New nuclear plant at Sizewell set for green light • Hacker News Board

Re: New nuclear plant at Sizewell set for green light

#161

Post by pfdietz » Sat, Oct 31, 2020, 12:11 PM UTC

korantu wrote: post #108

stinos wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nuclear is orders of magnitude better than other low-co2 options The sibling post seems to indicate otherwise though and mentions they're about the same? Any idea where that difference in numbers come from?

I was specifically referring to energy spent to build and operate / energy actually generated over lifetime, so called EROI. My post refers to the sources of the info

Nuclear is not orders of magnitude better in EROI, so I don't know what you think you were claiming.

Re: New nuclear plant at Sizewell set for green light

#162

Post by stinos » Sat, Oct 31, 2020, 12:12 PM UTC

gambiting wrote: post #128

CodeGlitch wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the UK homes are heated with gas, not electricity.

Yes, have you replied to the wrong comment? Besides, very soon all new construction in the UK will be required to be heated exclusively by electricity, so for new housing heating costs will be absolutely huge compared to gas.

for new housing heating costs will be absolutely huge compared to gas

Isn't it more nuanced than that? Don't know UK rules, but since you mention new housing: aren't these required to adhere to some minimum of insulation, likewise for renovations, thereby drastically reducing the energy required in the first place (I mean if I just compare our renovated house with my parent's, energy requirement is 4 to 5 times less per square m)? Moreover depending on climate, cost to produce a given amount of energy is lower for heta pumps than for gas?

Re: New nuclear plant at Sizewell set for green light

#163

Post by stinos » Sat, Oct 31, 2020, 12:15 PM UTC

corty wrote: post #137

stinos wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

doubling the price of energy would push a lot of elderly, infirm, and poor people to stop heating their homes 2x increase in cost doens't necessarily directly translate to doubling the price for everyone. For example it could be coupled with a scheme where consuming way above average makes the part which is above much more expensive, depending on income, to yield the ones consuming less and/or low income not having t…

It could be, but coming from happy Energiewende Germany, as a household you pay more than twice as much for your power as any industrial or commercial user, 30ct/kWh vs. 12ct/kWh. The difference comes from the usual rebates, but the largest part is that commercial users don't pay the renewable tax that is mandatory for non-commercial users. For the really big users, such as smeltings, there are additional subsidies o…

Yes unfortunately it's not uncommon at all that certain industries effectively get subsidized for their energy use and/or pay less taxes on it. In an ideal world that could be adjusted as well though but realistically that's not going to happen. Example from neighbouring country how crippled things can be: solar would be subsidized, leading to the ones with enough money putting complete factory roofs full with solar, to the point the time in which they'd gain back the initial cost would be a couple of years only. Don't get me wrong, great that they have solar energy, but there's way, way more concumer roofs out there but with an average income the initial cost for them is just too much.

Re: New nuclear plant at Sizewell set for green light

#164

Post by petre » Sat, Oct 31, 2020, 12:18 PM UTC

wahern wrote: post #105

Gwypaas wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Westinghouse filed for bankruptcy due to failed nuclear construction in the U.S. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/29/business/westinghouse-tos... Areva, responsible for the construction of Olkiluoto-3 in Finland on a fixed price contract. Restructured and sold all of it's reactor business except Olkiluoto-3, which it still is liable for, to EDF. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Areva

Western industry has progressively lost their ability to efficiently manage many types of heavy industry and large construction projects. This is particularly true for nuclear, which requires the application of disparate and highly specialized techniques and skillsets that are quickly lost. Though not to the same extent as the U.S., Japan, France, and South Korea have lost many of the same skills even though only a c…

Westinghouse was all rotten from the beginning, they sold reactors like cigarettes packs and disregarded scientists' safety concerns. Just look at the guy at 15:21.

https://youtu.be/EviEN0ScOwg

Re: New nuclear plant at Sizewell set for green light

#165

Post by pfdietz » Sat, Oct 31, 2020, 12:19 PM UTC

onion2k wrote: post #91

pfdietz wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Construction projects are inherently unpredictable And yet, renewable projects typically come in within 10% of the contracted price.

Offshore windfarms cost billions. A 10% overspend is quite significant.

Much better than a 300% overspend. Any renewable project that is going in that direction would be cancelled. Not only are renewables easier to build in small modules, but the staged build-out allows any problems (like, bad cost estimates) to be identified and fixed (or aborted).

