10 ms·

But are we going to build reactors non-stop? Is there either private-sector funding for this, or government subsidies to make it happen?

FredPret 3y ago
Yes, of course. Power demand increases. Technology improves. Installed capacity ages out. There will always be a need to build new plants, might as well lean into it and be proactive.
- afterburner 3y ago
  Unless the technology becomes obsolete. There are other ways to generate power.
  - FredPret 3y ago
    > Technology improves
- matthewdgreen 3y ago
  I found this list which shows "under construction", "planned" and "proposed". It does not look like the US is planning to build a lot of reactors. https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/plans-for-new-reactors-worldwide.aspx https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-fu...
  - mpweiher 3y ago
    The US is one of the 22 signatories of the COP28 pledge to triple nuclear capacity by 2050. With the failure of Germany's Energiewende, countries have drastically re-evaluated their nuclear stances. France just did an about-face and cancelled their plans to drastically reduce nuclear capacity or even get out of nuclear entirely. Instead they are now investing into a nuclear renaissance. Poland is getting into nuclear power big time, they are buying reactors from South Korea (and possibly also the US). The Finnish Green Party has recently come out to endorse nuclear power. Japan, who was also getting out of nuclear power after Fukushima has also made an about face and is now going to reactivate more plants and even build new ones. etc.
    - matthewdgreen 3y ago
      It’s hard to see how these non-binding pledges mean anything. France, in particular, already generates ~75% of their electricity with nuclear. They’re really going to triple that and generate 225% of their current generation? The US is going to go from a small handful of planned reactors to hundreds? Where is the money for this coming from?
      - mpweiher 3y ago
        Most of these countries are implementing policies. France had a law to slowly phase out nuclear and switch to renewables. They've rescinded that law and instead passed legislation to build more nuclear plants, and make building those plants easier, putting into action Macron's call for a "nuclear renaissance". Also extending the life of existing plants. Japan, site of the second worst nuclear accident, had all, then most of its reactors shuttered (after political pressure). They are now reactivating more and more of them, have rescinded the policy to get out of nuclear and instead are planning to build more plants. Poland is getting into nuclear power in big way. They currently don't have any and have just approved building 24 small reactors at six sites. I think they're also in talks with the US's Westinghouse to build more. Ukraine, site of the worst accident in history, continues to operate its plants, and is talking with Rolls-Royce to convert some of their coal plants to nuclear. Rolls-Royce wants to build these reactors in a factory (economies of scale!) and ship them to sites. There are a lot of coal power plants that either already are decommissioned or soon will be. So quite the market for mass-produced reactors. The US just approved the first new kind of nuclear reactor in 50 years, a molten fluoride salt-cooled reactor. China just gave an operation license for their first molten salt reactor (completed ahead of time), and their pebble bed reactor started delivering electricity to the grid this year. etc.
        matthewdgreen 3y ago
        France has a fleet of 56 reactors, about 14 of which are scheduled to be decommissioned in the 2030s or before. They currently plan to build 6 more reactors and “possibly” another 8 by 2050, which seems more like maintenance than expansion. By contrast, France constructed all of its current 56 reactors over a 15-year period, and the current plans do not look remotely comparable to that effort. Japan generated 30% of its electricity from nuclear before 2011, and is now aspirationally hoping to generate 20% by 2030 when considering decommissioned reactors and restarts. Poland has two planned reactors with construction targeted to begin in 2026 and a couple of additional proposed reactors. There are some plans to deploy SMRs in Poland, but the reactors aren’t even in the design stage yet and I can’t determine how many GW these small reactors will actually produce in total. I also can’t figure out where Rolls Royce is in the product cycle, except that they’re still somewhere in the design stage. Any deployments in Ukraine seem likely to be decades out. The Hermes molten salt reactor looks pretty great, but it won’t generate electricity and the Hermes 2 project will also be a 28MW test reactor. I’m very bullish on this sort of research, including the SMR stuff, since — unlike the 1970s-era plants being built, it at least has the potential to take off. But it’s all very much at the research and design stage: actual commercial production may be decades out. Who knows where battery storage tech will be in two decades.

