3 ms·
My guess: expensive. Gas turbine power plants are not cheap, but fuel wasn't that expensive back then. I'd expect the replacement to either use hydrogen with h
by namibj 5y ago
My guess: expensive.
Gas turbine power plants are not cheap, but fuel wasn't that expensive back then.
I'd expect the replacement to either use hydrogen with hydrogen-resistant steel, or, more likely, helium.
I think carbon-carbon composite can handle extreme temperatures in a helium atmosphere, beyond what you can reasonably reach with a fuel flame.
However, the temperatures should be feasible for fusion power plants, which could use helium or another noble gas (in case helium diffuses too fast) to cool the chamber-facing tiles.
The light gas would be for power density by way of having a high speed-of-sound.
Also, we mostly switched to Rankine cycle for external combustion power plants.
Steam turbines are quite good at what they're doing.
- pfdietz 5y agoGas turbine power plants (specifically, combustion turbines) are actually very cheap. The reason is they avoid heat exchangers. Simple open cycle combustion turbines don't need heat exchangers at all, neither before the turbine nor after it (to condense/cool a working fluid). A simple cycle gas turbine power plant might be as little as $400/kW, vs $10,000/kW for a nuclear power plant.