751–760 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Jeez. Imagine walking into a construction site from 2 decades ago.
Many churches in England took 100 years to build
This caught my eye: "Prior to Vogtle Unit 3, the last nuclear reactor to start in the United States was Watts Bar Unit 2 in Tennessee. Construction on Watts Bar 2 began in 1973 but was suspended in 1985. Work resumed in 2007, and the reactor came online in 2016." More on that here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watts_Bar_Nuclear_Plant#Unit_2
Meanwhile India is building 8 reactors right now with 10 more planned over the next decade. China is actively building 23 right now.
But it is very nice that RosAtom seems to be one of the most competently run Russian Gov agencies.
See also: "Georgia nuclear rebirth arrives 7 years late, $17B over cost" https://apnews.com/article/georgia-nuclear-power-plant-vogtl... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vogtle_Electric_Generating_Pla...
It seems like up-front monetary 'cost' is continually used to bash nuclear. And 100% from the perspective of human beings. To put it into context, nuclear * total human deaths due to nuclear since its inception is in the low thousands at worst, for the entire industry. * total animal deaths due to nuclear since its inception is minimal, in fact, for example, wildlife around Chernobyl has flourished * damage to the en…
Nuclear fanboys need to accept the fact that so long as nuclear always costs multiples more than literally anything else, these things won't get built, no matter how carbon-clean and healthy they are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But only lasts half that..
??? I think you’re thinking of US roads, which are generally shoddily constructed and poorly maintained compared to chinese ones. No, what you meant to say was “and only 47 people died constructing it!”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nuclear is costly _now_*. It wasn't getting built, for years. There is so much energy to be had from that, and cost learning curves can come down. France's ("small") modular reactors, SMR, they even aim to sell internationally, in their 2030 plan, are a model. To China no less. China also builds nuclear reactors, and we can't fall behind them. I cannot abide an SMR gap.
> China also builds nuclear reactors, and we can't fall behind them I, uh, have some uncomfortable news for you. China are currently building 22 nuclear reactors [1] China installed 230GW of solar and wind in 2023 [2] China has over 40,000kms of High Speed Rail, and continues to expand [3] By any measure, you're falling way behind them. [1] https://www.economist.com/china/2023/11/30/china-is-building... [2] https://w…
Nameplate capacity. For actual average output, divide by 6.
And it doesn't even deliver that 1/6th consistently, so you unless you want blackouts you also need an alternative that delivers power reliably.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
China is building nuclear reactors faster than any other country. At the moment, they have 21 new reactors under construction.
21 reactors under construction even with a short build time of 7 years is just 3 finished per year, and with China having ~15x the population of Germany that would amount to 0,2 reactors finishing per year in Germany. Multiplied with 1,4 GW that would add ~0,3 GW capacity resulting in about 2,5 TWh additional electricity generated per year which is 0,5% of annual current german demand. Do that for 20 years and you'd…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
you don't need to overbuild nuclear; nuclear plants commonly have a capacity factor of over 80%
Finland recently lost 14% of it's national electricity generation for days due to a turbine failure. This is of course a huge problem. Having 14% of the nations electricity transported from just 1 location is another problem all by itself even when it works. Last year half the reactors in France were offline at one point: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/15/business/nuclear-power-fr... I don't think nuclear should be…
France has not invested in its nuclear fleet in ages, and deferred maintenance during COVID, so a lot more plants were in maintenance than usual. Fortunately they planned this for the summer, when energy consumption is low and renewable output high. Unfortunately the inspections found more than they were expecting, as inspections are wont to do at times. Otherwise you wouldn't need them.
Fortunately, there's a European electricity grid, and so for one year out of the last thirty or forty, France was a net importer of electricity rather than an exporter. In 2023 they're an exporter again.
And they are now in the process of correcting the underinvestment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I find it hard to imagine solar could ever be cheaper than nuclear during winter in Northern Europe.
No need to imagine, because it is. At least if you believe electricity market prices reflect reality.
They reflect the value of the electricity to consumers.
When prices drop to zero, that is because the electricity is useless.
When prices drop below zero, that is because the electricity is worse than useless.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Surely much of the crippling cost is due to hostile lawfare and regulation.
Damn, if only we didn't have to build them safely we could make them so cheaply.