6 ms·

Ordinary nuclear reactors have cooler temperatures than coal fire. So it's not straightforward to just replace that part and keep the rest like the steam turbin

Ordinary nuclear reactors have cooler temperatures than coal fire. So it's not straightforward to just replace that part and keep the rest like the steam turbine and generator. One could have high temperature reactors like pebble bed, that would be a better fit but they are more exotic and experimental. Didn't read the article because I won't subscribe to WSJ. They have been an anti climate science platform.

xyzzyz 5y ago
Working fluid temperature is much lower than the coal fire, and it's limited by the material science considerations of the piping and turbine, not by the reaction temperature. You are not going to see systems employing steam hotter than 550 degrees C.
airstrike 5y ago
> Didn't read the article because I won't subscribe to WSJ. They have been an anti climate science platform. Sadly, the reporting side of the WSJ and "WSJ Opinion" are basically two entirely different universes lumped under the same brand / subscription umbrella. Clearly there's a significant share of subscribers who like the opinion pieces so the Journal has historically chosen not to do away with them, but I keep hoping they will kill or spin off that business. In fact, as a subscriber I was asked not too long ago to fill out a survey about WSJ Opinion and whether I think it adds or subtracts value from my subscription. I'm not sure these types of decisions are best informed by the results of online surveys but wanted to note that just FYI... I signed up for the WSJ when they had a holiday special and I think I pay something like $5 / month for a year
- hedora 5y ago
  The WSJ is owned by the Murdochs. If anything, you should hope they spin off the news business, and keep the opinion side. Sadly, I suspect they acquired the former to lend an air of legitimacy to the latter.
  - rowls66 5y ago
    I don't believe that is the case. I have been reading the WSJ since the 1980's, before it was acquired by Murdoch, and the Op-Ed section back then was already way to the right of most mainstream media, and the WSJ news gathering organization. I don't think that Murdoch has improved the quality of the WSJ, but he has not changed Op-Ed editing.
- hetspookjee 5y ago
  I believe they were extra ordinary hard to cancel, like the NYTimes, for and the best tip if you ever consider cancelling was to just cease payments through PayPal or your creditcard. This saves you the lovely trip to a sales rep and whatnot.
- mehlmao 5y ago
  On any opinion poll, I always write that I will pay for a subscription to the first major newspaper that gives me a 'no opinion/editorial' option.
TrispusAttucks 5y ago
The only integration points of the old coal plants are the transmission lines, location footprint, access to power generation employees. Steam and temperature aren't in play.
- ars 5y ago
  Would you not reuse the generator itself? What about the turbine that drives it?
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    You would. You might need to screw around with a few of the compressor stages to get peak efficiency on the cooler steam source but that's by no means rocket science.
- Gravityloss 5y ago
  That's a more realistic approach. That would mean investing in new coal plant steam turbines now would be a dead end. They are very expensive things.
- VintageCool 5y ago
  It seems to be much more common to re-use old coal plant locations as grid-scale energy storage sites.
vlovich123 5y ago
Are you sure about that? From what I could find reactors are in the 500-1000°C [1][2] while coal turbines are in the 540-600°C range [3]. This is about the small modular reactors which I think are HTGR and run a bit hotter AFAICT (i.e. closer to 1000°C). Seems pretty close regardless. Do you have anything I can read up about regarding nuclear reactors having cooler temperatures than what coal fire generates? [1] https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/publications/magazines/bulletin/bull26-4/26404781821.pdf https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/publications/magazi... [2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1738573315300267 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S173857331... [3] https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/coal-fired-thermal-power-plant https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/coal-fired-...
- acidburnNSA 5y ago
  Yes they're right about it. Your first link says that water-cooled reactors can produce steam up to about 300 °C, which is accurate. The hottest outlet temperature today from a nuclear reactor is about 1000 °C from HTTR in Japan, but that's fairly exotic. There have been hotter outlets back in the NERVA nuclear rocket days. Also exotic. Good read is this one: https://www.iaea.org/publications/8692/advances-in-nuclear-power-process-heat-applications https://www.iaea.org/publications/8692/advances-in-nuclear-p...
  - perihelions 5y ago
    - "There have been hotter outlets back in the NERVA nuclear rocket days. Also exotic." Though, those were rocket engines with a design lifespan of several minutes. It's not possible to sustain temperatures like that, is it? (I am not an engineer). I remember reading that one of the NTR test firings saw bits of molten corium flying out in the exhaust plume.
    - rich_sasha 5y ago
      Jet engines get way hotter for sustained periods of time: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/74362/how-hot-do-internal-parts-of-jet-engine-get https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/74362/how-hot-d... (And the crazy thing is, if you think about it, they are also gas turbines! The bough I guess perhaps your question was more specific to the reactor itself)
henriquez 5y ago
- nine_k 5y ago
  AFAICT, Tesla's batteries are cobalt-free.
  - sofixa 5y ago
    https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/17/samsung-panasonic-and-tesla-embracing-cobalt-free-batteries-.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/17/samsung-panasonic-and-tesla-... According to this, only entry level batteries where range is limited.
    - DennisP 5y ago
      LFP has somewhat lower energy density but it also doesn't degrade any faster if you charge it to 100% every time, while the higher-density batteries do degrade faster if you regularly charge them over 80%. So the practical range difference isn't as much as it appears at first glance.
DennisP 5y ago
You can still read WSJ articles by posting the link into archive.ph.

