131–140 of 143 posts
Their Q1 earning report revealed they lost money on the grid service.
Which one is cheaper to build and operate: Pumped hydro or batteries?
Pumped Hydro have huge capital work costs and sit behind transmission system barriers often, but they can go on and on and on. They have a startup delay component. They have lower overall efficiency because of pump losses (don't over cost this, often the power used is marginal, or was going to waste anyway)
So whilst its a valid Question as written, it is a bit apples and bicycles comparison: they don't actually "equal" each other in how they respond, and for how long, and what associated outcomes are alongside.
I believe the Turnbull Snowy pumped Hydro is $2b+ of cost to dig new tunnels and is 5+ years off. the same investment at current prices ($150m for the neoen stack) means TEN of them could be deployed at the rate Tesla can supply batteries, inside the five year window. Arguably better use of the money but the $2b gives a huge amount more sustained power.
Zero emmissions If nuclear has to include the costs of dismantling the plants, batteries have to include the cost of building them. And wind generators are massive aluminum structures, which are extremely costly to shape. Some day, maybe. Let's be fair in the meantime.
Yes, the PV/Wind sources are lower intensity of power, and yes they have energy input costs. But the delivered KWH cost is significantly lower.
This feels like an O/R planning exercise. What we want is to understand all the simultaneous input components to a complex set of cost and benefit outcomes, and have a grid of the models we could do.
(I'm pro nuke btw, but trying to be realistic)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Only waste that no longer requires cooling can be moved underground. Thats the point though. It should be moved into long term storage after that and not stay in the pool that needs to be cooled. Transporting is not the issue you make it out to be. Transport on trains has been a regular spectacle for decades in Europe, especially between La Hague and German nuclear power plants and the storage site in Gorleben. They…
> Thats the point though. It should be moved into long term storage after that and not stay in the pool that needs to be cooled. Whose point? I'm genuinely curious if there's credible evidence that there's waste being needlessly cooled. This also smells like a false dichotomy to me, as there are other options besides the pool and moving to long-term storage. > Transporting is not the issue you make it out to be. Spec…
>Resume: http://www.maxkalashnikov.com/redume.pdf
leads to
>The requested URL /redume.pdf was not found on this server.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Thats the point though. It should be moved into long term storage after that and not stay in the pool that needs to be cooled. Whose point? I'm genuinely curious if there's credible evidence that there's waste being needlessly cooled. This also smells like a false dichotomy to me, as there are other options besides the pool and moving to long-term storage. > Transporting is not the issue you make it out to be. Spec…
btw >Resume: http://www.maxkalashnikov.com/redume.pdf leads to >The requested URL /redume.pdf was not found on this server.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Thats the point though. It should be moved into long term storage after that and not stay in the pool that needs to be cooled. Whose point? I'm genuinely curious if there's credible evidence that there's waste being needlessly cooled. This also smells like a false dichotomy to me, as there are other options besides the pool and moving to long-term storage. > Transporting is not the issue you make it out to be. Spec…
> Rare, ultra-expensive catastrophes are much more difficult to price in and are, arguably, what have really been killing nuclear, politically, if not economically. I would argue after decades of usage and development state of the art nuclear power plants are relatively safe without major additional geographic risks like running them in places like Fukushima. The exception might be them becoming military targets. > T…
Relative to what? I recall it's riskier to move than to leave in place, not anything about any specific technology.
> My point is that such transports are possible and are regularly executed in Europe, just not as normal cargo. There is nothing stops the US from doing the same.
Again, nothing to do with overall risk.
Incidentally, I think the differences between US and European rail infrastructures (including regulation thereof) is not to be dismissed so lightly.
> It is simply not prudent to allow the production of nuclear energy by private entities without a solid plan, how the long term costs associated with it are to be financed.
Here, I totally agree. It may well be that it's simply not prudent to allow private nuclear energy at all. As much as I'm generally not a fan of government running anything industrial,
Earlier quoted context omitted.
His point is that a Watt is a unit of power being equal to 1 joule per second. As an aside, this corresponds to an electric circuit with a potential difference of 1 volt and a current of 1 Ampere. Saying a human produces 100W/hr is wrong. What I assume he meant is this: A human can produce 100W for 1 hour, on average. This is reasonable, since humans produce about 1/8 Horsepower, on average; and 1 HP = 746W.
He meant a human can produce 100W. He specifically doesn't mean "for one hour"; he says the human works a full workday, producing 800 watt-hours of energy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While not cost effective in the slightest, jettisoning nuclear waste into outer space is one proposition. Naturally, launching rockets filled with nuclear waste comes with its own safety concerns.
What's the carbon footprint of a thousand rocket launches?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tesla is as much a battery company as Cray was a refrigeration company.
You mean, except for the fact that Tesla sells batteries, whereas Craig never sold refrigeration products?
So it is with Tesla, who will be remembered for their batteries.
It is so obnoxious when a website immediately asks to send you notifications.
- about:config
- Find dom.webnotifications.enabled
- Set to False