5 ms·

> Nuclear has generally done a terrible job of offsetting fossil fuels, because it doesn't scale to 100% carbon free grid. The way you've phrased this, it soun

> Nuclear has generally done a terrible job of offsetting fossil fuels, because it doesn't scale to 100% carbon free grid. The way you've phrased this, it sounds like there is some other zero-carbon energy source that is better at offsetting fossil fuels. Take a look at France's electric grid, and the province of Ontario. They're both majority nuclear (75% and 65% respectively), they're both >90% carbon-free (with much of the remainder, indeed, being gas). Now show me a different grid that has a lower proportion of gas (regardless of whether or not it has any nuclear). Or a different grid that has lower CO2 per MWh. (there aren't any)

cycomanic 4y ago
France in the last year had its nuclear reactors only work at 60% due to outages and maintance, they were using the rest of the European grid to compensate.
- SECProto 4y ago
  And in a typical year, France generates 72% from nuclear and exports lots of power to the rest of the European grid. There are serious issues to resolve, but that's why you interconnect grids. The real issue with Frances nuclear reactors: they are all over 20 years old, and 51/58 of them are over 30 years old. If they don't get on building replacements asap, they won't have any functional reactors.
  - natmaka 4y ago
    In 2004 France started a project aiming at building an industrial seed for its new reactor ("EPR"). Construction started in 2007, for a delivery scheduled in 2012. Its total cost is already nearly 6 times its budget, and will not be delivered before 2023. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_(nuclear_reactor)#Flamanville_3_(France) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_(nuclear_reactor)#Flamanvi...
    - SECProto 4y ago
      Not really 6 times - 3.3 to 12.6 billion is about 4 times. Regardless, Finland started a similar project with the same design around the same time, and they're operational. China, too, started building reactors of the same design around the same time, and they're operational. The UK started a project with the same reactor design, and they're billions over budget and half a decade late (with still years left for those to continue to cascade). While all had delays and overruns, the cause is likely inaccurate estimating at the outset. The same article describes the EPR2 design, which is being done exactly to solve these issues. Regardless, the big problem here isn't specific to the nuclear plant design, but rather public project management (a field I have pretty deep insight into). The same can be seen in most multi-billion dollar projects with high political input and public visibility, whether it be a highway or a bridge or a transit line or an airport.
      - natmaka 4y ago
        > Not really 6 times - 3.3 to 12.6 billion is about 4 times 12.6 billions € are the construction costs right now (the reactor isn't running: they may raise), not the total cost which includes financial fees. Delayed delivery means that loan reimbursements are late because production didn't begin. The total cost, as established by the French Cour of audit («Cour des comptes») was, mid-2020, 19.1 billion € (additional costs and delays were since announced). Proof: https://www.ccomptes.fr/fr/publications/la-filiere-epr https://www.ccomptes.fr/fr/publications/la-filiere-epr Pertinent newspaper article: https://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs/article/2019/06/24/epr-de-flamanville-visualisez-comment-le-cout-et-la-duree-du-chantier-ont-triple-depuis-2007_5480745_4355770.html#:~:text=La%20mise%20en%20service%20de%20l%E2%80%99EPR%20de%20Flamanville,ans%2C%20pour%20un%20co%C3%BBt%20de%203%2C3%20milliards%20d%E2%80%99euros https://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs/article/2019/06/24/epr-.... Many mega projects indeed have such burdens, however this extent seems pretty rare and such boo-boos showing a lack of understanding of a very dangerous equipment aren't re-insuring.
        SECProto 4y ago
        > Many mega projects indeed have such burdens, however this extent seems pretty rare Here's an article I saw yesterday talking about how most big transit projects in Canada are over budget and over schedule. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/09/world/canada/transit-construction-delays.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/09/world/canada/transit-cons... > such boo-boos showing a lack of understanding of a very dangerous equipment aren't re-insuring. On the contrary, I find the fact that all four projects ended up over schedule and over budget rather shows that the design didn't adequately consider constructability. The issues the French project seems to be addressing in the latest delays (weld/pipe issues) seem similar to issues it is also correcting in a number of reactors that have operated for ~twenty years.
  - Retric 4y ago
    France imports a lot of power to cover shortfalls their reactors can’t supply, they also export a lot of nuclear power they have no use for. It’s no more representative of 72% nuclear than the town that happens to be next to a reactor is of a 100% nuclear grid.

cycomanic 4y ago

France in the last year had its nuclear reactors only work at 60% due to outages and maintance, they were using the rest of the European grid to compensate.

