3 ms·

The obligatory "what's the capacity factor" discussion should happen here; 40% to 50% might be reasonable, with highly correlated availability. Additionally th

The obligatory "what's the capacity factor" discussion should happen here; 40% to 50% might be reasonable, with highly correlated availability. Additionally the wind farm requires backup (CCGT or OCGT), which cost money to sit there. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6556027d046ed400148b99fe/electricity-generation-costs-2023.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6556027d046ed... (take it with a pinch of salt) gives a figure of £80/kW/year for an H class CCGT; that's £250M/year (2015 prices). Another talking point might be the lifetime of wind farms (20 or 25 years) versus 60 years design lifetime for the EPR. Note that there are lifetime extensions to 80 years being mooted in the US and Switzerland.

pfdietz 2y ago
The capex per watt of gas backup is vastly lower than a nuclear plant. Like, by a factor of 10 to 20.
- chickenbig 2y ago
  > The capex per watt of gas backup is vastly lower than a nuclear plant. Like, by a factor of 10 to 20. https://www.iea.org/reports/projected-costs-of-generating-electricity-2020 https://www.iea.org/reports/projected-costs-of-generating-el... tables Table 3.2a and 3.4a show that Korean CCGT cost 838 USD/kWe and Korean PWRs were 2157 USD/kWhe (all 2018 prices). Anyhow, gas backup fuel costs (and carbon taxes) are where the real big costs are.
  - pfdietz 2y ago
    The Korean nuclear numbers are unbelievable. They certainly didn't come anywhere close to that in UAE (more like $6/W, and possibly more if the concurrent military deal was being used as a slush fund to hide overruns.)
    - chickenbig 2y ago
      > the concurrent military deal was being used as a slush fund Citation? > The Korean nuclear numbers are unbelievable See https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Contract-awarded-for-construction-of-Shin-Hanul-3 https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Contract-awarded-for... and https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Contract-for-Shin-Hanul-3-and-4-major-components-s https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Contract-for-Shin-Ha... for construction deals relating to their latest reactors in South Korea.
      - pfdietz 2y ago
        > Citation? There's no hard evidence, but the presence of the side deal does raise suspicions. S. Korea's nuclear industry has been notably corrupt, with many years of prison sentences being handed out.
        chickenbig 2y ago
        I believe there was a defense pact to sweeten the deal, but that seems like relationship building on top of a very competitive bid for nuclear power stations. https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/risky-business-south-koreas-secret-military-deal-with-uae/ https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/risky-business-south-koreas-...
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
blitzar 2y ago
> Additionally the wind farm requires backup So does a nuclear reactor.
- chickenbig 2y ago
  Nuclear capacity should be around 90% when running baseload, with < 1 unplanned trip per year. The US have been very successful at getting the capacity factor higher; it is the cheapest way of producing more from the given assets. In addition the 10% unavailability is predictable and can be planned many months in advance (and can be delayed by a few weeks or so at lower power output). So multiple plants can plan their outages to not coincide ... one backup plant will serve as backup for more than one nuclear power stations. However offshore wind has a capacity factor of 40% to 50%, and its lack of output is correlated with other wind farms. Therefore one backup power station can only really serve one wind farm. Not only is it capacity factor but demand correlation that weights against the intermittents.
  - blitzar 2y ago
    The UK’s average nuclear load factor for 1970 to 2017 was 67.4 per cent. Furthermore, France demonstrated the correlation of nuclear downtime in the summer of 2022 when it was too summery, compounded with overrunning maintenance. At its lowest point, France’s nuclear availability sat at around 40% of maximum capacity for about a month. All single power generators need to be backed up for downtime.
    - chickenbig 2y ago
      > The UK’s average nuclear load factor for 1970 to 2017 was 67.4 per cent. Finland's load factor over the last 3 years has been above 90%, as was the USA. Germany was up at 94% until ... stuff happened. > At its lowest point, France’s nuclear availability sat at around 40% of maximum capacity for about a month. Would they have shut down those reactors if alternatives were unavailable? I think they would have probably continued to run them, with permission of the regulators (at the behest of the government). > All single power generators need to be backed up for downtime. I'm not sure I follow what this statement means. What does "single" mean, as the preceeding comment talks about correlated downtime. Should we ensure that all methane plants are backed up too?
ben_w 2y ago
> Additionally the wind farm requires backup (CCGT or OCGT), which cost money to sit there. Or batteries, but yes. Battery manufacturing capacity is growing fast, but still — figures from recent years as reported by the IAE are [2022: 1720 GWh, 2023: 2500 GWh], but that's global and I'm not sure if demand is currently driven (no pun intended) by vehicles or by grids. Still, if those batteries need replacement every decade, that global manufacturing supply can backup 150 GW of generation if they each need an independent 1 week backup and can't e.g. just use a broader grid to get e.g. Spanish sun for any of that.
- tonyedgecombe 2y ago
  >Or batteries, but yes. Grid batteries make sense for those 30 second to 30 minute outages but it seems unlikely that they would be viable for those 2 week cloudy windless spells we get. My understanding is the UK plans to fill that gap with peaker gas plants with CCS. They are being contracted for a maximum of two weeks in the year.
  - ben_w 2y ago
    Currently sure, hence the numbers I gave. Theoretically possible already, but the UK isn't buying 30% of global supply for the next decade. Forecasts suggest supply will rise to the level where this is doable… but over the next decade or so of increasing global manufacturing capacity. Considering what happened to global and local trade in the last decade, I'm not confident beyond 5 years, and even then only somewhat confident.
  - youngtaff 2y ago
    There's a weakness in the way the National Grid works which means we don't fully utilise the battery capacity that's available But in California batteries supply 20% of the power in the evening https://archive.is/IruIQ https://archive.is/IruIQ
    - tonyedgecombe 2y ago
      I'm not saying we shouldn't use batteries, rather that they don't solve every problem. In particular they probably won't ever be suitable for week long outages.

