If Germany did not begin a nuclear power phase-out in 2011, then they would still have 131 Terawatt hours from nuclear power.
Germany could have built forty-six 1.6 GW EPR reactors at the $12.5 billion per reactor cost of the U.K.’s Hinkley Point C. This would be for the same spending that Germany has on solar and wind up to now and through 2025. Germany will have invested $580 billion in renewable energy and storage by 2025. This will not get Germany near 100% renewable. This will get Germany to 20% electricity from renewables.
Those forty-six EPRs operating at 90 percent capacity factor could be used to eliminate all coal, gas, and biomass electricity and the 150 terawatt-hours per year of wind and solar from its renewables investment. Germany could export 100 terawatt-hours of electricity to its neighbors (double 2017’s actual exports). The last 133 terawatt-hours could power 45 million electric cars.
California could have kept San Onofre and Diablo Canyon nuclear reactors in service and kept large hydro dam and geothermal electricity production.
California could have built twenty South Korean OPR1000 reactors. These could have cost $5 billion per reactor which is more than double the cost of construction in South Korea.
California could be producing 200 terawatt-hours of clean electricity — more than total in-state generation in 2016 and 97 percent of in-state generation in 2017.
Ontario has nearly carbon-free electricity
There are 14.2 million people in Ontario.
Nuclear power is key part of Ontario, Canada’s nearly carbon-free electricity.
Nuclear reactors contributed 73.3 % of Ontario’s total electrical power generated in-province.
98.1 % of Ontario-generated electricity was carbon-free.
Nuclear reactors contributed 74.8 % of Ontario’s carbon-free electricity.
Quebec has 8.5 million people and also has almost carbon-free electricity. Quebec mostly generated power from hydro dams.
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
I think Brian has a point on this Phasing out nuclear does not make sense
I think Brian has a point on this Phasing out nuclear does not make sense
I have been saying this for literally years. The money spent on solar and wind could have transitioned Germany to CO2 free power and enabled a simpler transition to electric cars. It is easy math to do.
No, you can’t say that, because nuclear power providers are not allowed to sanely pay for their capital.
One could argue that the nuclear industry is trying to sell a product that the market just does not want… and the market is willing to pay a premium (higher energy costs) for what they really want
That’s an artifact of crony capitalism and over-regulation. When it becomes obvious we cannot afford Leftism and it’s stupidities, treating nuclear power like the commodity it is will happen.
Doesn’t matter when you can’t add renewables cheaply enough to pay for them fast enough.
I have been saying this for literally years.The money spent on solar and wind could have transitioned Germany to CO2 free power and enabled a simpler transition to electric cars. It is easy math to do.
No you can’t say that because nuclear power providers are not allowed to sanely pay for their capital.
One could argue that the nuclear industry is trying to sell a product that the market just does not want… and the market is willing to pay a premium (higher energy costs) for what they really want
That’s an artifact of crony capitalism and over-regulation. When it becomes obvious we cannot afford Leftism and it’s stupidities treating nuclear power like the commodity it is will happen.
Doesn’t matter when you can’t add renewables cheaply enough to pay for them fast enough.
California and Germany could have mostly or completely decarbonized their electricity if they have invested in nuclear power instead of solar and wind renewables. “”No shit! You’re pulling my leg.”””
You can add renewable much faster than you can add nuclear. And it doesn’t make any sense to fight the political head winds that nuclear has in those two location. If the nuclear industry wants a place in the future they have to focus on developing cheap inherently safe reactors that produce minimal waste. There is a place for them as high capacity base load units but they have to get their capital cost down.
That is just plain wrong. France deployed the reactors to power their whole country in 10-15 years.
If only they used all this money to develop highly efficient, durable so all in all economically sound solar PV technology with solutions for recycling and cheap batteries, then all of this would have been worth it. This is just dumping money into subpar electricity production which will turn into unusable trash in a few decades.
Nuclear is not crazy expensive in Korea. Heck Korea can successfully export their reactor technology so clearly the US is doing something wrong.
Consumers only pay a premium for solar if they install it themselves without any tax credits. Apart from that market forces aren’t that involved. Quotas, subsidies, etc for renewable energy distort the market.
IN fairness to nuclear power Methane is crazy cheap in the US. Nuclear power also has an insane level of regulation. The good news is that the #1 thing every bureaucracy wants it to survive. If the NRC doesn’t move forward with Gen IV plants then there will be nothing to regulate and it will die. Therefore Gen IV plants will move forward.
Nobody cares how fast you can add renewables if they are not cost competitive and they require coal for backup (which Germany does). Here in CA all of our renewable power installations went to replacing SONGS. You can look at the charts and see that all the solar and wind power generated simply matched what two 1GWe reactors were producing when they were decommissioned. So while you talk about how it takes so long to make reactors you overlook that they produce a crazy level of carbon free power with excellent reliability. It is perfectly possible to create one reactor per year. In 15 years you would have 10 reactors (even at the snail’s pace of building we favor in the US), bulk pricing, and transition for CA away from C02. And doing things not because it is economical but because politics dictates the solution is a great argument against government. You can’t just say “sure our solution is an economic loser but it has political consensus!
And it doesn’t make any sense to fight the political head winds that nuclear has in those two location. ” In other words, engage in a objectively stupid public policy on the flimsiest of excuses? “If the nuclear industry wants a place in the future they have to focus on developing cheap inherently safe reactors that produce minimal waste” They already have. Most of the cost of building reactors is because of government regulation.
Calm down, Matteo. Calm down.
That’s the Greentard Way: Screw Objective Reality when it clashes with their Virtue Signalling.
For a while, California was doing something called ‘electron laundering’. Basically generating and sending over long distance power to BC, where it would get mixed with BC’s hydro power, then sent back at a markup as 100% ‘renewable energy’. Of course, in reality, a LOT OF that power ‘sent up’ was wasted in the long transmission. Same on the way back. Even more technically, most of that power was probably not really sent but just added to the grid, used by others locally while power plants further up near the BC/Washington State border put the juice in that went to BC for the laundering. But either way, it was all Virtue Signaling Greentarded BS. That’s all the Greentard ‘Movement’ is about. Objective Reality be dâmned. Thus, nuclear is BAD because it presents a solution and the Virtue Signalers don’t solutions…they want to have excuses for ‘feeling better’, instead.
You have that wrong. Lets see if I can get by Vukkle’s deficiencies. thoughtscapism(dot)com(slash)2017/11/27/nuclear-energy-is-the-fastest-and-lowest-cost-clean-energy-solution/
And it doesn’t make any sense to fight the political head winds that nuclear has in those two location. “”In other words”””” engage in a objectively stupid public policy on the flimsiest of excuses?””””If the nuclear industry wants a place in the future they have to focus on developing cheap inherently safe reactors that produce minimal waste””””They already have. Most of the cost of building reactors is because of government regulation.”””
Calm down Matteo. Calm down.
That’s the Greentard Way: Screw Objective Reality when it clashes with their Virtue Signalling.
For a while California was doing something called ‘electron laundering’. Basically generating and sending over long distance power to BC where it would get mixed with BC’s hydro power then sent back at a markup as 100{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} ‘renewable energy’. Of course in reality a LOT OF that power ‘sent up’ was wasted in the long transmission. Same on the way back. Even more technically most of that power was probably not really sent but just added to the grid used by others locally while power plants further up near the BC/Washington State border put the juice in that went to BC for the laundering. But either way it was all Virtue Signaling Greentarded BS. That’s all the Greentard ‘Movement’ is about. Objective Reality be dâmned. Thus nuclear is BAD because it presents a solution and the Virtue Signalers don’t solutions…they want to have excuses for ‘feeling better’ instead.”
