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

Hinkley Point C: Building Britain's first nuclear reactor in 30 years

building.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 206 posts

Re: Hinkley Point C: Building Britain's first nuclear reactor in 30 years

#181

Post by ZeroGravitas »

chickenbig wrote: post #180
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a common mistake to price up renewables delivering flat nuclear shaped energy in an effort to inflate the price. It's as silly as demanding that a nuclear plant must emulate the delivery profile of solarn and install batteries capable of shifting night time power to the day. With a similar effect on prices. Demand is not flat. It's actually a bit more solar shaped on many markets which is why initial solar deplo…

> It's a common mistake to price up renewables delivering flat nuclear shaped energy in an effort to inflate the price. > Demand is not flat. The system as a whole has to deliver baseload plus variable demand. If the demand and supply do not match then there are problems. Load shifting/Demand Flexibility Service may be a promising concept, but there is only so much that will shift. > It's actually a bit more solar sh…

> That is not the case for the UK, the country being discussed, with peak electrical demand in winter.

Wind also peaks in winter, while nuclear fails to rise to the occasion so maybe we should force nuclear to invest in seasonal storage so that we get a really fair comparison?

Re: Hinkley Point C: Building Britain's first nuclear reactor in 30 years

#182

Post by chickenbig »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #181
chickenbig wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's a common mistake to price up renewables delivering flat nuclear shaped energy in an effort to inflate the price. > Demand is not flat. The system as a whole has to deliver baseload plus variable demand. If the demand and supply do not match then there are problems. Load shifting/Demand Flexibility Service may be a promising concept, but there is only so much that will shift. > It's actually a bit more solar sh…

> That is not the case for the UK, the country being discussed, with peak electrical demand in winter. Wind also peaks in winter, while nuclear fails to rise to the occasion so maybe we should force nuclear to invest in seasonal storage so that we get a really fair comparison?

Wind also peaks in peaks, leading to gluts. Summarising something so irregular in a single number misses out essential properties. The peak/trough pattern is so good for heating without plenty of thermal storage (not something the UK’s buildings are renowned for).

> maybe we should force nuclear to invest in seasonal storage

Probably simpler to build a bit more nuclear, then use it in summer to drive DACCS (heat and electricity) or processes like raw material smelting. Better to have industry operating on fairly predictable schedules (summer on, winter off) than pre-empting them on a regular basis (as startup/shutdown could reduce useful work done/harm equipment).

Re: Hinkley Point C: Building Britain's first nuclear reactor in 30 years

#183

Post by chickenbig »

pfdietz wrote: post #123
chickenbig wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The capex per watt of gas backup is vastly lower than a nuclear plant. Like, by a factor of 10 to 20. https://www.iea.org/reports/projected-costs-of-generating-el... tables Table 3.2a and 3.4a show that Korean CCGT cost 838 USD/kWe and Korean PWRs were 2157 USD/kWhe (all 2018 prices). Anyhow, gas backup fuel costs (and carbon taxes) are where the real big costs are.

The Korean nuclear numbers are unbelievable. They certainly didn't come anywhere close to that in UAE (more like $6/W, and possibly more if the concurrent military deal was being used as a slush fund to hide overruns.)

> the concurrent military deal was being used as a slush fund

Citation?

> The Korean nuclear numbers are unbelievable

See https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Contract-awarded-for... and https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Contract-for-Shin-Ha... for construction deals relating to their latest reactors in South Korea.

Re: Hinkley Point C: Building Britain's first nuclear reactor in 30 years

#184

Post by matt-p »

chickenbig wrote: post #131
matt-p wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, we may as well finish it, certainly, but it's going to reduce appetite for future nuclear schemes enormously. Realistically I think small reactors are our last hope for net new nuclear in the UK - if we don't get them we'll end up with Wind/Solar and storage.

> I think small reactors are our last hope for net new nuclear Sizewell C appears to be moving along; nevertheless Ed Milliband has not vocally supported the project (despite the junior minister Lord Hunt visiting the site last month and Keir Stamer visiting last year). What is most curious is that the announcement of up to £5.5B of extra funding (taking funding up to £8B so perhaps 1/3 of final project cost) until t…

I guess we have to wait and see.

Re: Hinkley Point C: Building Britain's first nuclear reactor in 30 years

#185

Post by ZeroGravitas »

chickenbig wrote: post #182
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is not the case for the UK, the country being discussed, with peak electrical demand in winter. Wind also peaks in winter, while nuclear fails to rise to the occasion so maybe we should force nuclear to invest in seasonal storage so that we get a really fair comparison?

