4 ms·

Nuclear plants take around a decade to start up. Electricity generation companies are worried that by the time a new plant starts producing energy solar/other r

Nuclear plants take around a decade to start up. Electricity generation companies are worried that by the time a new plant starts producing energy solar/other renewables will be so cheap that their plant will be obsolete. No one is willing to invest a billion dollars into a project with such long lead time given the uncertainty we are facing.

UnpossibleJim 4y ago
Don't the modern Small Modular Reactors (SMR's) greatly reduce both the cost and time (more importantly the time) for a nuclear reactor to get up and running? Or have I been sold on a lie?
- blitzar 4y ago
  "SMR's will be viable technology within a year." quote someone 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025
  - EricE 4y ago
    The fact that SMRs have made any progress at all *in spite of* the environment so strongly titled against them is, frankly, amazing. If half of the energy spend demonizing nuclear was spent on modernizing it, SMRs would be a long solved problem. It's the ultimate "stop hitting yourself" :p
    - blitzar 4y ago
      You could easily say the same about wind, solar, tidal, hydro, geothermal, 'clean coal' (what a joke), insulation, efficiency, large scale, local scale, interconnects etc. But no, everyone has their one true source of planet saving energy (that they have a financial interest in) and every cent that goes to any other is destroying humanity or treason that should be punished by death. The grid of the future will have a bit of everything, and between now and then it will have a range of temporary forms to ease the transition.
    - epistasis 4y ago
      Environmental groups have no power to stop SMR development. For that matter, unless environmental groups are putting saboteurs inside construction projects around the world from France to China to the US, then environmental groups can't really be blamed for the failures of the past 20 years, either. Personally, attempting to construct new nuclear, after the lessons of 1980s construction, is a big "stop hitting yourself" move as wel.
      - blitzar 4y ago
        It is the usual partisan 'environmental group / greens are to blame for x/y/z'. Their 1 seat in parliament has affected government policy and the party that has been in power, with a large absolute majority for decades was powerless to stand in their way.
MerelyMortal 4y ago
Do we know for absolute certain that we can obtain all the raw materials and manufacture solar/renewables completely within the U.S., or will we have to rely on international supply chains from countries that we might be in conflict with? "The best time to plant a tree was 10 years ago, the second best time is now."
- epistasis 4y ago
  Shifting from needing continuous fuel input from countries we are in conflict with, to only needed that input when we want to expand capacity, is a massive massive win for nearly any economy.

UnpossibleJim 4y ago

Don't the modern Small Modular Reactors (SMR's) greatly reduce both the cost and time (more importantly the time) for a nuclear reactor to get up and running? Or have I been sold on a lie?

blitzar 4y ago
"SMR's will be viable technology within a year." quote someone 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025
- EricE 4y ago
  The fact that SMRs have made any progress at all *in spite of* the environment so strongly titled against them is, frankly, amazing. If half of the energy spend demonizing nuclear was spent on modernizing it, SMRs would be a long solved problem. It's the ultimate "stop hitting yourself" :p
  - blitzar 4y ago
    You could easily say the same about wind, solar, tidal, hydro, geothermal, 'clean coal' (what a joke), insulation, efficiency, large scale, local scale, interconnects etc. But no, everyone has their one true source of planet saving energy (that they have a financial interest in) and every cent that goes to any other is destroying humanity or treason that should be punished by death. The grid of the future will have a bit of everything, and between now and then it will have a range of temporary forms to ease the transition.
  - epistasis 4y ago
    Environmental groups have no power to stop SMR development. For that matter, unless environmental groups are putting saboteurs inside construction projects around the world from France to China to the US, then environmental groups can't really be blamed for the failures of the past 20 years, either. Personally, attempting to construct new nuclear, after the lessons of 1980s construction, is a big "stop hitting yourself" move as wel.
    - blitzar 4y ago
      It is the usual partisan 'environmental group / greens are to blame for x/y/z'. Their 1 seat in parliament has affected government policy and the party that has been in power, with a large absolute majority for decades was powerless to stand in their way.

MerelyMortal 4y ago

Do we know for absolute certain that we can obtain all the raw materials and manufacture solar/renewables completely within the U.S., or will we have to rely on international supply chains from countries that we might be in conflict with? "The best time to plant a tree was 10 years ago, the second best time is now."

epistasis 4y ago
Shifting from needing continuous fuel input from countries we are in conflict with, to only needed that input when we want to expand capacity, is a massive massive win for nearly any economy.