Earlier quoted context omitted.
> and 1100 MW peak continuous operation it will take 36 years to make the money back That total cost is for 2 reactors, not one. Vogtle 3 just started operating and Vogtle 4 will start in a few months. If you divide your 36 years by 2, you get 18 years.
add in increasing energy demand, fossil fuel scarcity, battery storage for off peak solar and wind, The reason they're built it is because its worth it. Nuclear has always been worth it, sensationalism has always been the problem
First new U.S. nuclear reactor since 2016 is now in operation
991–1000 of 1001 posts
Re: First new U.S. nuclear reactor since 2016 is now in operation
#992Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had a professor in an facilities course mention the improved level of industrialization of nuclear plant construction as a big reason why France managed to be successful with nuclear energy in a way that other countries have not. If so, is this one of those dreaded examples of the free market failing our actual best interests?
?? How does that show a failure of the free market??
Re: First new U.S. nuclear reactor since 2016 is now in operation
#993Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had a professor in an facilities course mention the improved level of industrialization of nuclear plant construction as a big reason why France managed to be successful with nuclear energy in a way that other countries have not. If so, is this one of those dreaded examples of the free market failing our actual best interests?
?? How does that show a failure of the free market??
Re: First new U.S. nuclear reactor since 2016 is now in operation
#994Earlier quoted context omitted.
?? How does that show a failure of the free market??
I'm sorry but if you think the US had a "free market" for nuclear power, you're an idiot.
Re: First new U.S. nuclear reactor since 2016 is now in operation
#995Lots of disfavorable comparisons being made here between nuke and solar. Let's do some math. There is a total of around 10 GWh of deployed grid storage in the US. The US consumed about 4,000 TWh of electricity in 2022. (10GWh/ 4000TWh) * (31,536,000 seconds) == 78 seconds. So, net, there is about a minute and a half of energy storage across the entire grid. (Most, about 90%, is pumped hydro, not battery). Of course,…
I think the idea that renewables have to be paired with large amounts of energy storage is not correct. In Ireland dispatchable power is used when wind is low. Natural gas, hydroelectric, HVDC, pumped storage. Lithium ion batteries are generally only used briefly while the gas power plant gets up to temperature because of their high cost. There are also HVDC interconnectors that allow excess wind to be exported to th…
I was looking at this paper
https://www.eia.gov/analysis/studies/powerplants/capitalcost...
where solar is quoted at $1300/kwh and adding a battery that can store a little more than an hour of output brings that to around $1800/kwh. I see people quoting that one like it is gospel but that doesn’t seem to be enough storage. If you assume the system needs 12 hours of storage to get through the night you need 10 of those batteries and the cost is getting into the $3500/kwh range.
They quote the AP-1000 and NuScale around $6000. Solar looks cheaper now and maybe it is in the tropics but in the Northeast you are going to get a lot less power in the winter than summer so to keep the lights on all year you might need two of those solar installations (though I think the battery stays the same) and now you are getting around $5000/kwh so that gap with nuclear is getting smaller.
That estimate may be a bit pessimistic, but renewable advocates right now sound like the people who were saying nuclear would be “too cheap to meter.”
Now if you have excess capacity in the summer you could in principle use it for something but that is not trivial. If you use something half he year you basically double the capital cost. Do you hire workers to do nothing in the winter or do you lay them off? “Free” excess solar energy might be “free as in puppy” not “free as in beer.”
Re: First new U.S. nuclear reactor since 2016 is now in operation
#996Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you know if those forests were professionally managed for paper production? It might be private land, and it very likely legal.
True. There isn't any actual untouched forest land in north Florida. It's all been harvested and replanted many times. Almost certainly it was private sale or leased land. But those farm trees still produced more oxygen and stored more carbon than the solar panels will.
If those solar panels replace a coal fired power plant, is that still true? I am unsure.
Re: First new U.S. nuclear reactor since 2016 is now in operation
#997Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm sorry but if you think the US had a "free market" for nuclear power, you're an idiot.
I actually thought nothing and was curious enough to ask for clarity, as clearly demonstrated. But if you're the type to read into the question what you want just so you can call me an "idiot", that makes you a pretty special type of asshole there buddy.
Re: First new U.S. nuclear reactor since 2016 is now in operation
#998Earlier quoted context omitted.
I actually thought nothing and was curious enough to ask for clarity, as clearly demonstrated. But if you're the type to read into the question what you want just so you can call me an "idiot", that makes you a pretty special type of asshole there buddy.
Your question was full of self righteous snark and your response to my question was as well. Trying to tell me you were just "curious" and "asking for clarity" is 100% bullshit and you know it. If you want to actually engage in a conversation, drop the snark and I'll be happy to have a pleasant conversation with you. Otherwise, I guess we'll both have to be assholes.
I believe it was Mill who insisted that one should be able to argue the other side of a topic as well as the one they prefer :)
Re: First new U.S. nuclear reactor since 2016 is now in operation
#999Earlier quoted context omitted.
So electric car owners are in effect sponsoring electricity storage?
No: they are benefiting from it as they (most of the time) load their batteries when electricity is cheap, and discharge it into the grid when it is rare and therefore expensive. On average the car autonomy already is way above the daily commute, and this margin is quickly growing. There are more and more parking places (private and public) connected to the grid. A bit of intelligence ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/…
This would only work if the added charge on night-time electricity also accounts for battery cycling cost which I doubt it would.
Re: First new U.S. nuclear reactor since 2016 is now in operation
#1000Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't even imagine how you'd get the parts, and they probably can't change the plans either. Ok so I decided to look into it a bit more, and here are some interesting details from documents on the nrc.gov and EIA.gov: Here's some context for what was happening in 1985, from the eia: >"As a consequence of the identification of a large number of deficiencies shortly before the WBN Unit 1 license was expected to be is…
> I can't even imagine how you'd get the parts I have no idea, but I would assume most parts are custom machined to spec. If that's true, you'd just need to find machine shops capable of making the parts.
You call up your local nuclear reactor spare parts vendor and place an order. Then they figure out how to either source the part or manufacture it or substitute it.
No, really. Most places that sell nuclear fuel have a spare parts business too.