You have that wrong. Lets see if I can get by Vukkle’s deficiencies.thoughtscapism(dot)com(slash)2017/11/27/nuclear-energy-is-the-fastest-and-lowest-cost-clean-energy-solution/
How about, “Fvkk you, you ly!ng troll!”, for $500 Alex?
Technically you might be right but there is nothing fast about building a nuclear power plants here in the US.
Someone’s tax credit for solar is a tax levied upon someone else.
Molten salt reactors can support a SCCO2 turbine cycle, thus have the flexibility to load-follow.
But you can. And you can add them in small cheap increments as needed. When you add a 1G power plant some other power plants have to be taken offline. There goes that investment.
When it becomes obvious we cannot afford Leftism and it’s stupidities…” What do you mean by ‘when’? It has been ‘obvious’ for decades…yet it survives and even has been moving the size of government to ever bigger heights.
The NRC was created to do what its predecessor the AEC did not: Constrain the growth of nuclear power. The AEC (Atomic Energy Commission) was actually PRO nuclear power and actively promoted its development.
In fact, the Germans even had to condemn an entire village just to get at all the coal underneath it.
I use bitly. Then cut out the h-t-t-p(s) part, as so: bit.ly/2x9HMng
How about Fvkk you”” you ly!ng troll!”””” for $500 Alex?”””
Technically you might be right but there is nothing fast about building a nuclear power plants here in the US.
Someone’s tax credit for solar is a tax levied upon someone else.
Molten salt reactors can support a SCCO2 turbine cycle thus have the flexibility to load-follow.
But you can. And you can add them in small cheap increments as needed. When you add a 1G power plant some other power plants have to be taken offline. There goes that investment.
When it becomes obvious we cannot afford Leftism and it’s stupidities…”” What do you mean by ‘when’? It has been ‘obvious’ for decades…yet it survives and even has been moving the size of government to ever bigger heights.”””
The NRC was created to do what its predecessor the AEC did not: Constrain the growth of nuclear power.The AEC (Atomic Energy Commission) was actually PRO nuclear power and actively promoted its development.
In fact the Germans even had to condemn an entire village just to get at all the coal underneath it.
I use bitly. Then cut out the h-t-t-p(s) part as so:bit.ly/2x9HMng
Someone’s tax credit for solar is a tax levied upon someone else.” Completely agree. The person who gets the credit sees a distorted market price.
They were condemning fellow Germans, so….and Ossies at that.
I read some interview of the guy who ran that program. This was like six years ago or something. Anyway, he commented that if France were to try doing the same today: No way. He said that costs would be too high and the power of NIMBYism in France is also too high, compared to the early 80s anyway.
What is it with Germans and condemning people? (ok a bit below the belt but you have to admit you laughed)
Just like someone’s federal tax deduction for local/state taxes is a tax levied on someone else.
This is what we have been reduced to…
Calm down, Matteo.
Solar panels currently have a useful lifetime of many decades… The possibility of this 100% scheme all depends on the development of cheap power storage mechanisms. I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job and all the suitable valleys in the Sierras will need to be turned into covered pump hydro storage sites. They need to be covered because I doubt we’ll have enough water in the state to handle the evaporation if they are open.
This is the greatest thing since sliced bread! https://baconipsum.com/
And certain id!ots who could be mistaken for Moby’s because their lies and exaggerations are so grotesque and stupid, could have nothing to do with the Left’s continuing relative credibility, et tu troll? … Cupim spare ribs strip steak, chuck pork loin tail biltong drumstick pork belly pig leberkas. Pork belly drumstick pig, cupim short loin bacon capicola pork loin short ribs. Swine ham hock strip steak, spare ribs ball tip brisket meatloaf tri-tip ribeye burgdoggen pig hamburger venison. Prosciutto sirloin pancetta, pork loin jerky burgdoggen bacon filet mignon pastrami ham beef bresaola. Chicken tail doner ground round short loin prosciutto, cow andouille fatback pork ribeye kevin beef sirloin. Pork porchetta kevin prosciutto ribeye corned beef. … Burgdoggen brisket leberkas, beef ribs sausage pancetta capicola ground round. Frankfurter chicken tail filet mignon landjaeger ham hock tongue kielbasa biltong tenderloin. Ribeye jerky short loin, biltong bacon turkey bresaola fatback prosciutto doner pig cow pork chop chicken hamburger. Meatloaf jowl pastrami kevin venison alcatra frankfurter biltong doner beef ribs salami pork flank shank. Ribeye spare ribs andouille biltong bresaola ham porchetta shankle meatloaf kevin t-bone jerky tri-tip beef ribs. Shank tri-tip porchetta buffalo short loin. … Porchetta ribeye prosciutto picanha, pork chop strip steak swine pastrami landjaeger pork salami spare ribs tri-tip tenderloin drumstick. Jerky tail capicola cupim. Jowl pig ball tip, shankle pork loin bacon capicola frankfurter salami tail sirloin chicken. Kevin doner pancetta, shankle chicken ham burgdoggen tongue landjaeger ground round alcatra pork loin meatloaf.
Nope, never happened yet. ” When you add a 1G power plant some other power plants have to be taken offline. ” No, there are plants you can take offline, which will be more expensive than the base load plant.
Someone’s tax credit for solar is a tax levied upon someone else.””Completely agree. The person who gets the credit sees a distorted market price.”””
They were condemning fellow Germans so….and Ossies at that.
I read some interview of the guy who ran that program. This was like six years ago or something. Anyway he commented that if France were to try doing the same today: No way.He said that costs would be too high and the power of NIMBYism in France is also too high compared to the early 80s anyway.
What is it with Germans and condemning people?(ok a bit below the belt but you have to admit you laughed)
Just like someone’s federal tax deduction for local/state taxes is a tax levied on someone else.
This is what we have been reduced to…
Calm down Matteo.
Solar panels currently have a useful lifetime of many decades…The possibility of this 100{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} scheme all depends on the development of cheap power storage mechanisms. I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job and all the suitable valleys in the Sierras will need to be turned into covered pump hydro storage sites. They need to be covered because I doubt we’ll have enough water in the state to handle the evaporation if they are open.
This is the greatest thing since sliced bread!https://baconipsum.com/
And certain id!ots who could be mistaken for Moby’s because their lies and exaggerations are so grotesque and stupid could have nothing to do with the Left’s continuing relative credibility et tu troll?…Cupim spare ribs strip steak chuck pork loin tail biltong drumstick pork belly pig leberkas. Pork belly drumstick pig cupim short loin bacon capicola pork loin short ribs. Swine ham hock strip steak spare ribs ball tip brisket meatloaf tri-tip ribeye burgdoggen pig hamburger venison. Prosciutto sirloin pancetta pork loin jerky burgdoggen bacon filet mignon pastrami ham beef bresaola. Chicken tail doner ground round short loin prosciutto cow andouille fatback pork ribeye kevin beef sirloin. Pork porchetta kevin prosciutto ribeye corned beef….Burgdoggen brisket leberkas beef ribs sausage pancetta capicola ground round. Frankfurter chicken tail filet mignon landjaeger ham hock tongue kielbasa biltong tenderloin. Ribeye jerky short loin biltong bacon turkey bresaola fatback prosciutto doner pig cow pork chop chicken hamburger. Meatloaf jowl pastrami kevin venison alcatra frankfurter biltong doner beef ribs salami pork flank shank. Ribeye spare ribs andouille biltong bresaola ham porchetta shankle meatloaf kevin t-bone jerky tri-tip beef ribs. Shank tri-tip porchetta buffalo short loin….Porchetta ribeye prosciutto picanha pork chop strip steak swine pastrami landjaeger pork salami spare ribs tri-tip tenderloin drumstick. Jerky tail capicola cupim. Jowl pig ball tip shankle pork loin bacon capicola frankfurter salami tail sirloin chicken. Kevin doner pancetta shankle chicken ham burgdoggen tongue landjaeger ground round alcatra pork loin meatloaf.
