12 ms·
It is more than 14%. It looks like this plant, all three reactors together, might eventually cover a third of Finland's needs. But those are 2020 numbers. In
by sandworm101 5y ago
It is more than 14%. It looks like this plant, all three reactors together, might eventually cover a third of Finland's needs. But those are 2020 numbers. Increased electrification, especially EVs and moves away from gas, will probably reduce that percentage. In that context, the third reactor is only incrementally more powerful than those already running at the facility.
"The Olkiluoto plant consists of two boiling water reactors (BWRs), each producing 890 MW of electricity, together comprising 22% of the country's electricity generation for 2020.[1] A third reactor, Unit 3, is expected to be online in January 2022, and at 1,600 MW, will by itself satisfy 14% of the country's electricity demand."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olkiluoto_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olkiluoto_Nuclear_Power_Plant
- seanmcdirmid 5y agoIf those EVs are mainly charging at night, where does the extra peak load come from? Or is this just a case of not being able to shut off as much NG/Hydro generation at night (since nuclear can’t really be turned on and off at will)?
- at_compile_time 5y agoElectrification goes beyond cars. Think of how much fuel they need for heat in Finland. Electrification means replacing that fuel with electricity. And many reactors are able to modulate their output, either by absorbing neutrons to slow the chain reaction, or by letting steam bypass the turbines. https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/3-ways-nuclear-more-flexible-you-might-think https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/3-ways-nuclear-more-flexi...
- thriftwy 5y agoNuclear plant can provide heating for free. It has to be located in Helsinki, though.
- pfdietz 5y agoNuclear reactors could modulate their output, but they would take a grievous economic hit if they do so, because most of their costs are fixed, independent of the power setting.
- jdavis703 5y agoCertainly this is cheaper than paying people to buy your electricity (as sometimes happens in California because of solar plants).
- pfdietz 5y agoSince solar panels can go to zero output onto the grid instantly, this is just a matter of improper design (of the equipment, or of the regulatory regime.) In any case, the cost/kWh from nuclear is computed assuming it's running flat out (except for refueling outages). Reduce that generation and the levelized cost increases. It's already very much higher than renewables; curtailing nuclear output would make that discrepancy worse.
- arcticbull 5y agoSounds like we could solve this problem for for nuclear the same way we look to solve problems for renewables: storage.
- pfdietz 5y agoExcept if I have batteries, why should I charge them with expensive nuclear energy when I can charge them with cheap renewables? The nuclear plant will be forced to compete with those renewables for this market, which will limit what it can earn with the otherwise curtailed output. This is not as bad as losing it entirely, or even paying for someone to take it, but it's still going to be a net negative for the plant's economics vs. running all out selling at the calculated cost.
- seanmcdirmid 5y ago
- Sharlin 5y agoWe (Finland) are probably not going to move towards electric heating to any significant degree. Currently direct (resistive) electric is already the most common means of heating in single-family homes and other low-density residential buildings. Heat pumps are fortunately becoming popular especially in new development, and with them a significant reduction of electricity use compared to direct electric. For condos and apartment buildings by far the most common method of heating is district heating (teleheating) [1], and historically this has been very carbon intensive, even though cogeneration of both heat and electricity in one plant is quite efficient (efficiency > 80%; most Finnish thermal power plants are cogen). Fossil fuels and peat are being replaced with more sustainable (mostly wood-based) fuels, but attaining the emission goals requires burning less fuel, period, which means technologies like geothermal boreholes and large-scale heatpump facilities. SMR nuclear reactors, if they ever become mainstream, would be an excellent source of clean heat and electricity for cities. Current nuclear power plants are located (by design) too far from cities for it to be economical to pipe their waste heat to where it's needed. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_heating https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_heating
- ncmncm 5y agoGeothermal boreholes are suddenly much more practical than anybody had guessed, with laser drilling. Its operating cost will necessarily be quite a bit more than solar, but it works in the Arctic winter, 24x7, and provides cogen heat.
- Ekaros 5y agoKnowing that we have test plant with geothermal and the depth required is 6,4km even with laser drilling the effectiveness might not be so great.
