3 ms·

Here's an idea: offer one of these micro/modular reactors for free to a developer of a new residential division, and indemnify them by offering to remove it aft

Here's an idea: offer one of these micro/modular reactors for free to a developer of a new residential division, and indemnify them by offering to remove it after at least N years in operation and up to M years after that. I would consider living in a division that has extra low-cost electricity. It couldn't be zero cost because nuclear could only provide base load power, unless one of these micro/modular reactor types is so innovative that it can provide base and peak load power, in which case such a division could have truly zero-cost power for a bunch of years. I.e., promote the darned things, loss-lead if need be. If the manufacturer won't take such risks, then might never break through. I bet that after a few years you could get such good press out of it that other developers might sign on.

ethbr0 4y ago
> Here's an idea: offer one of these micro/modular reactors for free to a developer of a new residential division... One word: Epcot It's something Disney and Florida could probably agree on, would be a wholesome PR story about investing in Walt's futurism dreams, and would be easier to negotiate than with a less-planned development. And finally, what better showcase than "If it's safe enough for Disney"? Our Friend the Atom, indeed https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QRzl1wHc43I https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QRzl1wHc43I
- nhoughto 4y ago
  And also they already can, if you believe it: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-15/disney-world-s-literal-nuclear-option-explained https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-15/disney-wo...
  - ethbr0 4y ago
    Yeah... chose not to highlight that, as it seemed a clickbaity way of saying "Disney has historically had substantial independence in zoning" (which is a more accurate but less exciting way to phrase it).
XorNot 4y ago
Reactors can provide peak power no problems, the incentive not to is you burn fuel at a higher rate then you need to since you can't ramp quickly. But in a small scale scenario you could easily oversize the reactor to service the local area, and sell any excess on the grid as though it were a renewable utility.
- cryptonector 4y ago
  That's fair. Excess power can be driven into the ground, and at small scales it can be sold to the grid.

ethbr0 4y ago

> Here's an idea: offer one of these micro/modular reactors for free to a developer of a new residential division... One word: Epcot It's something Disney and Florida could probably agree on, would be a wholesome PR story about investing in Walt's futurism dreams, and would be easier to negotiate than with a less-planned development. And finally, what better showcase than "If it's safe enough for Disney"? Our Friend the Atom, indeed https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QRzl1wHc43I https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QRzl1wHc43I

nhoughto 4y ago
And also they already can, if you believe it: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-15/disney-world-s-literal-nuclear-option-explained https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-15/disney-wo...
- ethbr0 4y ago
  Yeah... chose not to highlight that, as it seemed a clickbaity way of saying "Disney has historically had substantial independence in zoning" (which is a more accurate but less exciting way to phrase it).

XorNot 4y ago

Reactors can provide peak power no problems, the incentive not to is you burn fuel at a higher rate then you need to since you can't ramp quickly. But in a small scale scenario you could easily oversize the reactor to service the local area, and sell any excess on the grid as though it were a renewable utility.

cryptonector 4y ago
That's fair. Excess power can be driven into the ground, and at small scales it can be sold to the grid.