Nope never happened yet. When you add a 1G power plant some other power plants have to be taken offline. “”No”” there are plants you can take offline”” which will be more expensive than the base load plant.”””
Solar power generation in Northern Europe is absurd. It makes sense a lot of sense on the Greek Island where the alternative is diesel powered generators.
I do not actuall
Phasing out nuclear does not make sense” It makes sense if you think CO2 driven global warming is less dangerous than nuclear power. Hmmmmmmmm.
Solar power generation in Northern Europe is absurd. It makes sense a lot of sense on the Greek Island where the alternative is diesel powered generators.
I do not actuall
Phasing out nuclear does not make sense””It makes sense if you think CO2 driven global warming is less dangerous than nuclear power.Hmmmmmmmm.”””
So I see. The famous Enron energy pricing game has been alive and well all along, but who is the new Ken Lay?
In fact, construction of multiple reactors in a chainlike, orderly decision tree reduces cost per individual reactor, effectively reducing the cost of each prototype by 50% to 90%. This law is known in the defense industry, notwithstanding procurement cost inflation, which comes from the tendency of government to ask for newer and newer technology, creating regulation and uncertainty in the test and design process.
I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job..” Do you mean: “I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job…economically”? See, they can do the job. Just that (last stats I’ve seen) it jacks up the KwH price involved to 40 cents/kw. Which of course, is uneconomical.
So I see. The famous Enron energy pricing game has been alive and well all along but who is the new Ken Lay?
In fact construction of multiple reactors in a chainlike orderly decision tree reduces cost per individual reactor effectively reducing the cost of each prototype by 50{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} to 90{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12}. This law is known in the defense industry notwithstanding procurement cost inflation which comes from the tendency of government to ask for newer and newer technology creating regulation and uncertainty in the test and design process.
I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job..””Do you mean: “”””I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job…economically””””?See”” they can do the job. Just that (last stats I’ve seen) it jacks up the KwH price involved to 40 cents/kw. Which of course”” is uneconomical.”””
If a tiny fraction of the money put into developing PV had been put into developing closed cycle CO2 Brayton heat engines, much more energy could have been generated, while lowering waste heat thermal pollution, and cutting the cost of turbomachinery.
If government must interfere with people’s economic decisions regarding energy production, it should dictate policy to engineers, and let them, rather than politicians decide what actions will be taken to implement that policy. So few politicians have any sort of technical background, it is impossible for them to make informed decisions on technical issues. It’s like having your congressman decide how to treat your heart disease, or cancer. It’s the blind leading the blind.
To support socialism you must be able to ignore reality. This skill”” is also put to other uses by the “”””progressive”””” community.”””
If government must interfere with people’s economic decisions regarding energy production it should dictate policy to engineers and let them rather than politicians decide what actions will be taken to implement that policy. So few politicians have any sort of technical background it is impossible for them to make informed decisions on technical issues. It’s like having your congressman decide how to treat your heart disease or cancer. It’s the blind leading the blind.
To support socialism you must be able to ignore reality. This “skill” is also put to other uses by the “progressive” community.
If a tiny fraction of the money put into developing PV had been put into developing closed cycle CO2 Brayton heat engines much more energy could have been generated while lowering waste heat thermal pollution and cutting the cost of turbomachinery.
What does this have to do with Enron? Nothing.
What does this have to do with Enron? Nothing.
Some of the numbers are wrong. Nuclear should include the cost of refueling, major refurbishments and disposing of the nuclear waste , dismantling of the plant and insurance against meltdown and the spread of radioactive material. And then there is the cost of fuel, on going monitoring and maintenance. And for renewable the capacity factor and the cost figures are for old installation, not for new and future installation. And the projected life span of the renewable plants are ridiculously low. There are no reason why the plants can’t last hundreds of years. The condition they are under are much milder than a nuclear power plant.
The transition is not the same as the final state. Wind and solar are cheaper than new nuke and getting cheaper every year. It is an invalid argument that renewable are more expensive because that argument is no longer true.
Government regulation that is meant to keep the reactor from melting down. As for inherently safe reactors no one is building them at least not yet. All current reactors have the same singular fault in that the lost of coolant will cause the reactor to meltdown. I know that nuclear power plants are built with a lot of redundant safety devices. But I also believe in Black Swan”” events”””” just ask the Japanese about them if you don’t want to take my word for them.”””
Some of the numbers are wrong. Nuclear should include the cost of refueling major refurbishments and disposing of the nuclear waste dismantling of the plant and insurance against meltdown and the spread of radioactive material. And then there is the cost of fuel on going monitoring and maintenance. And for renewable the capacity factor and the cost figures are for old installation not for new and future installation. And the projected life span of the renewable plants are ridiculously low. There are no reason why the plants can’t last hundreds of years. The condition they are under are much milder than a nuclear power plant.
The transition is not the same as the final state. Wind and solar are cheaper than new nuke and getting cheaper every year. It is an invalid argument that renewable are more expensive because that argument is no longer true.
Government regulation that is meant to keep the reactor from melting down. As for inherently safe reactors, no one is building them, at least not yet. All current reactors have the same singular fault in that the lost of coolant will cause the reactor to meltdown. I know that nuclear power plants are built with a lot of redundant safety devices. But I also believe in “Black Swan” events, just ask the Japanese about them if you don’t want to take my word for them.
There are complications to building nuclear in California. The main one is earthquakes. If you are going to build nuclear responsibly in California, then you need to build east of the San Andreas Fault. Trouble is, most reactors require a lot of water for cooling and there is not much water that far inland, at least in the south. And in the north they have less population and hydroelectric power and do not need nuclear. The only way left is floating reactors off the coast, preferably near neutrally buoyant and water tight…perhaps 150 feet underwater and tethered but with a lot of room to move if there was major techtonic activity. San Onofre was damaged. Operating it in a damaged state was dubious. They wanted to run it at reduced power, maybe that would have worked…but maybe it wouldn’t have. Diablo Canyon was upgraded to withstand earthquakes of 7.5 I think that is sufficient for the location. There is no good reason to shut that down. Maybe it should not have been built there, but with the upgrades, I see no issue with allowing it to continue operation. Is it expensive to operate? Yes, but that has nothing to do with the technology, just bloodsucking unions. Automate the thing. Then you probably need less than 50 people. Of course that would just make more people want to shut it down. And even if there was savings, it would not be passed down to consumers. The energy prices in California are about punishing people…total disconnect with actual production cost. Germany? Just stupid leadership. Nothing wrong with those reactors. California is actually well situated for energy storage. We could build lots of the train car potential kinetic storage fairly easy. We have hills and mountains that we could easily build the rails on. No need to wait for batteries that do not degrade and are made from cheap materials cheaply. The gravity trains are about 80% efficient which is better than water storage…and obviously does not require water
There are complications to building nuclear in California. The main one is earthquakes. If you are going to build nuclear responsibly in California then you need to build east of the San Andreas Fault. Trouble is most reactors require a lot of water for cooling and there is not much water that far inland at least in the south. And in the north they have less population and hydroelectric power and do not need nuclear. The only way left is floating reactors off the coast preferably near neutrally buoyant and water tight…perhaps 150 feet underwater and tethered but with a lot of room to move if there was major techtonic activity.San Onofre was damaged. Operating it in a damaged state was dubious. They wanted to run it at reduced power maybe that would have worked…but maybe it wouldn’t have. Diablo Canyon was upgraded to withstand earthquakes of 7.5 I think that is sufficient for the location. There is no good reason to shut that down. Maybe it should not have been built there but with the upgrades I see no issue with allowing it to continue operation. Is it expensive to operate? Yes but that has nothing to do with the technology just bloodsucking unions. Automate the thing. Then you probably need less than 50 people. Of course that would just make more people want to shut it down. And even if there was savings it would not be passed down to consumers.The energy prices in California are about punishing people…total disconnect with actual production cost.Germany? Just stupid leadership. Nothing wrong with those reactors. California is actually well situated for energy storage. We could build lots of the train car potential kinetic storage fairly easy. We have hills and mountains that we could easily build the rails on. No need to wait for batteries that do not degrade and are made from cheap materials cheaply.The gravity trains are about 80{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} efficient which i
All those costs (fuel, maintenance, upgrades, insurance, etc.) are included – it’s a business like any other – it involves amortization and accounting and all those good things. The only strange thing is that the utility pays for the fuel and it’s storage while on site but the Fed owns it and is paying for the casks and is responsible for the ultimate disposal (i.e. the Yucca Mtn. thing).