SECProto 4y ago
And in a typical year, France generates 72% from nuclear and exports lots of power to the rest of the European grid. There are serious issues to resolve, but that's why you interconnect grids. The real issue with Frances nuclear reactors: they are all over 20 years old, and 51/58 of them are over 30 years old. If they don't get on building replacements asap, they won't have any functional reactors.
- natmaka 4y ago
  In 2004 France started a project aiming at building an industrial seed for its new reactor ("EPR"). Construction started in 2007, for a delivery scheduled in 2012. Its total cost is already nearly 6 times its budget, and will not be delivered before 2023. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_(nuclear_reactor)#Flamanville_3_(France) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EPR_(nuclear_reactor)#Flamanvi...
  - SECProto 4y ago
    Not really 6 times - 3.3 to 12.6 billion is about 4 times. Regardless, Finland started a similar project with the same design around the same time, and they're operational. China, too, started building reactors of the same design around the same time, and they're operational. The UK started a project with the same reactor design, and they're billions over budget and half a decade late (with still years left for those to continue to cascade). While all had delays and overruns, the cause is likely inaccurate estimating at the outset. The same article describes the EPR2 design, which is being done exactly to solve these issues. Regardless, the big problem here isn't specific to the nuclear plant design, but rather public project management (a field I have pretty deep insight into). The same can be seen in most multi-billion dollar projects with high political input and public visibility, whether it be a highway or a bridge or a transit line or an airport.
    - natmaka 4y ago
      > Not really 6 times - 3.3 to 12.6 billion is about 4 times 12.6 billions € are the construction costs right now (the reactor isn't running: they may raise), not the total cost which includes financial fees. Delayed delivery means that loan reimbursements are late because production didn't begin. The total cost, as established by the French Cour of audit («Cour des comptes») was, mid-2020, 19.1 billion € (additional costs and delays were since announced). Proof: https://www.ccomptes.fr/fr/publications/la-filiere-epr https://www.ccomptes.fr/fr/publications/la-filiere-epr Pertinent newspaper article: https://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs/article/2019/06/24/epr-de-flamanville-visualisez-comment-le-cout-et-la-duree-du-chantier-ont-triple-depuis-2007_5480745_4355770.html#:~:text=La%20mise%20en%20service%20de%20l%E2%80%99EPR%20de%20Flamanville,ans%2C%20pour%20un%20co%C3%BBt%20de%203%2C3%20milliards%20d%E2%80%99euros https://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs/article/2019/06/24/epr-.... Many mega projects indeed have such burdens, however this extent seems pretty rare and such boo-boos showing a lack of understanding of a very dangerous equipment aren't re-insuring.
      - SECProto 4y ago
        > Many mega projects indeed have such burdens, however this extent seems pretty rare Here's an article I saw yesterday talking about how most big transit projects in Canada are over budget and over schedule. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/09/world/canada/transit-construction-delays.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/09/world/canada/transit-cons... > such boo-boos showing a lack of understanding of a very dangerous equipment aren't re-insuring. On the contrary, I find the fact that all four projects ended up over schedule and over budget rather shows that the design didn't adequately consider constructability. The issues the French project seems to be addressing in the latest delays (weld/pipe issues) seem similar to issues it is also correcting in a number of reactors that have operated for ~twenty years.
- Retric 4y ago
  France imports a lot of power to cover shortfalls their reactors can’t supply, they also export a lot of nuclear power they have no use for. It’s no more representative of 72% nuclear than the town that happens to be next to a reactor is of a 100% nuclear grid.