4 ms·

They estimate about 1-2% in gas savings, due to the fact that nuclear is base load and gas plants are used mostly for grid compensation. If the gas storages wer

by V__ 4y ago

They estimate about 1-2% in gas savings, due to the fact that nuclear is base load and gas plants are used mostly for grid compensation. If the gas storages were empty, and the LNG-terminals weren't about to go online, I would like to see the nuclear plants be kept online. Right now, I'd rather they would invest that money in the future.

arcticbull 4y ago
Nuclear energy is the future. It's the lowest-carbon and the safest form of energy we know of. China knows this, which is why they're adding 150 new nuclear power plants in the next 15 years. [1] [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-11-02/china-climate-goals-hinge-on-440-billion-nuclear-power-plan-to-rival-u-s https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-11-02/china-cli...
- V__ 4y ago
  I think it will be part of a future solution. But building new right now isn't cheap and will just take to long. In addition the old reactors are pretty expensive. I'm looking forward to see how new reactor designs and modular solutions will fare in the next few years.
  - arcticbull 4y ago
    > I think it will be part of a future solution. I agree completely. Along with solar, wind, hydro (+storage appropriate to each) and probably even natural gas peaker plants. > But building new right now isn't cheap and will just take to long. Yep, definitely - but it should be done. If you're interested I'd suggest listening to the most recent Odd Lots with Jigar Shah, who's in charge of the DoE loan program (~300B in capital). He talks about how building reactors right now is like building airports - each one a custom specimen for the given landscape and conditions - whereas he believes we should move to a model of building airplanes, mass-producing reactors that fit only where conditions permit out of reusable components. > I'm looking forward to see how new reactor designs and modular solutions will fare in the next few years. Me too!
    - V__ 4y ago
      Thanks for the podcast suggestion, will take a listen.

by V__ 4y ago

arcticbull 4y ago

Nuclear energy is the future. It's the lowest-carbon and the safest form of energy we know of. China knows this, which is why they're adding 150 new nuclear power plants in the next 15 years. [1] [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-11-02/china-climate-goals-hinge-on-440-billion-nuclear-power-plan-to-rival-u-s https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-11-02/china-cli...

V__ 4y ago
I think it will be part of a future solution. But building new right now isn't cheap and will just take to long. In addition the old reactors are pretty expensive. I'm looking forward to see how new reactor designs and modular solutions will fare in the next few years.
- arcticbull 4y ago
  > I think it will be part of a future solution. I agree completely. Along with solar, wind, hydro (+storage appropriate to each) and probably even natural gas peaker plants. > But building new right now isn't cheap and will just take to long. Yep, definitely - but it should be done. If you're interested I'd suggest listening to the most recent Odd Lots with Jigar Shah, who's in charge of the DoE loan program (~300B in capital). He talks about how building reactors right now is like building airports - each one a custom specimen for the given landscape and conditions - whereas he believes we should move to a model of building airplanes, mass-producing reactors that fit only where conditions permit out of reusable components. > I'm looking forward to see how new reactor designs and modular solutions will fare in the next few years. Me too!
  - V__ 4y ago
    Thanks for the podcast suggestion, will take a listen.