pfdietz 2y ago

The capex per watt of gas backup is vastly lower than a nuclear plant. Like, by a factor of 10 to 20.

chickenbig 2y ago
> The capex per watt of gas backup is vastly lower than a nuclear plant. Like, by a factor of 10 to 20. https://www.iea.org/reports/projected-costs-of-generating-electricity-2020 https://www.iea.org/reports/projected-costs-of-generating-el... tables Table 3.2a and 3.4a show that Korean CCGT cost 838 USD/kWe and Korean PWRs were 2157 USD/kWhe (all 2018 prices). Anyhow, gas backup fuel costs (and carbon taxes) are where the real big costs are.
- pfdietz 2y ago
  The Korean nuclear numbers are unbelievable. They certainly didn't come anywhere close to that in UAE (more like $6/W, and possibly more if the concurrent military deal was being used as a slush fund to hide overruns.)
  - chickenbig 2y ago
    > the concurrent military deal was being used as a slush fund Citation? > The Korean nuclear numbers are unbelievable See https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Contract-awarded-for-construction-of-Shin-Hanul-3 https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Contract-awarded-for... and https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Contract-for-Shin-Hanul-3-and-4-major-components-s https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Contract-for-Shin-Ha... for construction deals relating to their latest reactors in South Korea.
    - pfdietz 2y ago
      > Citation? There's no hard evidence, but the presence of the side deal does raise suspicions. S. Korea's nuclear industry has been notably corrupt, with many years of prison sentences being handed out.
      - chickenbig 2y ago
        I believe there was a defense pact to sweeten the deal, but that seems like relationship building on top of a very competitive bid for nuclear power stations. https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/risky-business-south-koreas-secret-military-deal-with-uae/ https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/risky-business-south-koreas-...
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

blitzar 2y ago

> Additionally the wind farm requires backup So does a nuclear reactor.

chickenbig 2y ago
Nuclear capacity should be around 90% when running baseload, with < 1 unplanned trip per year. The US have been very successful at getting the capacity factor higher; it is the cheapest way of producing more from the given assets. In addition the 10% unavailability is predictable and can be planned many months in advance (and can be delayed by a few weeks or so at lower power output). So multiple plants can plan their outages to not coincide ... one backup plant will serve as backup for more than one nuclear power stations. However offshore wind has a capacity factor of 40% to 50%, and its lack of output is correlated with other wind farms. Therefore one backup power station can only really serve one wind farm. Not only is it capacity factor but demand correlation that weights against the intermittents.
- blitzar 2y ago
  The UK’s average nuclear load factor for 1970 to 2017 was 67.4 per cent. Furthermore, France demonstrated the correlation of nuclear downtime in the summer of 2022 when it was too summery, compounded with overrunning maintenance. At its lowest point, France’s nuclear availability sat at around 40% of maximum capacity for about a month. All single power generators need to be backed up for downtime.
  - chickenbig 2y ago
    > The UK’s average nuclear load factor for 1970 to 2017 was 67.4 per cent. Finland's load factor over the last 3 years has been above 90%, as was the USA. Germany was up at 94% until ... stuff happened. > At its lowest point, France’s nuclear availability sat at around 40% of maximum capacity for about a month. Would they have shut down those reactors if alternatives were unavailable? I think they would have probably continued to run them, with permission of the regulators (at the behest of the government). > All single power generators need to be backed up for downtime. I'm not sure I follow what this statement means. What does "single" mean, as the preceeding comment talks about correlated downtime. Should we ensure that all methane plants are backed up too?

ben_w 2y ago

> Additionally the wind farm requires backup (CCGT or OCGT), which cost money to sit there. Or batteries, but yes. Battery manufacturing capacity is growing fast, but still — figures from recent years as reported by the IAE are [2022: 1720 GWh, 2023: 2500 GWh], but that's global and I'm not sure if demand is currently driven (no pun intended) by vehicles or by grids. Still, if those batteries need replacement every decade, that global manufacturing supply can backup 150 GW of generation if they each need an independent 1 week backup and can't e.g. just use a broader grid to get e.g. Spanish sun for any of that.

tonyedgecombe 2y ago
>Or batteries, but yes. Grid batteries make sense for those 30 second to 30 minute outages but it seems unlikely that they would be viable for those 2 week cloudy windless spells we get. My understanding is the UK plans to fill that gap with peaker gas plants with CCS. They are being contracted for a maximum of two weeks in the year.
- ben_w 2y ago
  Currently sure, hence the numbers I gave. Theoretically possible already, but the UK isn't buying 30% of global supply for the next decade. Forecasts suggest supply will rise to the level where this is doable… but over the next decade or so of increasing global manufacturing capacity. Considering what happened to global and local trade in the last decade, I'm not confident beyond 5 years, and even then only somewhat confident.
- youngtaff 2y ago
  There's a weakness in the way the National Grid works which means we don't fully utilise the battery capacity that's available But in California batteries supply 20% of the power in the evening https://archive.is/IruIQ https://archive.is/IruIQ
  - tonyedgecombe 2y ago
    I'm not saying we shouldn't use batteries, rather that they don't solve every problem. In particular they probably won't ever be suitable for week long outages.