Automate the thing [Diablo]. Then you probably need less than 50 people.” I know you’re like genius millennial Mindbreaker, but that wouldn’t even cover the 5 crews of operations personnel required for 24/7.
All those costs (fuel maintenance upgrades insurance etc.) are included – it’s a business like any other – it involves amortization and accounting and all those good things. The only strange thing is that the utility pays for the fuel and it’s storage while on site but the Fed owns it and is paying for the casks and is responsible for the ultimate disposal (i.e. the Yucca Mtn. thing).
Automate the thing [Diablo]. Then you probably need less than 50 people.””I know you’re like genius millennial Mindbreaker”””” but that wouldn’t even cover the 5 crews of operations personnel required for 24/7.”””
All those costs (fuel, maintenance, upgrades, insurance, etc.) are included – it’s a business like any other – it involves amortization and accounting and all those good things. The only strange thing is that the utility pays for the fuel and it’s storage while on site but the Fed owns it and is paying for the casks and is responsible for the ultimate disposal (i.e. the Yucca Mtn. thing).
All those costs (fuel maintenance upgrades insurance etc.) are included – it’s a business like any other – it involves amortization and accounting and all those good things. The only strange thing is that the utility pays for the fuel and it’s storage while on site but the Fed owns it and is paying for the casks and is responsible for the ultimate disposal (i.e. the Yucca Mtn. thing).
Automate the thing [Diablo]. Then you probably need less than 50 people.” I know you’re like genius millennial Mindbreaker, but that wouldn’t even cover the 5 crews of operations personnel required for 24/7.
Automate the thing [Diablo]. Then you probably need less than 50 people.””I know you’re like genius millennial Mindbreaker”””” but that wouldn’t even cover the 5 crews of operations personnel required for 24/7.”””
There are complications to building nuclear in California. The main one is earthquakes. If you are going to build nuclear responsibly in California, then you need to build east of the San Andreas Fault. Trouble is, most reactors require a lot of water for cooling and there is not much water that far inland, at least in the south. And in the north they have less population and hydroelectric power and do not need nuclear. The only way left is floating reactors off the coast, preferably near neutrally buoyant and water tight…perhaps 150 feet underwater and tethered but with a lot of room to move if there was major techtonic activity. San Onofre was damaged. Operating it in a damaged state was dubious. They wanted to run it at reduced power, maybe that would have worked…but maybe it wouldn’t have. Diablo Canyon was upgraded to withstand earthquakes of 7.5 I think that is sufficient for the location. There is no good reason to shut that down. Maybe it should not have been built there, but with the upgrades, I see no issue with allowing it to continue operation. Is it expensive to operate? Yes, but that has nothing to do with the technology, just bloodsucking unions. Automate the thing. Then you probably need less than 50 people. Of course that would just make more people want to shut it down. And even if there was savings, it would not be passed down to consumers. The energy prices in California are about punishing people…total disconnect with actual production cost. Germany? Just stupid leadership. Nothing wrong with those reactors. California is actually well situated for energy storage. We could build lots of the train car potential kinetic storage fairly easy. We have hills and mountains that we could easily build the rails on. No need to wait for batteries that do not degrade and are made from cheap materials cheaply. The gravity trains are about 80% efficient which is better than water storage…and obviously does not require water
There are complications to building nuclear in California. The main one is earthquakes. If you are going to build nuclear responsibly in California then you need to build east of the San Andreas Fault. Trouble is most reactors require a lot of water for cooling and there is not much water that far inland at least in the south. And in the north they have less population and hydroelectric power and do not need nuclear. The only way left is floating reactors off the coast preferably near neutrally buoyant and water tight…perhaps 150 feet underwater and tethered but with a lot of room to move if there was major techtonic activity.San Onofre was damaged. Operating it in a damaged state was dubious. They wanted to run it at reduced power maybe that would have worked…but maybe it wouldn’t have. Diablo Canyon was upgraded to withstand earthquakes of 7.5 I think that is sufficient for the location. There is no good reason to shut that down. Maybe it should not have been built there but with the upgrades I see no issue with allowing it to continue operation. Is it expensive to operate? Yes but that has nothing to do with the technology just bloodsucking unions. Automate the thing. Then you probably need less than 50 people. Of course that would just make more people want to shut it down. And even if there was savings it would not be passed down to consumers.The energy prices in California are about punishing people…total disconnect with actual production cost.Germany? Just stupid leadership. Nothing wrong with those reactors. California is actually well situated for energy storage. We could build lots of the train car potential kinetic storage fairly easy. We have hills and mountains that we could easily build the rails on. No need to wait for batteries that do not degrade and are made from cheap materials cheaply.The gravity trains are about 80{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} efficient which i
All those costs (fuel, maintenance, upgrades, insurance, etc.) are included – it’s a business like any other – it involves amortization and accounting and all those good things. The only strange thing is that the utility pays for the fuel and it’s storage while on site but the Fed owns it and is paying for the casks and is responsible for the ultimate disposal (i.e. the Yucca Mtn. thing).
“Automate the thing [Diablo]. Then you probably need less than 50 people.”
I know you’re like genius millennial Mindbreaker, but that wouldn’t even cover the 5 crews of operations personnel required for 24/7.
There are complications to building nuclear in California. The main one is earthquakes. If you are going to build nuclear responsibly in California, then you need to build east of the San Andreas Fault. Trouble is, most reactors require a lot of water for cooling and there is not much water that far inland, at least in the south. And in the north they have less population and hydroelectric power and do not need nuclear. The only way left is floating reactors off the coast, preferably near neutrally buoyant and water tight…perhaps 150 feet underwater and tethered but with a lot of room to move if there was major techtonic activity.
San Onofre was damaged. Operating it in a damaged state was dubious. They wanted to run it at reduced power, maybe that would have worked…but maybe it wouldn’t have. Diablo Canyon was upgraded to withstand earthquakes of 7.5 I think that is sufficient for the location. There is no good reason to shut that down. Maybe it should not have been built there, but with the upgrades, I see no issue with allowing it to continue operation. Is it expensive to operate? Yes, but that has nothing to do with the technology, just bloodsucking unions. Automate the thing. Then you probably need less than 50 people. Of course that would just make more people want to shut it down. And even if there was savings, it would not be passed down to consumers.
The energy prices in California are about punishing people…total disconnect with actual production cost.
Germany? Just stupid leadership. Nothing wrong with those reactors.
California is actually well situated for energy storage. We could build lots of the train car potential kinetic storage fairly easy. We have hills and mountains that we could easily build the rails on. No need to wait for batteries that do not degrade and are made from cheap materials cheaply.
The gravity trains are about 80% efficient which is better than water storage…and obviously does not require water and making lakes, dams and such.
