Moldoteck

5 ms·

31.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
The design was bad in the sense they backported generator placement from US BWR projects in basement. It makes sense in US but risks in Japan are different Yes, radiation killed zero. Evacuation - thousands
32.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
Ren= renewables. Hualong is the domestic Chinese reactor design
33.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
I mean these https://www.opg.com/news-resources/newsroom/our-stories/stor... https://news.ontario.ca/en/release/1007558/ontario-delivers-...
34.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
Yes, canada aproved repository site. Similar to Onkalo
35.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
it doesnt suck as much as fossils https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/DE/live/fifteen_min...
36.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
depends if you like gas/coal or not https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/DE/live/fifteen_min...
37.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
Enrichment is already more or less done by Orano and Urenco. They could expand faster if assured that EU bans russian imports
38.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
Also relevant - all recent Canadian refurbs were on time and budget
39.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
UK's regulations are so bad that even Hitachi pulled out from building ABWR
40.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
It's less about money and more about timeline risks. Canada's BWRX will cost per MW by plan more than French flamanville with all delays. But unlike Flamanville it has chances to be put on the grid faster
41.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
because opex is cheaper. Modularity can be achieved in large units too
42.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
you can create even more jobs with ren. But not all jobs are the same. With ren you compete with China. With nuclear - you are somewhat protected since many don't like the idea of a hualong near them
43.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
Barakah took about 8y/unit. But local projects are expected to take less. Part of the reason is precedent govts were willing to ditch the industry entirely like Germany
44.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
it's one thing to have regulation that makes sense and it's another thing to have regulation that doesnt do much. UK is prime example with HPC
45.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
The problem is more about Chernobyl affecting global nuclear deployments imo
46.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
Proliferation is not much related to plants. It's cheaper to build a weapon with distributed enrichment capacity for uranium in some caves.
47.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
Chernobyl was triggered by humans but the ultimate problem was it's design. And it shows - Fukushima was triggered by tsunami, but ultimate problem was again the design. But since the design was much better, the impact is much milder v
48.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
No, it's ok if you schedule maintenance during summer. And with more AC adoption you'll partially reduce this heavy swing. Nuclear at 60%cf is still economical. The problem arises if your plant takes 20y and 20bn to build
49.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
You can see how you dont need nuclear with your strategy today in Germany https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/DE/live/fifteen_min... TMI cleanup costed 1bn, so far lower than the secondary insurance
50.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
It could take much less in Canada. And recent refurbs being on time and budget are encouraging. We'll see in fact Canada's capacity to deliver sooner, but not in Canada - Romania already signed for Cernavoda expansion to a full 4
51.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
Canada has own supply chain and all recent refurbs were on time and budget. Ironically, if SA contracted Korea for a npp (and if nuclear was legal there) at the same time as UAE, it'll probably be a net exporter of low carbon power by
52.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
Spain has better weather, more hydro, cheap African gas and still nuclear. And emissions are worse
53.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
It's because you dont want to. Nuclear env impact is low https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2022-04/LCA_3_FINAL%20... France has lower prices vs Germany and now, during peak summer heatwaves you
54.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
Nuclear mining is mostly insitu nowadays and has low env impact. Env impact of nuclear is low in general https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2022-04/LCA_3_FINAL%20... and mining requirements are minima
55.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
you can get cheaper power if you play the cards well. By this I mean sacrificing a bit nuclear CF but not too much. Also VRE can be paired with hydro up to it's capacity and the rest would be nuclear. This will give better results vs n
56.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
Ren don't work just fine in Europe. There are serious challenges https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/DE/live/fifteen_min...
57.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
It needs nuclear to avoid using gas. Ren will be curtailed anyway. May as well curtail them for nuclear. Germany is a prime example of fossils+ren combo https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/DE/live/fi
58.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
Germany is notorious for that https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/DE/live/fifteen_min...
59.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
no it's not fully complementary. And that's the main challenge. Countries without nuclear and hydro tackle this with gas/coal
60.
by Moldoteck 4mo ago
Ore is currently about 2% of the capex of a reactor. And many mines globally have lowered production because it's too cheap. Even if you 10x the price of the ore, it'll still be cheap

More ›