Wind also peaks in peaks, leading to gluts. Summarising something so irregular in a single number misses out essential properties. The peak/trough pattern is so good for heating without plenty of thermal storage (not something the UK’s buildings are renowned for). > maybe we should force nuclear to invest in seasonal storage Probably simpler to build a bit more nuclear, then use it in summer to drive DACCS (heat and…

Overbuilding is a good strategy, cheaper to do it with wind and solar though.

This has sometimes been referred to with the cheesy catchphrase of "SWB Superpower":

https://www.rethinkx.com/energy/in-depth/super-power

Re: Hinkley Point C: Building Britain's first nuclear reactor in 30 years

#186

Post by pfdietz »

chickenbig wrote: post #183
pfdietz wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Korean nuclear numbers are unbelievable. They certainly didn't come anywhere close to that in UAE (more like $6/W, and possibly more if the concurrent military deal was being used as a slush fund to hide overruns.)

> the concurrent military deal was being used as a slush fund Citation? > The Korean nuclear numbers are unbelievable See https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Contract-awarded-for... and https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Contract-for-Shin-Ha... for construction deals relating to their latest reactors in South Korea.

> Citation?

There's no hard evidence, but the presence of the side deal does raise suspicions. S. Korea's nuclear industry has been notably corrupt, with many years of prison sentences being handed out.

Re: Hinkley Point C: Building Britain's first nuclear reactor in 30 years

#187

Post by chickenbig »

invalidname wrote: post #119
chickenbig wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also assume there's a lot of room for cost reduction in wind over the next decade https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jul/20/giant-windf... What are the reasons behind believing prices will reduce further? > I'm guessing Nuclear won't see the same level of changes Parsons says the second reactor is being built 20% more quickly than the first one. Parsons says he expects that Sizewell will be built between 2…

> What are the reasons behind believing prices will reduce further? Economies of scale and room for technological/process innovation. The fact that solar reduced so significantly and battery costs too. This article seems a bit cherry picked about a specific project and not a global trend in costs. Offshore will naturally take time to become competitive since it requires complex installation and processes, but those s…

> Economies of scale and room for technological/process innovation.

This applies when going from 1 to 2 to 4 reactors.

See https://www.oecd-nea.org/mdep/events/conf-2023/presentations... page 27 for the Chinese approach to HPR1000 (Hualong One) innovation.

Plus the linked article mentioned improvements to manufacturing outside the constraints of the containment.

Re: Hinkley Point C: Building Britain's first nuclear reactor in 30 years

#188

Post by chickenbig »

pfdietz wrote: post #186
chickenbig wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the concurrent military deal was being used as a slush fund Citation? > The Korean nuclear numbers are unbelievable See https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Contract-awarded-for... and https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Contract-for-Shin-Ha... for construction deals relating to their latest reactors in South Korea.

> Citation? There's no hard evidence, but the presence of the side deal does raise suspicions. S. Korea's nuclear industry has been notably corrupt, with many years of prison sentences being handed out.

I believe there was a defense pact to sweeten the deal, but that seems like relationship building on top of a very competitive bid for nuclear power stations.

https://thediplomat.com/2018/03/risky-business-south-koreas-...

Re: Hinkley Point C: Building Britain's first nuclear reactor in 30 years

#189

Post by chickenbig »

DrBazza wrote: post #161
chickenbig wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

France has around 20GW on the coast (21,444MW including Flamanville 3). Also France looks to have winter-dominated electrical demand (50TWh in January 2023, 40TWh in April, 37TWh in August, 46TWh in November). See https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/data-tools/monthly-e... and select France.

Indeed. Though, as I said there are others next to rivers. The map here: https://www.connexionfrance.com/news/map-where-are-frances-n... shows 6 reactors on the coast, and 12 inland on rivers which are susceptible to summer river water temperatures and levels.

> susceptible to summer river water temperatures and levels

Yes, when the French grid needs them the least.

Re: Hinkley Point C: Building Britain's first nuclear reactor in 30 years

#190

Post by littlestymaar »

adrianN wrote: post #176
littlestymaar wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Going from 76 minutes to a full British night (which can last up to 16 hours in winter!) is going to need a heck of a growth curve indeed.

Less than four doublings is not a lot. We’re at the beginning of the storage expansion. The interesting question is not when we‘ll be able to cover a night, but when we’ll be able to cover a month.

> The interesting question is not when we‘ll be able to cover a night, but when we’ll be able to cover a month.

The answer to this one is a pretty straightforward never. You have to realize that such a storage will sit duck most of the time, making it impossible to get any return on investment on it.

Post reply on HN