xyzzyz 5y ago

Working fluid temperature is much lower than the coal fire, and it's limited by the material science considerations of the piping and turbine, not by the reaction temperature. You are not going to see systems employing steam hotter than 550 degrees C.

airstrike 5y ago

> Didn't read the article because I won't subscribe to WSJ. They have been an anti climate science platform. Sadly, the reporting side of the WSJ and "WSJ Opinion" are basically two entirely different universes lumped under the same brand / subscription umbrella. Clearly there's a significant share of subscribers who like the opinion pieces so the Journal has historically chosen not to do away with them, but I keep hoping they will kill or spin off that business. In fact, as a subscriber I was asked not too long ago to fill out a survey about WSJ Opinion and whether I think it adds or subtracts value from my subscription. I'm not sure these types of decisions are best informed by the results of online surveys but wanted to note that just FYI... I signed up for the WSJ when they had a holiday special and I think I pay something like $5 / month for a year

hedora 5y ago
The WSJ is owned by the Murdochs. If anything, you should hope they spin off the news business, and keep the opinion side. Sadly, I suspect they acquired the former to lend an air of legitimacy to the latter.
- rowls66 5y ago
  I don't believe that is the case. I have been reading the WSJ since the 1980's, before it was acquired by Murdoch, and the Op-Ed section back then was already way to the right of most mainstream media, and the WSJ news gathering organization. I don't think that Murdoch has improved the quality of the WSJ, but he has not changed Op-Ed editing.
hetspookjee 5y ago
I believe they were extra ordinary hard to cancel, like the NYTimes, for and the best tip if you ever consider cancelling was to just cease payments through PayPal or your creditcard. This saves you the lovely trip to a sales rep and whatnot.
mehlmao 5y ago
On any opinion poll, I always write that I will pay for a subscription to the first major newspaper that gives me a 'no opinion/editorial' option.

TrispusAttucks 5y ago

The only integration points of the old coal plants are the transmission lines, location footprint, access to power generation employees. Steam and temperature aren't in play.

ars 5y ago
Would you not reuse the generator itself? What about the turbine that drives it?
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  You would. You might need to screw around with a few of the compressor stages to get peak efficiency on the cooler steam source but that's by no means rocket science.
Gravityloss 5y ago
That's a more realistic approach. That would mean investing in new coal plant steam turbines now would be a dead end. They are very expensive things.
VintageCool 5y ago
It seems to be much more common to re-use old coal plant locations as grid-scale energy storage sites.

vlovich123 5y ago

Are you sure about that? From what I could find reactors are in the 500-1000°C [1][2] while coal turbines are in the 540-600°C range [3]. This is about the small modular reactors which I think are HTGR and run a bit hotter AFAICT (i.e. closer to 1000°C). Seems pretty close regardless. Do you have anything I can read up about regarding nuclear reactors having cooler temperatures than what coal fire generates? [1] https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/publications/magazines/bulletin/bull26-4/26404781821.pdf https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/publications/magazi... [2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1738573315300267 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S173857331... [3] https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/coal-fired-thermal-power-plant https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/coal-fired-...

acidburnNSA 5y ago
Yes they're right about it. Your first link says that water-cooled reactors can produce steam up to about 300 °C, which is accurate. The hottest outlet temperature today from a nuclear reactor is about 1000 °C from HTTR in Japan, but that's fairly exotic. There have been hotter outlets back in the NERVA nuclear rocket days. Also exotic. Good read is this one: https://www.iaea.org/publications/8692/advances-in-nuclear-power-process-heat-applications https://www.iaea.org/publications/8692/advances-in-nuclear-p...
- perihelions 5y ago
  - "There have been hotter outlets back in the NERVA nuclear rocket days. Also exotic." Though, those were rocket engines with a design lifespan of several minutes. It's not possible to sustain temperatures like that, is it? (I am not an engineer). I remember reading that one of the NTR test firings saw bits of molten corium flying out in the exhaust plume.
  - rich_sasha 5y ago
    Jet engines get way hotter for sustained periods of time: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/74362/how-hot-do-internal-parts-of-jet-engine-get https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/74362/how-hot-d... (And the crazy thing is, if you think about it, they are also gas turbines! The bough I guess perhaps your question was more specific to the reactor itself)

henriquez 5y ago

nine_k 5y ago
AFAICT, Tesla's batteries are cobalt-free.
- sofixa 5y ago
  https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/17/samsung-panasonic-and-tesla-embracing-cobalt-free-batteries-.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/17/samsung-panasonic-and-tesla-... According to this, only entry level batteries where range is limited.
  - DennisP 5y ago
    LFP has somewhat lower energy density but it also doesn't degrade any faster if you charge it to 100% every time, while the higher-density batteries do degrade faster if you regularly charge them over 80%. So the practical range difference isn't as much as it appears at first glance.

DennisP 5y ago

You can still read WSJ articles by posting the link into archive.ph.