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

ThorCon: Cheap, reliable, CO2-free electric power

thorconpower.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 246 posts

Re: ThorCon: Cheap, reliable, CO2-free electric power

#221

Post by mdeeks »

ncmncm wrote: post #71
mdeeks wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that one of the big problems is transmission. It reduces the cost competitiveness when you have to factor in running many more high voltage transmission lines across the US. You need them to get the power from the desert to city centers that have the bulk of demand. Building transmission lines in the US is apparently very hard because there is a lot of red tape and politics and NIMBY-ism (to be fa…

Transmission is cheap. But there is absolutely no need to site solar in deserts. It can be local, anywhere, coexisting neatly with other land use.

The Real Engineering youtube link in one of the comments above mine in this thread has an example where putting it in the desert yields three times more than putting it on location in Germany. So there is a significant difference in some places. I'd imagine that makes a difference in being cost competitive.

Also in the video: A single 700MW line from from morocco to spain cost 150M. Though I suspect thats a more expensive than overhead lines.

Re: ThorCon: Cheap, reliable, CO2-free electric power

#222

Post by ncmncm »

mdeeks wrote: post #221
ncmncm wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Transmission is cheap. But there is absolutely no need to site solar in deserts. It can be local, anywhere, coexisting neatly with other land use.

The Real Engineering youtube link in one of the comments above mine in this thread has an example where putting it in the desert yields three times more than putting it on location in Germany. So there is a significant difference in some places. I'd imagine that makes a difference in being cost competitive. Also in the video: A single 700MW line from from morocco to spain cost 150M. Though I suspect thats a more expe…

The lesson of the RE video was that they cancelled the Sahara solar projects because panels had got so cheap, putting them right there in Germany was better despite efficiency arguments. Efficiency turned out to matter a lot less than other things, as price fell.

Re: ThorCon: Cheap, reliable, CO2-free electric power

#223

Post by orthecreedence »

jhgb wrote: post #201
orthecreedence wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Do you think we can scale reactor production sufficiently to build thousands of reactors in two or three decades? Humans can do some cool things when we decide to. And scaling solar isn't as easy as it sounds. What's the cost, in energy and fossil fuels, to mine the materials, build and ship not just the panels but also the massive batteries required for solar? Not to mention having to constantly replace them? That…

> Humans can do some cool things when we decide to. And scaling solar isn't as easy as it sounds. Weirdly enough, we're already currently annually installing so much solar power (in terms of actual energy output, not just nameplate) that it equates the progress accomplished in the nuclear industry in the past fifteen years or so. In other words, the nuclear industry would have to accelerate by more than an order to m…

> pumped hydro is economically preferred over batteries.

Which is a massive battery.

Re: ThorCon: Cheap, reliable, CO2-free electric power

#224

Post by putnambr »

laurencerowe wrote: post #214
pydry wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fengning_Pumped_Storage_Powe... Pushing water uphill is relatively cheap and ~80% efficient. We can build more 2x nuclear power station equivalent "batteries" like fengning fairly easily.

Are there many sites with appropriate geology to build any substantial number of pumped storage stations?

How about any of the reservoirs in drought-stricken North America? Water could be pumped to Lake Mead, power generated at Hoover Dam, and then enter irrigation for farmland. Same for almost the entirety of the Snake River and tributaries.

Re: ThorCon: Cheap, reliable, CO2-free electric power

#225

Post by jhgb »

orthecreedence wrote: post #223
jhgb wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Humans can do some cool things when we decide to. And scaling solar isn't as easy as it sounds. Weirdly enough, we're already currently annually installing so much solar power (in terms of actual energy output, not just nameplate) that it equates the progress accomplished in the nuclear industry in the past fifteen years or so. In other words, the nuclear industry would have to accelerate by more than an order to m…

> pumped hydro is economically preferred over batteries. Which is a massive battery.

If by "battery", you mean "a primary or secondary electrochemical cell or cells", as is its usual meaning, then it's not.

Re: ThorCon: Cheap, reliable, CO2-free electric power

#226

Post by jupp0r »

ncmncm wrote: post #174
jupp0r wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If PV and storage were that much cheaper, those people controlling billion-dollar budgets would have built that instead of gas plants and this discussion would be moot.

And now they are building out PV and gearing up to build out storage.

Are they? Why haven’t they already? It looks like they are supplementing peak capacity right now with gas plants dynamically reacting to varying demand with storage being oders of magnitude too small.

Re: ThorCon: Cheap, reliable, CO2-free electric power

#227

Post by ncmncm »

jupp0r wrote: post #226
ncmncm wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And now they are building out PV and gearing up to build out storage.

Are they? Why haven’t they already? It looks like they are supplementing peak capacity right now with gas plants dynamically reacting to varying demand with storage being oders of magnitude too small.

Do you understand the difference between already built-out storage, and preparing to build out storage? If you want to compare like against like, the number of ThorCon reactors deployed is exactly zero (0).

Storage is not already built out because it is still obviously better to spend the money building out generating capacity, and will be until its share is much larger. In particular, before storage can be useful, you need enough spare generating capacity to top up your storage while also driving customer load.

Re: ThorCon: Cheap, reliable, CO2-free electric power

#228

Post by barathr »

davidgay wrote: post #178
ohgodplsno wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, "just build it in the desert". It's only a matter of: - Building hectares upon hectares of solar panels in one of the most hostile regions in the world - Maintaining them because the sand is horribly damaging, and replacing them regularly - ignore the fact that, in the Sahara, there's multiple wars going on over there and that it would be a prime location for a terrorist attack - Somehow, also build the infra…

> ... in the Sahara ... I suspect the OP was in the US. Desert would then be something like Nevada - definitely a shortage of wars, and Sagebrush scrub ( https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagebrush_scrub ) is probably less destructive than the Saraha's sands...

Yes, sorry, you're right -- I forgot to state that I was speaking from a US-based perspective where there is ample land (and grid infrastructure) that could support baseload solar at scale (in addition to rooftop solar, which will put a huge dent in daytime CO2e/kWh).

Re: ThorCon: Cheap, reliable, CO2-free electric power

#229

Post by ncmncm »

DennisP wrote: post #207
danans wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That graph actually shows the levelized cost of solar+storage capacity at $165-296/ kWh-year The levelized cost of solar + storage according to Lazards is even less: $85-158/MWh.

Oops, you're right, sorry. But that's still only four hours storage, and still higher than Thorcon's estimated cost for their reactor, which could actually supply power through the night and through all seasons regardless of weather conditions without extra cost.

ThorCon can make up any number they like. By the time they could get one built, prices for the alternatives will be much lower.

Re: ThorCon: Cheap, reliable, CO2-free electric power

#230

Post by Sebb767 »

JohnHaugeland wrote: post #216
godelski wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disinformation: spreading false information while knowing the information is false. Misinformation: spreading false information while believing the false information. We should be mindful how we use these terms. I believe that the parent to your comment fully believes what they are saying. If you wish to act in good faith just provide a few sources or comments to counter their claims and move on. Consider the context…

The person you're reacting to was correct. They're reacting to someone who is spreading information they well know to be false.

Feel free to show me in what way my comment was false, I'd be very happy if I'm wrong and desert solar is a viable solution.
Post reply on HN