4 ms·
You have economies of scale (size) squaring off against economies of scale (production). For one-offs, the economies of size win, because then the economies of
by mpweiher 2y ago
You have economies of scale (size) squaring off against economies of scale (production).
For one-offs, the economies of size win, because then the economies of production don't actually get a chance to do their thing. So kick-starting is a problem. However, the problems with the EPR and the AP-1000 hint (do not prove) that we may be hitting size limitations.
The strategy that Rolls-Royce is pursuing seems promising: factory-built microreactors (so economies of production) that you can plop into existing coal-powered plants to upgrade them to nuclear. That way you reduce the issues with the non-factory-built parts.
- johndunne 2y agoAnd decommissioning promises to be more manageable and less expensive with microreactors. Individual microreactors can be swapped as they age out and decommissioned/refurbished elsewhere.
- pfdietz 2y agoReally? I expect microreactors would create much more irradiated material than larger reactors, due to the higher surface area/volume ratio of tiny reactors. This also negatively affects their neutron economy.