Government regulation that is meant to keep the reactor from melting down. As for inherently safe reactors, no one is building them, at least not yet. All current reactors have the same singular fault in that the lost of coolant will cause the reactor to meltdown. I know that nuclear power plants are built with a lot of redundant safety devices. But I also believe in “Black Swan” events, just ask the Japanese about them if you don’t want to take my word for them.
Government regulation that is meant to keep the reactor from melting down. As for inherently safe reactors no one is building them at least not yet. All current reactors have the same singular fault in that the lost of coolant will cause the reactor to meltdown. I know that nuclear power plants are built with a lot of redundant safety devices. But I also believe in Black Swan”” events”””” just ask the Japanese about them if you don’t want to take my word for them.”””
Some of the numbers are wrong. Nuclear should include the cost of refueling, major refurbishments and disposing of the nuclear waste , dismantling of the plant and insurance against meltdown and the spread of radioactive material. And then there is the cost of fuel, on going monitoring and maintenance. And for renewable the capacity factor and the cost figures are for old installation, not for new and future installation. And the projected life span of the renewable plants are ridiculously low. There are no reason why the plants can’t last hundreds of years. The condition they are under are much milder than a nuclear power plant.
Some of the numbers are wrong. Nuclear should include the cost of refueling major refurbishments and disposing of the nuclear waste dismantling of the plant and insurance against meltdown and the spread of radioactive material. And then there is the cost of fuel on going monitoring and maintenance. And for renewable the capacity factor and the cost figures are for old installation not for new and future installation. And the projected life span of the renewable plants are ridiculously low. There are no reason why the plants can’t last hundreds of years. The condition they are under are much milder than a nuclear power plant.
The transition is not the same as the final state. Wind and solar are cheaper than new nuke and getting cheaper every year. It is an invalid argument that renewable are more expensive because that argument is no longer true.
The transition is not the same as the final state. Wind and solar are cheaper than new nuke and getting cheaper every year. It is an invalid argument that renewable are more expensive because that argument is no longer true.
What does this have to do with Enron? Nothing.
What does this have to do with Enron? Nothing.
Government regulation that is meant to keep the reactor from melting down. As for inherently safe reactors, no one is building them, at least not yet. All current reactors have the same singular fault in that the lost of coolant will cause the reactor to meltdown. I know that nuclear power plants are built with a lot of redundant safety devices. But I also believe in “Black Swan” events, just ask the Japanese about them if you don’t want to take my word for them.
Some of the numbers are wrong. Nuclear should include the cost of refueling, major refurbishments and disposing of the nuclear waste , dismantling of the plant and insurance against meltdown and the spread of radioactive material. And then there is the cost of fuel, on going monitoring and maintenance. And for renewable the capacity factor and the cost figures are for old installation, not for new and future installation. And the projected life span of the renewable plants are ridiculously low. There are no reason why the plants can’t last hundreds of years. The condition they are under are much milder than a nuclear power plant.
The transition is not the same as the final state. Wind and solar are cheaper than new nuke and getting cheaper every year. It is an invalid argument that renewable are more expensive because that argument is no longer true.
What does this have to do with Enron? Nothing.
If a tiny fraction of the money put into developing PV had been put into developing closed cycle CO2 Brayton heat engines, much more energy could have been generated, while lowering waste heat thermal pollution, and cutting the cost of turbomachinery.
If a tiny fraction of the money put into developing PV had been put into developing closed cycle CO2 Brayton heat engines much more energy could have been generated while lowering waste heat thermal pollution and cutting the cost of turbomachinery.
To support socialism you must be able to ignore reality. This “skill” is also put to other uses by the “progressive” community.
To support socialism you must be able to ignore reality. This skill”” is also put to other uses by the “”””progressive”””” community.”””
If government must interfere with people’s economic decisions regarding energy production, it should dictate policy to engineers, and let them, rather than politicians decide what actions will be taken to implement that policy. So few politicians have any sort of technical background, it is impossible for them to make informed decisions on technical issues. It’s like having your congressman decide how to treat your heart disease, or cancer. It’s the blind leading the blind.
If government must interfere with people’s economic decisions regarding energy production it should dictate policy to engineers and let them rather than politicians decide what actions will be taken to implement that policy. So few politicians have any sort of technical background it is impossible for them to make informed decisions on technical issues. It’s like having your congressman decide how to treat your heart disease or cancer. It’s the blind leading the blind.
So I see. The famous Enron energy pricing game has been alive and well all along, but who is the new Ken Lay?
So I see. The famous Enron energy pricing game has been alive and well all along but who is the new Ken Lay?
In fact, construction of multiple reactors in a chainlike, orderly decision tree reduces cost per individual reactor, effectively reducing the cost of each prototype by 50% to 90%. This law is known in the defense industry, notwithstanding procurement cost inflation, which comes from the tendency of government to ask for newer and newer technology, creating regulation and uncertainty in the test and design process.
In fact construction of multiple reactors in a chainlike orderly decision tree reduces cost per individual reactor effectively reducing the cost of each prototype by 50{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} to 90{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12}. This law is known in the defense industry notwithstanding procurement cost inflation which comes from the tendency of government to ask for newer and newer technology creating regulation and uncertainty in the test and design process.
I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job..” Do you mean: “I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job…economically”? See, they can do the job. Just that (last stats I’ve seen) it jacks up the KwH price involved to 40 cents/kw. Which of course, is uneconomical.
I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job..””Do you mean: “”””I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job…economically””””?See”” they can do the job. Just that (last stats I’ve seen) it jacks up the KwH price involved to 40 cents/kw. Which of course”” is uneconomical.”””
Solar power generation in Northern Europe is absurd. It makes sense a lot of sense on the Greek Island where the alternative is diesel powered generators.
Solar power generation in Northern Europe is absurd. It makes sense a lot of sense on the Greek Island where the alternative is diesel powered generators.
I do not actuall
I do not actuall
Phasing out nuclear does not make sense” It makes sense if you think CO2 driven global warming is less dangerous than nuclear power. Hmmmmmmmm.
Phasing out nuclear does not make sense””It makes sense if you think CO2 driven global warming is less dangerous than nuclear power.Hmmmmmmmm.”””
Someone’s tax credit for solar is a tax levied upon someone else.” Completely agree. The person who gets the credit sees a distorted market price.
Someone’s tax credit for solar is a tax levied upon someone else.””Completely agree. The person who gets the credit sees a distorted market price.”””
They were condemning fellow Germans, so….and Ossies at that.
They were condemning fellow Germans so….and Ossies at that.
I read some interview of the guy who ran that program. This was like six years ago or something. Anyway, he commented that if France were to try doing the same today: No way. He said that costs would be too high and the power of NIMBYism in France is also too high, compared to the early 80s anyway.
I read some interview of the guy who ran that program. This was like six years ago or something. Anyway he commented that if France were to try doing the same today: No way.He said that costs would be too high and the power of NIMBYism in France is also too high compared to the early 80s anyway.
What is it with Germans and condemning people? (ok a bit below the belt but you have to admit you laughed)
What is it with Germans and condemning people?(ok a bit below the belt but you have to admit you laughed)
Just like someone’s federal tax deduction for local/state taxes is a tax levied on someone else.
Just like someone’s federal tax deduction for local/state taxes is a tax levied on someone else.
This is what we have been reduced to…
This is what we have been reduced to…
Calm down, Matteo.
Calm down Matteo.
Solar panels currently have a useful lifetime of many decades… The possibility of this 100% scheme all depends on the development of cheap power storage mechanisms. I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job and all the suitable valleys in the Sierras will need to be turned into covered pump hydro storage sites. They need to be covered because I doubt we’ll have enough water in the state to handle the evaporation if they are open.
