4 ms·

> But the world has moved on. China's got 27 reactors under construction right now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_China https://en.wikipedia.o

> But the world has moved on. China's got 27 reactors under construction right now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_China

DarkNova6 10mo ago
You are naturally correct and I have corrected my statement. I intended to refer to the West but my wording was factually incorrect. China has invested so much for so long into nuclear technology that they now have the industry which Europe once had. And to rebuild the same type of industry would take the same amount of effort that China had to do. Meanwhile, the US can't even build their own warships anymore.
- bigbadfeline 10mo ago
  > China has invested so much for so long into nuclear technology... And to rebuild the same type of industry in the EU would take the same amount of effort. You're factually wrong. China started from 0 but the EU has kept building reactors, the French Areva/EDF finished three advanced 1600 MW reactors just 6 and 2 years ago. They are also building two reactors of the same type in the UK as we speak. The EU has never lost the expertise necessary for building nuclear reactors, they have actually advanced the state of the art since the end of the initial European wave. Don't be confused by the lack of finished reactors in the EU, 2 of the completed Areva plants are in China and were built for a third of the time and cost of the same type reactors currently under construction in the UK. Therefore: 1. Looking at completed reactors in the EU cannot be used for judging the level of Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) expertise in the EU. 2. Cost overruns in Europe are due to politics and civil engineering chaos there while the EU's NPP expertise is the best in the world. 3. Technology-wise, a new EU buldout of NPPs won't start from zero but from the the very top of the NPP technology ladder.
derriz 10mo ago
In the first 5 months of this year, China added 198 GW of solar PV and 46 GW of wind. Nuclear is a small side-hustle for them.
- pyrale 10mo ago
  nameplate capacity of different generation sources can't be compared, if only because capacity factor is not comparable.
  - derriz 10mo ago
    China's plan is to add 100GW of nuclear by 2040. In 2024 alone, it added 360GW of wind and solar and the trajectory for renewables is steepening, not declining so this year's number looks like it will exceed this number - 450GW or more. Capacity factors are just noise when you're dealing with nearly 2 orders of magnitude of difference in scale. Apply whatever adjustment for capacity factor differences that you like but 100GW of nuclear over 15 years is not going to catch up with 450GW of wind and solar per year.
    - bigbadfeline 10mo ago
      China has 1,000 GW installed solar and 26 GW of wind which generate 2k TWh/yr. The total installed nuclear in China is a mere 60 GW which generate 450 TWh/yr. Therefore, the capacity factor of solar is 2 TWh/GW and that of nuclear is 4 times higher at 8 TWh/GW. Calling an 4 times higher capacity factor "noise" is actual noise. Besides, nuclear provides uninterrupted energy supply, no need for storage or special convenient places for installation. That's why China is building capacity of both types as fast as they can. Europe is in a colder geographic area with less sunshine and more needs of energy during the cold/rainy days, nuclear is an absolute necessity there.
      - ViewTrick1002 10mo ago
        Unless half the fleet is offline like happened in France during the energy crisis and twice in Sweden in the last year. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/15/business/nuclear-power-france.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/15/business/nuclear-power-fr... > That's why China is building capacity of both types as fast as they can. Nuclear power as a percentage of the Chinese grid mix is backsliding. Will likely land somewhere in the 2-3% range when their grid is fully built out. China is building renewables and storage as fast as they can and provide a token investment (in terms of their grid size)for new built nuclear power.
ViewTrick1002 10mo ago
China has been scaling back and delaying their nuclear program in favor of renewables since Fukushima. At saturation, given current nuclear build out based on actual construction starts and China’s grid size, China will end up with 2-3% nuclear power in the grid mix. Enough to sustain a civilian industry to complement any military ambitions, but it does not move the needle. In terms of electricity China is all in on renewables and storage with a backstop of locally sourced firming coal.
- mpweiher 10mo ago
  > China has been scaling back and delaying their nuclear program in favor of renewables since Fukushima. Not "has". "Had". The whole world held their breath after Fukushima. Now that everybody knows that nothing really consequential happened apart from state overreaction, Japan, China and the rest of the world are no longer holding their breath. China has been approving 10 or more nuclear power plants per year the last couple of years. Given the lifetime of 80 years of modern nuclear reactors and Little's Law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little%27s_law) that implies an expected fleet size of 800 reactors. At 1.2 - 1.4GW per reactors, that would be slightly above 1 TW of generating capacity, which is enough for 90% of current Chinese electricity production.

