saturates daytime demand, provisioning further solar power doesn't contribute to decarbonization. This is why nuclear is really the only known path to decarbonization. Maybe we'll figure out scalable ways to provision hundreds of terawatt hours of storage, but we might be waiting a long time.
- toomuchtodo 6y ago
  https://gspp.berkeley.edu/faculty-and-impact/news/recent-news/the-us-can-reach-90-percent-clean-electricity-by-2035-dependably-and-without-increasing-consumer-bills https://gspp.berkeley.edu/faculty-and-impact/news/recent-new... ("The US can reach 90 percent clean electricity by 2035, dependably and without increasing consumer bills") https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/europe-wind-turbines-power-world-renewable-energy-a9057251.html https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/europe-win... ("Europe has space for enough wind turbines to power the entire world, study finds") https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/uploads/ee2523dc632c9b01df11ecc6e3dd2184.pdf https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/uploads/ee2523dc632c9b01df... ("Australia is the sunniest country in the world and one of the windiest. Australia’s potential for renewable energy generation is 500 times greater than current power generation capacity.") https://www.afdb.org/en/news-and-events/why-africa-is-the-next-renewables-powerhouse-18822 https://www.afdb.org/en/news-and-events/why-africa-is-the-ne... ("Africa has an almost unlimited potential of solar capacity (10 TW), abundant hydro (350 GW), wind (110 GW), and geothermal energy sources (15 GW). The International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) estimates that renewable energy capacity in Africa could reach 310 GW by 2030; which would put the continent at the forefront of renewable energy generation globally.")
  - andromeduck 6y ago
    yeah and we'll have fusion in 10 years

paganel 6y ago

> Lower the cost of reinforced concrete. Is this doable? What's keeping it up? Is it anything artificial, like a business cartel or something similar? If not, lowering the price would practically mean subsidies.

throwaw4ybio 6y ago
Cost of materials (e.g. sand) are going up, plus the "nuclear grade" upcharge. Add a 2x to 4x multiplier for "accidents" that require demolition and rework. :)

PaulHoule 6y ago

No it is the steam turbine (& associated heat exchangers) that makes the economics of the lwr impossible. It is what made the economics of the old-school coal burning power plants impossible in most places compared to the methane fueled gas turbine not to mention wind and other renewables. The power density of a gas turbine is so much greater than that of a steam turbine that a closed-cycle gas turbine powerset for a sodium cooled fast reactor would fit in the employee break room of the turbine hall of an lwr. Running at higher temperatures with liquid metal, molten salt, or gas-cooled reactors poses many practical problems, but means building a machine that processes more energy with less mass thus drastically lower capital cost.

DennisP 6y ago
Also, a big reason LWRs use so much reinforced concrete is that they have huge containment domes. The reason they're so big is that the water is pressurized at around 100 atmospheres, and if there's a pipe break it'll flash into steam at a thousand times the volume. You need plenty of space for the steam to expand inside containment. A molten salt reactor is at atmospheric pressure and has nothing to cause a chemical explosion. You still need containment, but you don't need to contain a large empty space.
- PaulHoule 6y ago
  Yep. A supercritical CO2 turbine runs at 1000+ psi but if the pipes broke and the CO2 sprayed out into that salt, you might get an overpressure around 10 psi in a not-too-big confinement because the volume of working fluid is tiny.
  - pfdietz 6y ago
    You would not even run the CO2 plumbing into the containment building. There would be a secondary salt loop leaving that building.
andromeduck 6y ago
By gas turbines do you mean scCO2 tech?