Solar panels currently have a useful lifetime of many decades…The possibility of this 100{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} scheme all depends on the development of cheap power storage mechanisms. I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job and all the suitable valleys in the Sierras will need to be turned into covered pump hydro storage sites. They need to be covered because I doubt we’ll have enough water in the state to handle the evaporation if they are open.
This is the greatest thing since sliced bread! https://baconipsum.com/
This is the greatest thing since sliced bread!https://baconipsum.com/
And certain id!ots who could be mistaken for Moby’s because their lies and exaggerations are so grotesque and stupid, could have nothing to do with the Left’s continuing relative credibility, et tu troll? … Cupim spare ribs strip steak, chuck pork loin tail biltong drumstick pork belly pig leberkas. Pork belly drumstick pig, cupim short loin bacon capicola pork loin short ribs. Swine ham hock strip steak, spare ribs ball tip brisket meatloaf tri-tip ribeye burgdoggen pig hamburger venison. Prosciutto sirloin pancetta, pork loin jerky burgdoggen bacon filet mignon pastrami ham beef bresaola. Chicken tail doner ground round short loin prosciutto, cow andouille fatback pork ribeye kevin beef sirloin. Pork porchetta kevin prosciutto ribeye corned beef. … Burgdoggen brisket leberkas, beef ribs sausage pancetta capicola ground round. Frankfurter chicken tail filet mignon landjaeger ham hock tongue kielbasa biltong tenderloin. Ribeye jerky short loin, biltong bacon turkey bresaola fatback prosciutto doner pig cow pork chop chicken hamburger. Meatloaf jowl pastrami kevin venison alcatra frankfurter biltong doner beef ribs salami pork flank shank. Ribeye spare ribs andouille biltong bresaola ham porchetta shankle meatloaf kevin t-bone jerky tri-tip beef ribs. Shank tri-tip porchetta buffalo short loin. … Porchetta ribeye prosciutto picanha, pork chop strip steak swine pastrami landjaeger pork salami spare ribs tri-tip tenderloin drumstick. Jerky tail capicola cupim. Jowl pig ball tip, shankle pork loin bacon capicola frankfurter salami tail sirloin chicken. Kevin doner pancetta, shankle chicken ham burgdoggen tongue landjaeger ground round alcatra pork loin meatloaf.
And certain id!ots who could be mistaken for Moby’s because their lies and exaggerations are so grotesque and stupid could have nothing to do with the Left’s continuing relative credibility et tu troll?…Cupim spare ribs strip steak chuck pork loin tail biltong drumstick pork belly pig leberkas. Pork belly drumstick pig cupim short loin bacon capicola pork loin short ribs. Swine ham hock strip steak spare ribs ball tip brisket meatloaf tri-tip ribeye burgdoggen pig hamburger venison. Prosciutto sirloin pancetta pork loin jerky burgdoggen bacon filet mignon pastrami ham beef bresaola. Chicken tail doner ground round short loin prosciutto cow andouille fatback pork ribeye kevin beef sirloin. Pork porchetta kevin prosciutto ribeye corned beef….Burgdoggen brisket leberkas beef ribs sausage pancetta capicola ground round. Frankfurter chicken tail filet mignon landjaeger ham hock tongue kielbasa biltong tenderloin. Ribeye jerky short loin biltong bacon turkey bresaola fatback prosciutto doner pig cow pork chop chicken hamburger. Meatloaf jowl pastrami kevin venison alcatra frankfurter biltong doner beef ribs salami pork flank shank. Ribeye spare ribs andouille biltong bresaola ham porchetta shankle meatloaf kevin t-bone jerky tri-tip beef ribs. Shank tri-tip porchetta buffalo short loin….Porchetta ribeye prosciutto picanha pork chop strip steak swine pastrami landjaeger pork salami spare ribs tri-tip tenderloin drumstick. Jerky tail capicola cupim. Jowl pig ball tip shankle pork loin bacon capicola frankfurter salami tail sirloin chicken. Kevin doner pancetta shankle chicken ham burgdoggen tongue landjaeger ground round alcatra pork loin meatloaf.
Nope, never happened yet. ” When you add a 1G power plant some other power plants have to be taken offline. ” No, there are plants you can take offline, which will be more expensive than the base load plant.
Nope never happened yet. When you add a 1G power plant some other power plants have to be taken offline. “”No”” there are plants you can take offline”” which will be more expensive than the base load plant.”””
How about, “Fvkk you, you ly!ng troll!”, for $500 Alex?
How about Fvkk you”” you ly!ng troll!”””” for $500 Alex?”””
Technically you might be right but there is nothing fast about building a nuclear power plants here in the US.
Technically you might be right but there is nothing fast about building a nuclear power plants here in the US.
Someone’s tax credit for solar is a tax levied upon someone else.
Someone’s tax credit for solar is a tax levied upon someone else.
Molten salt reactors can support a SCCO2 turbine cycle, thus have the flexibility to load-follow.
Molten salt reactors can support a SCCO2 turbine cycle thus have the flexibility to load-follow.
But you can. And you can add them in small cheap increments as needed. When you add a 1G power plant some other power plants have to be taken offline. There goes that investment.
But you can. And you can add them in small cheap increments as needed. When you add a 1G power plant some other power plants have to be taken offline. There goes that investment.
When it becomes obvious we cannot afford Leftism and it’s stupidities…” What do you mean by ‘when’? It has been ‘obvious’ for decades…yet it survives and even has been moving the size of government to ever bigger heights.
When it becomes obvious we cannot afford Leftism and it’s stupidities…”” What do you mean by ‘when’? It has been ‘obvious’ for decades…yet it survives and even has been moving the size of government to ever bigger heights.”””
The NRC was created to do what its predecessor the AEC did not: Constrain the growth of nuclear power. The AEC (Atomic Energy Commission) was actually PRO nuclear power and actively promoted its development.
The NRC was created to do what its predecessor the AEC did not: Constrain the growth of nuclear power.The AEC (Atomic Energy Commission) was actually PRO nuclear power and actively promoted its development.
In fact, the Germans even had to condemn an entire village just to get at all the coal underneath it.
In fact the Germans even had to condemn an entire village just to get at all the coal underneath it.
I use bitly. Then cut out the h-t-t-p(s) part, as so: bit.ly/2x9HMng
I use bitly. Then cut out the h-t-t-p(s) part as so:bit.ly/2x9HMng
And it doesn’t make any sense to fight the political head winds that nuclear has in those two location. ” In other words, engage in a objectively stupid public policy on the flimsiest of excuses? “If the nuclear industry wants a place in the future they have to focus on developing cheap inherently safe reactors that produce minimal waste” They already have. Most of the cost of building reactors is because of government regulation.
And it doesn’t make any sense to fight the political head winds that nuclear has in those two location. “”In other words”””” engage in a objectively stupid public policy on the flimsiest of excuses?””””If the nuclear industry wants a place in the future they have to focus on developing cheap inherently safe reactors that produce minimal waste””””They already have. Most of the cost of building reactors is because of government regulation.”””
Calm down, Matteo. Calm down.
Calm down Matteo. Calm down.
That’s the Greentard Way: Screw Objective Reality when it clashes with their Virtue Signalling.
That’s the Greentard Way: Screw Objective Reality when it clashes with their Virtue Signalling.
For a while, California was doing something called ‘electron laundering’. Basically generating and sending over long distance power to BC, where it would get mixed with BC’s hydro power, then sent back at a markup as 100% ‘renewable energy’. Of course, in reality, a LOT OF that power ‘sent up’ was wasted in the long transmission. Same on the way back. Even more technically, most of that power was probably not really sent but just added to the grid, used by others locally while power plants further up near the BC/Washington State border put the juice in that went to BC for the laundering. But either way, it was all Virtue Signaling Greentarded BS. That’s all the Greentard ‘Movement’ is about. Objective Reality be dâmned. Thus, nuclear is BAD because it presents a solution and the Virtue Signalers don’t solutions…they want to have excuses for ‘feeling better’, instead.