- ncmncm 5y agoWe will need to wait and see. It might end up cheaper to ship in ammonia synthesized from solar in the tropics. Most likely it will be a combination of several: normally, delivery by transmission line because cheapest, but with geothermal held ready for strategic backup, and stockpiled ammonia for load peaks. Shipping will get cheaper as fuel does, but is already astonishingly cheap.
- R0b0t1 5y agoIt's the incentivized/induced demand problem. Build out a new freeway, suddenly it's full of traffic. Same thing for power. If you make power cheap people find more ways to use it. This is still probably a good thing, but something to consider.
- arrosenberg 5y agoI think you mean induced demand?
- ncmncm 5y agoMuch of "induced demand" will be for synthesizing hydrogen and hydrocarbons, which then compete with mined sources, absorb otherwise unused peak capacity, and provide back-up storage.
- dghlsakjg 5y agoWhy do EVs mostly be charged at night? We have electricity run to almost everywhere there is a road, and every building that we spend any significant amount of time in. We can charge at work or on the street during the day. Basically anywhere a car is stationary. With the right incentives and infrastructure we can shift electric vehicle charging to daytime, or whenever there is excess generating ability coming from the grid.
- shapefrog 5y ago> whenever there is excess generating ability coming from the grid That would be nighttime.
- ZeroGravitas 5y agoTrue, though it depends on energy mix and location, and all day on weekends are also often similar. If any of your local electricity providers have a variable time of use tariff, that's a pretty good guide to when the cheapest (and often, but not always, the greenest) electricity is available. Some EVs can automatically charge at these times, and sometimes you get discounts for charging at these times, but you can also usually just set a timer on your charger. https://www.oeb.ca/consumer-information-and-protection/electricity-rates#main https://www.oeb.ca/consumer-information-and-protection/elect... For example the above suggests it's usually nighttime, but weekends and statutory holidays are also good. As an aside, I wonder how much money an economy could save by having a new "cheap electricity holiday' which chooses one or two days a year that they announce a month in advance as national holidays when an extreme weather event is predicted.
- dghlsakjg 5y agoI live in a province where 90%+ of electrical power comes from hydro sources. Essentially we can arbitrarily scale for time of day demand to a pretty large degree.
- robertlagrant 5y ago> Why do EVs mostly be charged at night? Because most people don't drive at night.
- Maakuth 5y agoThere's a lot of cross-border transmission capacity, so excess capacity is exported without an issue.
- throwaway894345 5y agoDoes that suggest that one plant will satisfy 36% of the country's electricity demand?
- brianwawok 5y agoFinland has 5 million people. I am pretty sure there are existing plants in the world that could satisfy the entire country if moved to Finland. There are 10ish dams that produce over 10k MW
- sandworm101 5y agoFinland is an entire country, but it also has a population smaller than Toronto or Dallas.
- Cederfjard 5y agoThis is if you count the Greater Toronto Area and the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex respectively, to be clear (Finland has five and a half million inhabitants).
- cinntaile 5y agoIt's 14%. The other reactors are from the 70s and that's not what he meant even though he used the word plant.
- krzyk 5y ago> boiling water reactors It amazes me that we are still using steam power (mostly 18th and 19t century discovery AFAIR) in such advanced systems.
- tsimionescu 5y agoThe funny thing is even fusion plants would produce energy by turning a steam turbine.
- ncmncm 5y agoNot useful ones. Predicting here there will be no fusion plants that drive steam turbines, ever. (Unless General Fusion's system turns out to work.)
- tsimionescu 5y agoHow else could a fusion power plant generate power?
- ncmncm 5y agoD-H3 and H-B fusion release their energy in a form that can be extracted electromagnetically, with no detour through heat and turbines, so at least in principle could be cheaper to use than fission, unlike the D-T fusion that ITER etc. target. There are projects working on these. They have much higher activation energy, so are harder to make happen -- for hydrogen-boron fusion, much, much harder. Helium-3 is scarce, effectively available only from decay of tritium, all of which has to be synthesized, then it needs to decay, with a half-life of 12 years.
- legulere 5y agoWhat is so advanced about it? We’ve had pressurized water reactors since the 50s
- makomk 5y ago