> But the world has moved on. China's got 27 reactors under construction right now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_China

DarkNova6 10mo ago

You are naturally correct and I have corrected my statement. I intended to refer to the West but my wording was factually incorrect. China has invested so much for so long into nuclear technology that they now have the industry which Europe once had. And to rebuild the same type of industry would take the same amount of effort that China had to do. Meanwhile, the US can't even build their own warships anymore.

bigbadfeline 10mo ago
> China has invested so much for so long into nuclear technology... And to rebuild the same type of industry in the EU would take the same amount of effort. You're factually wrong. China started from 0 but the EU has kept building reactors, the French Areva/EDF finished three advanced 1600 MW reactors just 6 and 2 years ago. They are also building two reactors of the same type in the UK as we speak. The EU has never lost the expertise necessary for building nuclear reactors, they have actually advanced the state of the art since the end of the initial European wave. Don't be confused by the lack of finished reactors in the EU, 2 of the completed Areva plants are in China and were built for a third of the time and cost of the same type reactors currently under construction in the UK. Therefore: 1. Looking at completed reactors in the EU cannot be used for judging the level of Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) expertise in the EU. 2. Cost overruns in Europe are due to politics and civil engineering chaos there while the EU's NPP expertise is the best in the world. 3. Technology-wise, a new EU buldout of NPPs won't start from zero but from the the very top of the NPP technology ladder.

derriz 10mo ago

In the first 5 months of this year, China added 198 GW of solar PV and 46 GW of wind. Nuclear is a small side-hustle for them.

pyrale 10mo ago
nameplate capacity of different generation sources can't be compared, if only because capacity factor is not comparable.
- derriz 10mo ago
  China's plan is to add 100GW of nuclear by 2040. In 2024 alone, it added 360GW of wind and solar and the trajectory for renewables is steepening, not declining so this year's number looks like it will exceed this number - 450GW or more. Capacity factors are just noise when you're dealing with nearly 2 orders of magnitude of difference in scale. Apply whatever adjustment for capacity factor differences that you like but 100GW of nuclear over 15 years is not going to catch up with 450GW of wind and solar per year.
  - bigbadfeline 10mo ago
    China has 1,000 GW installed solar and 26 GW of wind which generate 2k TWh/yr. The total installed nuclear in China is a mere 60 GW which generate 450 TWh/yr. Therefore, the capacity factor of solar is 2 TWh/GW and that of nuclear is 4 times higher at 8 TWh/GW. Calling an 4 times higher capacity factor "noise" is actual noise. Besides, nuclear provides uninterrupted energy supply, no need for storage or special convenient places for installation. That's why China is building capacity of both types as fast as they can. Europe is in a colder geographic area with less sunshine and more needs of energy during the cold/rainy days, nuclear is an absolute necessity there.
    - ViewTrick1002 10mo ago
      Unless half the fleet is offline like happened in France during the energy crisis and twice in Sweden in the last year. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/15/business/nuclear-power-france.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/15/business/nuclear-power-fr... > That's why China is building capacity of both types as fast as they can. Nuclear power as a percentage of the Chinese grid mix is backsliding. Will likely land somewhere in the 2-3% range when their grid is fully built out. China is building renewables and storage as fast as they can and provide a token investment (in terms of their grid size)for new built nuclear power.

ViewTrick1002 10mo ago

China has been scaling back and delaying their nuclear program in favor of renewables since Fukushima. At saturation, given current nuclear build out based on actual construction starts and China’s grid size, China will end up with 2-3% nuclear power in the grid mix. Enough to sustain a civilian industry to complement any military ambitions, but it does not move the needle. In terms of electricity China is all in on renewables and storage with a backstop of locally sourced firming coal.

mpweiher 10mo ago
> China has been scaling back and delaying their nuclear program in favor of renewables since Fukushima. Not "has". "Had". The whole world held their breath after Fukushima. Now that everybody knows that nothing really consequential happened apart from state overreaction, Japan, China and the rest of the world are no longer holding their breath. China has been approving 10 or more nuclear power plants per year the last couple of years. Given the lifetime of 80 years of modern nuclear reactors and Little's Law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little%27s_law) that implies an expected fleet size of 800 reactors. At 1.2 - 1.4GW per reactors, that would be slightly above 1 TW of generating capacity, which is enough for 90% of current Chinese electricity production.