For a while California was doing something called ‘electron laundering’. Basically generating and sending over long distance power to BC where it would get mixed with BC’s hydro power then sent back at a markup as 100{22800fc54956079738b58e74e4dcd846757aa319aad70fcf90c97a58f3119a12} ‘renewable energy’. Of course in reality a LOT OF that power ‘sent up’ was wasted in the long transmission. Same on the way back. Even more technically most of that power was probably not really sent but just added to the grid used by others locally while power plants further up near the BC/Washington State border put the juice in that went to BC for the laundering. But either way it was all Virtue Signaling Greentarded BS. That’s all the Greentard ‘Movement’ is about. Objective Reality be dâmned. Thus nuclear is BAD because it presents a solution and the Virtue Signalers don’t solutions…they want to have excuses for ‘feeling better’ instead.”
You have that wrong. Lets see if I can get by Vukkle’s deficiencies. thoughtscapism(dot)com(slash)2017/11/27/nuclear-energy-is-the-fastest-and-lowest-cost-clean-energy-solution/
You have that wrong. Lets see if I can get by Vukkle’s deficiencies.thoughtscapism(dot)com(slash)2017/11/27/nuclear-energy-is-the-fastest-and-lowest-cost-clean-energy-solution/
If a tiny fraction of the money put into developing PV had been put into developing closed cycle CO2 Brayton heat engines, much more energy could have been generated, while lowering waste heat thermal pollution, and cutting the cost of turbomachinery.
To support socialism you must be able to ignore reality. This “skill” is also put to other uses by the “progressive” community.
If government must interfere with people’s economic decisions regarding energy production, it should dictate policy to engineers, and let them, rather than politicians decide what actions will be taken to implement that policy. So few politicians have any sort of technical background, it is impossible for them to make informed decisions on technical issues. It’s like having your congressman decide how to treat your heart disease, or cancer. It’s the blind leading the blind.
That is just plain wrong. France deployed the reactors to power their whole country in 10-15 years.
That is just plain wrong. France deployed the reactors to power their whole country in 10-15 years.
If only they used all this money to develop highly efficient, durable so all in all economically sound solar PV technology with solutions for recycling and cheap batteries, then all of this would have been worth it. This is just dumping money into subpar electricity production which will turn into unusable trash in a few decades.
If only they used all this money to develop highly efficient durable so all in all economically sound solar PV technology with solutions for recycling and cheap batteries then all of this would have been worth it.This is just dumping money into subpar electricity production which will turn into unusable trash in a few decades.
Nuclear is not crazy expensive in Korea. Heck Korea can successfully export their reactor technology so clearly the US is doing something wrong.
Nuclear is not crazy expensive in Korea. Heck Korea can successfully export their reactor technology so clearly the US is doing something wrong.
Consumers only pay a premium for solar if they install it themselves without any tax credits. Apart from that market forces aren’t that involved. Quotas, subsidies, etc for renewable energy distort the market.
Consumers only pay a premium for solar if they install it themselves without any tax credits.Apart from that market forces aren’t that involved. Quotas subsidies etc for renewable energy distort the market.
IN fairness to nuclear power Methane is crazy cheap in the US. Nuclear power also has an insane level of regulation. The good news is that the #1 thing every bureaucracy wants it to survive. If the NRC doesn’t move forward with Gen IV plants then there will be nothing to regulate and it will die. Therefore Gen IV plants will move forward.
IN fairness to nuclear power Methane is crazy cheap in the US. Nuclear power also has an insane level of regulation.The good news is that the #1 thing every bureaucracy wants it to survive. If the NRC doesn’t move forward with Gen IV plants then there will be nothing to regulate and it will die. Therefore Gen IV plants will move forward.
I have been saying this for literally years. The money spent on solar and wind could have transitioned Germany to CO2 free power and enabled a simpler transition to electric cars. It is easy math to do.
I have been saying this for literally years.The money spent on solar and wind could have transitioned Germany to CO2 free power and enabled a simpler transition to electric cars. It is easy math to do.
No, you can’t say that, because nuclear power providers are not allowed to sanely pay for their capital.
No you can’t say that because nuclear power providers are not allowed to sanely pay for their capital.
One could argue that the nuclear industry is trying to sell a product that the market just does not want… and the market is willing to pay a premium (higher energy costs) for what they really want
One could argue that the nuclear industry is trying to sell a product that the market just does not want… and the market is willing to pay a premium (higher energy costs) for what they really want
That’s an artifact of crony capitalism and over-regulation. When it becomes obvious we cannot afford Leftism and it’s stupidities, treating nuclear power like the commodity it is will happen.
That’s an artifact of crony capitalism and over-regulation. When it becomes obvious we cannot afford Leftism and it’s stupidities treating nuclear power like the commodity it is will happen.
Doesn’t matter when you can’t add renewables cheaply enough to pay for them fast enough.
Doesn’t matter when you can’t add renewables cheaply enough to pay for them fast enough.
California and Germany could have mostly or completely decarbonized their electricity if they have invested in nuclear power instead of solar and wind renewables. ” No shit! You’re pulling my leg.
California and Germany could have mostly or completely decarbonized their electricity if they have invested in nuclear power instead of solar and wind renewables. “”No shit! You’re pulling my leg.”””
You can add renewable much faster than you can add nuclear. And it doesn’t make any sense to fight the political head winds that nuclear has in those two location. If the nuclear industry wants a place in the future they have to focus on developing cheap inherently safe reactors that produce minimal waste. There is a place for them as high capacity base load units but they have to get their capital cost down.
You can add renewable much faster than you can add nuclear. And it doesn’t make any sense to fight the political head winds that nuclear has in those two location. If the nuclear industry wants a place in the future they have to focus on developing cheap inherently safe reactors that produce minimal waste. There is a place for them as high capacity base load units but they have to get their capital cost down.
So I see. The famous Enron energy pricing game has been alive and well all along, but who is the new Ken Lay?
In fact, construction of multiple reactors in a chainlike, orderly decision tree reduces cost per individual reactor, effectively reducing the cost of each prototype by 50% to 90%. This law is known in the defense industry, notwithstanding procurement cost inflation, which comes from the tendency of government to ask for newer and newer technology, creating regulation and uncertainty in the test and design process.
“I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job..”
Do you mean: “I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job…economically”?
See, they can do the job. Just that (last stats I’ve seen) it jacks up the KwH price involved to 40 cents/kw. Which of course, is uneconomical.
Solar power generation in Northern Europe is absurd. It makes sense a lot of sense on the Greek Island where the alternative is diesel powered generators.
I do not actuall
“Phasing out nuclear does not make sense”
It makes sense if you think CO2 driven global warming is less dangerous than nuclear power.
Hmmmmmmmm.
“Someone’s tax credit for solar is a tax levied upon someone else.”
Completely agree. The person who gets the credit sees a distorted market price.
I think Brian has a point on this Phasing out nuclear does not make sense
I think Brian has a point on this Phasing out nuclear does not make sense
They were condemning fellow Germans, so….and Ossies at that.
I read some interview of the guy who ran that program. This was like six years ago or something.
Anyway, he commented that if France were to try doing the same today: No way.
He said that costs would be too high and the power of NIMBYism in France is also too high, compared to the early 80s anyway.
What is it with Germans and condemning people?
(ok a bit below the belt but you have to admit you laughed)
Just like someone’s federal tax deduction for local/state taxes is a tax levied on someone else.
