3 ms·

There’s a power plant near me that might be closing. Hope this is able to save them.

by aspaceman 5y ago

exabrial 5y ago
If it's a 1950s-1960s design, it's probably best to let it close, or be retrofitted.
- AnthonyMouse 5y ago
  It takes long enough to build a nuclear reactor that it makes more sense to build it somewhere else than on the site of an operating reactor which is still viable to continue operations. Keep all the existing plants that can reasonably be kept operating online until after the last coal plant is shut down, then start retrofitting existing reactors.
  - flavius29663 5y ago
    by then, it might be easier to retrofit them with solar panels and batteries, or H2 power to gas, who knows? Not joking, the lines and transformers are a very big part of a new plant cost, and you already have that setup in place.
    - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
      So retrofit the existing coal power plants into being new nuclear power plants.
      - flavius29663 5y ago
        not sure that's going to work, because nuclear requires some massive concrete insulation bubbles. Also the cooling is wildly different, nuclear power plants are built on large bodies of water, If there isn't one, sometimes they built a large dammed lake to have enough water to cool down the reactors in case of an emergency. Instead, there are coal-> gas and coal->biomass retrofits. Gas works because the installations are TINY compared to coal. Look at Drax, this plan would have replaced the entire capacity of the coal plant. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/30/uk-sued-for-approving-europes-biggest-gas-power-station https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/30/uk-sued-... (I think the plan was dropped eventually). Nuclear to solar I think there is Chernobyl as an example. New nuclear is a challenge right now, because they're not standardized and the costs and timings are insane. Also, everyone wants nuclear, unless it's in their county. I think we have a good chance of seeing factory produced small nuclear reactors that are easier, cheaper and faster to install than what we have now.
        AnthonyMouse 5y ago
        > not sure that's going to work, because nuclear requires some massive concrete insulation bubbles. That implies you might need somewhat more land. Take a look around most coal power plants. It's commonly unimproved land because ain't nobody want to live next to that. > Also the cooling is wildly different, nuclear power plants are built on large bodies of water, If there isn't one, sometimes they built a large dammed lake to have enough water to cool down the reactors in case of an emergency. You sure it's that different? They both operate on the principle of generating heat to turn water into steam and run turbines. That implies the same amount of generating capacity would require approximately the same amount of water. With the implication that most of the existing coal power plants are already on bodies of water. > New nuclear is a challenge right now, because they're not standardized and the costs and timings are insane. But this is chicken and egg. If you've built none then the first installation you do of its kind has high costs. Build a hundred and that isn't true.

There’s a power plant near me that might be closing. Hope this is able to save them.

exabrial 5y ago

If it's a 1950s-1960s design, it's probably best to let it close, or be retrofitted.

AnthonyMouse 5y ago
It takes long enough to build a nuclear reactor that it makes more sense to build it somewhere else than on the site of an operating reactor which is still viable to continue operations. Keep all the existing plants that can reasonably be kept operating online until after the last coal plant is shut down, then start retrofitting existing reactors.
- flavius29663 5y ago
  by then, it might be easier to retrofit them with solar panels and batteries, or H2 power to gas, who knows? Not joking, the lines and transformers are a very big part of a new plant cost, and you already have that setup in place.
  - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
    So retrofit the existing coal power plants into being new nuclear power plants.
    - flavius29663 5y ago
      not sure that's going to work, because nuclear requires some massive concrete insulation bubbles. Also the cooling is wildly different, nuclear power plants are built on large bodies of water, If there isn't one, sometimes they built a large dammed lake to have enough water to cool down the reactors in case of an emergency. Instead, there are coal-> gas and coal->biomass retrofits. Gas works because the installations are TINY compared to coal. Look at Drax, this plan would have replaced the entire capacity of the coal plant. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/30/uk-sued-for-approving-europes-biggest-gas-power-station https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jan/30/uk-sued-... (I think the plan was dropped eventually). Nuclear to solar I think there is Chernobyl as an example. New nuclear is a challenge right now, because they're not standardized and the costs and timings are insane. Also, everyone wants nuclear, unless it's in their county. I think we have a good chance of seeing factory produced small nuclear reactors that are easier, cheaper and faster to install than what we have now.
      - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
        > not sure that's going to work, because nuclear requires some massive concrete insulation bubbles. That implies you might need somewhat more land. Take a look around most coal power plants. It's commonly unimproved land because ain't nobody want to live next to that. > Also the cooling is wildly different, nuclear power plants are built on large bodies of water, If there isn't one, sometimes they built a large dammed lake to have enough water to cool down the reactors in case of an emergency. You sure it's that different? They both operate on the principle of generating heat to turn water into steam and run turbines. That implies the same amount of generating capacity would require approximately the same amount of water. With the implication that most of the existing coal power plants are already on bodies of water. > New nuclear is a challenge right now, because they're not standardized and the costs and timings are insane. But this is chicken and egg. If you've built none then the first installation you do of its kind has high costs. Build a hundred and that isn't true.