FredPret 3y ago

Yes, of course. Power demand increases. Technology improves. Installed capacity ages out. There will always be a need to build new plants, might as well lean into it and be proactive.

afterburner 3y ago
Unless the technology becomes obsolete. There are other ways to generate power.
- FredPret 3y ago
  > Technology improves
matthewdgreen 3y ago
I found this list which shows "under construction", "planned" and "proposed". It does not look like the US is planning to build a lot of reactors. https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-future-generation/plans-for-new-reactors-worldwide.aspx https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/current-and-fu...
- mpweiher 3y ago
  The US is one of the 22 signatories of the COP28 pledge to triple nuclear capacity by 2050. With the failure of Germany's Energiewende, countries have drastically re-evaluated their nuclear stances. France just did an about-face and cancelled their plans to drastically reduce nuclear capacity or even get out of nuclear entirely. Instead they are now investing into a nuclear renaissance. Poland is getting into nuclear power big time, they are buying reactors from South Korea (and possibly also the US). The Finnish Green Party has recently come out to endorse nuclear power. Japan, who was also getting out of nuclear power after Fukushima has also made an about face and is now going to reactivate more plants and even build new ones. etc.
  - matthewdgreen 3y ago
    It’s hard to see how these non-binding pledges mean anything. France, in particular, already generates ~75% of their electricity with nuclear. They’re really going to triple that and generate 225% of their current generation? The US is going to go from a small handful of planned reactors to hundreds? Where is the money for this coming from?
    - mpweiher 3y ago
      Most of these countries are implementing policies. France had a law to slowly phase out nuclear and switch to renewables. They've rescinded that law and instead passed legislation to build more nuclear plants, and make building those plants easier, putting into action Macron's call for a "nuclear renaissance". Also extending the life of existing plants. Japan, site of the second worst nuclear accident, had all, then most of its reactors shuttered (after political pressure). They are now reactivating more and more of them, have rescinded the policy to get out of nuclear and instead are planning to build more plants. Poland is getting into nuclear power in big way. They currently don't have any and have just approved building 24 small reactors at six sites. I think they're also in talks with the US's Westinghouse to build more. Ukraine, site of the worst accident in history, continues to operate its plants, and is talking with Rolls-Royce to convert some of their coal plants to nuclear. Rolls-Royce wants to build these reactors in a factory (economies of scale!) and ship them to sites. There are a lot of coal power plants that either already are decommissioned or soon will be. So quite the market for mass-produced reactors. The US just approved the first new kind of nuclear reactor in 50 years, a molten fluoride salt-cooled reactor. China just gave an operation license for their first molten salt reactor (completed ahead of time), and their pebble bed reactor started delivering electricity to the grid this year. etc.
      - matthewdgreen 3y ago
        France has a fleet of 56 reactors, about 14 of which are scheduled to be decommissioned in the 2030s or before. They currently plan to build 6 more reactors and “possibly” another 8 by 2050, which seems more like maintenance than expansion. By contrast, France constructed all of its current 56 reactors over a 15-year period, and the current plans do not look remotely comparable to that effort. Japan generated 30% of its electricity from nuclear before 2011, and is now aspirationally hoping to generate 20% by 2030 when considering decommissioned reactors and restarts. Poland has two planned reactors with construction targeted to begin in 2026 and a couple of additional proposed reactors. There are some plans to deploy SMRs in Poland, but the reactors aren’t even in the design stage yet and I can’t determine how many GW these small reactors will actually produce in total. I also can’t figure out where Rolls Royce is in the product cycle, except that they’re still somewhere in the design stage. Any deployments in Ukraine seem likely to be decades out. The Hermes molten salt reactor looks pretty great, but it won’t generate electricity and the Hermes 2 project will also be a 28MW test reactor. I’m very bullish on this sort of research, including the SMR stuff, since — unlike the 1970s-era plants being built, it at least has the potential to take off. But it’s all very much at the research and design stage: actual commercial production may be decades out. Who knows where battery storage tech will be in two decades.