This is what we have been reduced to…
Calm down, Matteo.
Solar panels currently have a useful lifetime of many decades…
The possibility of this 100% scheme all depends on the development of cheap power storage mechanisms. I’m thinking batteries won’t ever be up to the job and all the suitable valleys in the Sierras will need to be turned into covered pump hydro storage sites. They need to be covered because I doubt we’ll have enough water in the state to handle the evaporation if they are open.
This is the greatest thing since sliced bread!
https://baconipsum.com/
And certain id!ots who could be mistaken for Moby’s because their lies and exaggerations are so grotesque and stupid, could have nothing to do with the Left’s continuing relative credibility, et tu troll?
…
Cupim spare ribs strip steak, chuck pork loin tail biltong drumstick pork belly pig leberkas. Pork belly drumstick pig, cupim short loin bacon capicola pork loin short ribs. Swine ham hock strip steak, spare ribs ball tip brisket meatloaf tri-tip ribeye burgdoggen pig hamburger venison. Prosciutto sirloin pancetta, pork loin jerky burgdoggen bacon filet mignon pastrami ham beef bresaola. Chicken tail doner ground round short loin prosciutto, cow andouille fatback pork ribeye kevin beef sirloin. Pork porchetta kevin prosciutto ribeye corned beef.
…
Burgdoggen brisket leberkas, beef ribs sausage pancetta capicola ground round. Frankfurter chicken tail filet mignon landjaeger ham hock tongue kielbasa biltong tenderloin. Ribeye jerky short loin, biltong bacon turkey bresaola fatback prosciutto doner pig cow pork chop chicken hamburger. Meatloaf jowl pastrami kevin venison alcatra frankfurter biltong doner beef ribs salami pork flank shank. Ribeye spare ribs andouille biltong bresaola ham porchetta shankle meatloaf kevin t-bone jerky tri-tip beef ribs. Shank tri-tip porchetta buffalo short loin.
…
Porchetta ribeye prosciutto picanha, pork chop strip steak swine pastrami landjaeger pork salami spare ribs tri-tip tenderloin drumstick. Jerky tail capicola cupim. Jowl pig ball tip, shankle pork loin bacon capicola frankfurter salami tail sirloin chicken. Kevin doner pancetta, shankle chicken ham burgdoggen tongue landjaeger ground round alcatra pork loin meatloaf.
Nope, never happened yet.
” When you add a 1G power plant some other power plants have to be taken offline. ”
No, there are plants you can take offline, which will be more expensive than the base load plant.
How about, “Fvkk you, you ly!ng troll!”, for $500 Alex?
Technically you might be right but there is nothing fast about building a nuclear power plants here in the US.
Someone’s tax credit for solar is a tax levied upon someone else.
Molten salt reactors can support a SCCO2 turbine cycle, thus have the flexibility to load-follow.
But you can. And you can add them in small cheap increments as needed. When you add a 1G power plant some other power plants have to be taken offline. There goes that investment.
” When it becomes obvious we cannot afford Leftism and it’s stupidities…”
What do you mean by ‘when’? It has been ‘obvious’ for decades…yet it survives and even has been moving the size of government to ever bigger heights.
The NRC was created to do what its predecessor the AEC did not: Constrain the growth of nuclear power.
The AEC (Atomic Energy Commission) was actually PRO nuclear power and actively promoted its development.
In fact, the Germans even had to condemn an entire village just to get at all the coal underneath it.
I use bitly. Then cut out the h-t-t-p(s) part, as so:
bit.ly/2x9HMng
“And it doesn’t make any sense to fight the political head winds that nuclear has in those two location. ”
In other words, engage in a objectively stupid public policy on the flimsiest of excuses?
“If the nuclear industry wants a place in the future they have to focus on developing cheap inherently safe reactors that produce minimal waste”
They already have. Most of the cost of building reactors is because of government regulation.
Calm down, Matteo. Calm down.
That’s the Greentard Way: Screw Objective Reality when it clashes with their Virtue Signalling.
For a while, California was doing something called ‘electron laundering’. Basically generating and sending over long distance power to BC, where it would get mixed with BC’s hydro power, then sent back at a markup as 100% ‘renewable energy’.
Of course, in reality, a LOT OF that power ‘sent up’ was wasted in the long transmission. Same on the way back. Even more technically, most of that power was probably not really sent but just added to the grid, used by others locally while power plants further up near the BC/Washington State border put the juice in that went to BC for the laundering.
But either way, it was all Virtue Signaling Greentarded BS.
That’s all the Greentard ‘Movement’ is about. Objective Reality be dâmned.
Thus, nuclear is BAD because it presents a solution and the Virtue Signalers don’t solutions…they want to have excuses for ‘feeling better’, instead.
You have that wrong. Lets see if I can get by Vukkle’s deficiencies.
thoughtscapism(dot)com(slash)2017/11/27/nuclear-energy-is-the-fastest-and-lowest-cost-clean-energy-solution/
That is just plain wrong. France deployed the reactors to power their whole country in 10-15 years.
If only they used all this money to develop highly efficient, durable so all in all economically sound solar PV technology with solutions for recycling and cheap batteries, then all of this would have been worth it.
This is just dumping money into subpar electricity production which will turn into unusable trash in a few decades.
Nuclear is not crazy expensive in Korea. Heck Korea can successfully export their reactor technology so clearly the US is doing something wrong.
Consumers only pay a premium for solar if they install it themselves without any tax credits.
Apart from that market forces aren’t that involved. Quotas, subsidies, etc for renewable energy distort the market.
IN fairness to nuclear power Methane is crazy cheap in the US. Nuclear power also has an insane level of regulation.
The good news is that the #1 thing every bureaucracy wants it to survive. If the NRC doesn’t move forward with Gen IV plants then there will be nothing to regulate and it will die. Therefore Gen IV plants will move forward.
Nobody cares how fast you can add renewables if they are not cost competitive and they require coal for backup (which Germany does).
Here in CA all of our renewable power installations went to replacing SONGS. You can look at the charts and see that all the solar and wind power generated simply matched what two 1GWe reactors were producing when they were decommissioned.
So while you talk about how it takes so long to make reactors you overlook that they produce a crazy level of carbon free power with excellent reliability. It is perfectly possible to create one reactor per year. In 15 years you would have 10 reactors (even at the snail’s pace of building we favor in the US), bulk pricing, and transition for CA away from C02.
And doing things not because it is economical but because politics dictates the solution is a great argument against government. You can’t just say “sure our solution is an economic loser but it has political consensus!”
I have been saying this for literally years.
The money spent on solar and wind could have transitioned Germany to CO2 free power and enabled a simpler transition to electric cars. It is easy math to do.
No, you can’t say that, because nuclear power providers are not allowed to sanely pay for their capital.
One could argue that the nuclear industry is trying to sell a product that the market just does not want… and the market is willing to pay a premium (higher energy costs) for what they really want
That’s an artifact of crony capitalism and over-regulation. When it becomes obvious we cannot afford Leftism and it’s stupidities, treating nuclear power like the commodity it is will happen.
Doesn’t matter when you can’t add renewables cheaply enough to pay for them fast enough.
” California and Germany could have mostly or completely decarbonized their electricity if they have invested in nuclear power instead of solar and wind renewables. ”
No shit! You’re pulling my leg.
You can add renewable much faster than you can add nuclear. And it doesn’t make any sense to fight the political head winds that nuclear has in those two location.
If the nuclear industry wants a place in the future they have to focus on developing cheap inherently safe reactors that produce minimal waste. There is a place for them as high capacity base load units but they have to get their capital cost down.
I think Brian has a point on this
Phasing out nuclear does not make sense