Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bill Gates' nuclear venture plans reactor to complement solar, wind power boom

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 133 posts

Re: Bill Gates' nuclear venture plans reactor to complement solar, wind power boom

#21

Post by wahern »

spenrose wrote: post #17
jedberg wrote: post #9

I watched the Bill Gates doc on Netflix. They actually had this ready to go in 2017. They were going to build it in China because US regulators wouldn’t allow it. But then we started a trade war with China and they nixed the contract. They were hoping to prove it out in China and then bring it back to the US.

China had ambitious plans for nuclear and didn't follow through: https://twitter.com/sampenrose/status/1162772916125126656

That assessment is a little out of date. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_reactors#China

They had several construction starts in 2015 (some are coming online now), and after a 3 year hiatus began several more in 2019. BTW, I'm not just trusting that Wikipedia table. I've confirmed construction and [near] completion of some of those listed (but haven't bothered with all, my doubts assuaged).

China's nuclear plans were delayed and reassessed. But their commitment to and follow through on their [apparently] revised plan is still quite ambitious. Predictions of the death of nuclear in China were rather premature, albeit understandable considering the lack of transparency, especially in the Western world given the language barrier.

Re: Bill Gates' nuclear venture plans reactor to complement solar, wind power boom

#22

Post by Hypx »

m0zg wrote: post #7
delecti wrote: post #6

Why sodium in particular? I've seen in the past that molten sodium is often proposed as a storage medium, but is there something about it that makes it suited for that use?

Because it doesn't decompose into an explosive mixture of hydrogen and oxygen under extreme temperatures, among other things.

Instead it just explodes when exposed to water or air...

Re: Bill Gates' nuclear venture plans reactor to complement solar, wind power boom

#23

Post by saagarjha »

byronr wrote: post #16
unchocked wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Intermittent sources are usually quoted as peak. That is multiplied by a typical capacity factor to determine average load. For offshore wind, 60% is a reasonable number I think.

The key word is "nameplate", a colorful term implying engraving and rivets: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nameplate_capacity

Nuclear power is usually run close to nameplate, continuously, as it this is generally more economical.

Re: Bill Gates' nuclear venture plans reactor to complement solar, wind power boom

#24

Post by [deleted] »

spenrose wrote: post #8

345MW for "$1B", which is presumably the delivered cost. Add another $1B for running, insurance, and decommissioning (or show me real numbers). Walney is a new nameplate 588MW offshore wind farm; it will average close to the same delivered energy and cost $3B.[1] If Terrapower can actually deliver at roughly those costs, they might make a real contribution to our energy future. [1] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotlan…

[deleted]

Re: Bill Gates' nuclear venture plans reactor to complement solar, wind power boom

#25

Post by saagarjha »

Hypx wrote: post #22
m0zg wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it doesn't decompose into an explosive mixture of hydrogen and oxygen under extreme temperatures, among other things.

Instead it just explodes when exposed to water or air...

Just water. Under air it will quickly oxide, but not that quickly.

Re: Bill Gates' nuclear venture plans reactor to complement solar, wind power boom

#26

Post by saagarjha »

throwaway5752 wrote: post #12
delecti wrote: post #6

Why sodium in particular? I've seen in the past that molten sodium is often proposed as a storage medium, but is there something about it that makes it suited for that use?

This has some discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor#Fused_salt... I think one advantage is that it's relative cheap and light compared to other atmospheric pressure coolant (and that it can be both fuel and coolant).

I think this is the link you want: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_metal_cooled_reactor#So...

Re: Bill Gates' nuclear venture plans reactor to complement solar, wind power boom

#27

Post by yyy888sss »

unchocked wrote: post #15
Rebelgecko wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is 588MW a measure of? Peak output? Average?

Intermittent sources are usually quoted as peak. That is multiplied by a typical capacity factor to determine average load. For offshore wind, 60% is a reasonable number I think.

Seems to be more like 40% [1] and it's worth noting that in a lot of geographies you still need full backup for wind farms as the wind speed can drop low across the whole country/continent.

[1] - https://energynumbers.info/uk-offshore-wind-capacity-factors

Re: Bill Gates' nuclear venture plans reactor to complement solar, wind power boom

#28

Post by thomasrognon »

bob29 wrote: post #20
briffle wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only we could replace these old, baseload reactors quicker, and cheaper, and maybe with an identical, smaller design, with better tech so one control room could monitor multiple reactors. And if refuelling could be done without turning off all power generation at a site. Maybe if we had something modular......oh, wait

Wow its so easy, can't believe all those idiots trying to build nuclear plants the past few decades have never though to simply apply "better tech". Thanks hacker news/silicon valley!

The barriers, time, and cost for nuclear seem to be primarily of political origin, not technical. It's held to an unreasonable higher standard than anything else.

Re: Bill Gates' nuclear venture plans reactor to complement solar, wind power boom

#29

Post by blargmaster33 »

zucker42 wrote: post #5
toomuchtodo wrote: post #2

> By 2050 “we would see hundreds of these reactors around the world, solving multiple different energy needs,” Levesque said. We can already reach 90% renewables by 2035 without these reactors [1]. If they get built, that’d be great, but they won’t be built in time to avert climate change. TerraPower has existed for 14 years and still hasn’t built a reactor. For comparison, the Kamuthi solar facility in Tamil Nadu, I…

That study groups nuclear with clean energy.

It is clean

Re: Bill Gates' nuclear venture plans reactor to complement solar, wind power boom

#30

Post by m0zg »

Hypx wrote: post #22
m0zg wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it doesn't decompose into an explosive mixture of hydrogen and oxygen under extreme temperatures, among other things.

Instead it just explodes when exposed to water or air...

Well, don't expose it to water then. :-)
Post reply on HN