The modular nature of renewables also allows them to be much more resilient in the face of component failure, or in face of construction errors (with the exception of common mode design failures). This means they can be installed with less skilled labor that makes more mistakes.

Renewable fields are akin to server farms w. large numbers of replaceable blades. Nuclear plants are like mainframes.

Re: New nuclear plant at Sizewell set for green light

#166

Post by pfdietz » Sat, Oct 31, 2020, 12:20 PM UTC

eunos wrote: post #28

LatteLazy wrote: post #3

The others are already over budget and behind schedule, the private companies meant to be heading them are dropping like flies. This won't end well... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-54158091 https://www.pbctoday.co.uk/news/energy-news/toshiba-withdraw... https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/sep/25/hinkley-poin...

At this point probably only the Chinese, Korean and Russian that can build Nuclear Power Plant properly.

The Koreans could not build their NPPs properly, unless you mean by cutting corners in such a way that hundreds of years of jail time were handed out.

Re: New nuclear plant at Sizewell set for green light

#167

Post by pfdietz » Sat, Oct 31, 2020, 12:24 PM UTC

opo wrote: post #81

socialdemocrat wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Renewables are already widely deployed and payed for. It is nuts to build nuclear to replace fully functional wind turbines and solar cells. Nuclear fans just have no economic sense. It is all about nuclear no matter the cost.

>...It is all about nuclear no matter the cost. Oddly, this is the exact sort of behavior I sometimes see with the advocates for renewables. Cost should always be a consideration, but when people conveniently ignore some costs and focus on others, it does a disservice to the goal of decarbonizing the grid. The levelized cost for residential rooftop solar is at least as high as nuclear, but that cost doesn't seem to m…

> Oddly, this is the exact sort of behavior I sometimes see with the advocates for renewables.

If so, the renewable advocate should argue based on cost. Nuclear is very likely going to lose that argument, ultimately spurious arguments about energy density or intermittency notwithstanding.

Re: New nuclear plant at Sizewell set for green light

#168

Post by pfdietz » Sat, Oct 31, 2020, 12:26 PM UTC

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #141

opo wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>...It is all about nuclear no matter the cost. Oddly, this is the exact sort of behavior I sometimes see with the advocates for renewables. Cost should always be a consideration, but when people conveniently ignore some costs and focus on others, it does a disservice to the goal of decarbonizing the grid. The levelized cost for residential rooftop solar is at least as high as nuclear, but that cost doesn't seem to m…

I’m an advocate for taxing carbon and letting the utility companies figure out what is really cheaper. They have the expertise and the incentive.

Exelon has stated that for new nuclear plants in the US to compete with NG CC, CO2 taxes would have to be $300-400/ton. To compete with NG for filling in around renewables, CO2 taxes would have to be much higher than that.

Other projections have the economy basically decarbonizing (without needing nuclear) at a CO2 tax of just $200/ton.

There's a good reason Exelon is tryin to spin off all its NPPs.

Re: New nuclear plant at Sizewell set for green light

#169

Post by pezezin » Sat, Oct 31, 2020, 12:29 PM UTC

Afforess wrote: post #8

steeve wrote: post #2

Good news for the climate and the environment!

There is no evidence nuclear waste can be disposed of safely in the medium or long term. Only technocrats and elites want more nuclear energy. Its not the will of the voting public. This is a defeat for the environment and democracy.

I literally live in front of a nuclear reprocessing facility (as in a can see it from my window), and I want more nuclear energy.

Also, there are some reactor designs that can burn the waste we currently have, so we could get more energy and less waste.

Re: New nuclear plant at Sizewell set for green light

#170

Post by pfdietz » Sat, Oct 31, 2020, 12:30 PM UTC

read_if_gay_ wrote: post #130

MikeAmelung wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain a little more about the storage part of this? I see renewables and storage mentioned every time this topic comes up. It seems like we've got the solar panels and wind turbines figured out, but I'm skeptical on the storage part. I tried doing some research myself, but everything I find reads like a press release from a company that is attempting some kind of storage. As far as I can tell, there is no a…

It'd be especially interesting to see how expensive renewables plus storage end up being, relative to nuclear.

Any NPP started today will not be online until 2030 or later, so one should compare with renewable/storage projections of cost, not current costs. The renewable and storage systems can be brought online much faster than NPPs.

Using 2030 projections, nuclear loses.

https://model.energy/

(and that model doesn't take into account addressing intermittency with transmission or dispatchable demand, such as end-user thermal storage.)