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

France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

politico.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 450 posts

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#261

Post by AtlasBarfed »

azinman2 wrote: post #250
innermate wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Batteries can store enough energy to last for a few weeks.

Industrial-scale batteries are far from a solved problem, and require a lot of excess energy production to fill them that doesn't already get depleted at night. A far more realistic solution is to be able to flex with things like gas plants that don't need to be always running and can function on demand.

Sodium Ion is supposed to commercialize this year if you can believe CATL, with high temp range, good safety, good charge cycles, all supposed to be better than LFP at ?half? the cost (we'll see when it hits the market).

I think sodium ion batteries will be the game changer in utility storage, like good-density (200 Wh/kg) LFP will for mass EV/PHEV electrification (sodium ion will help there too in hybrid batteries).

If we get sodium ion grid storage, another 50% drop in wind/solar utility LCOE, and residential solar gets on par with natural gas LCOE, and good-density LFP batteries deliver 100 mile PHEVs and 250-300 mile EVs in 10 years, then we might actually have a cslim hance of handling global warming

It isn't a solved problem, but there is already industrial scale deployments happening, and what that means is there is a massive market to chase and the ball is rolling fast. It's not like fusion where we are waiting on tech hurdles before the economics are even tackled.

Gas plants will have to do for flexing, much better than coal. It's not like politically they'll all get shutdown (I mean, they should or get a two year warning, but that won't happen).

I think residential solar should be vastly more subsidized. That way the solar that does get made doesn't have as much transmission losses through the grid, it gets used directly, but maybe I'm wrong about that.

I would also like a good synthetic fuels strategy that isn't a creep marketing conspiracy to keep fossil fuels business running (hydrogen "green/blue/gray" color BS falls into this category), that could handle aviation, long haul shipping, and home heating at at least carbon neutrality.

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#262

Post by misja111 »

polskibus wrote: post #258
BurningPenguin wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say it's very unlikely that there will be no wind or sun all over Europe. There is constant exchange of excess energy between the countries anyway. Regardless of that, there are other options too. Like water or geothermal depending on the country. Sometimes there even will be too much energy. I can imagine this being used to make some hydrogen for later use.

Lack of enough wind and sun is basically what happened in EU end of last year and caused energy and gas prices to sky rocket. It is not as rare as you think, moreover it happens over large areas at the same time which exacerbates stress on the grid.

This is nonsense. The crazy gas prices had two main causes: insufficient gas buffers during the uptick of the economy after Corona, and Russia closing part of its huge gas supply to Europe.

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#263

Post by exadeci »

j16sdiz wrote: post #225

The linked article is thin on material. It is 6 by 2028, 14 by 2050 Related article: - France to build up to 14 new nuclear reactors by 2050, says Macron https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/10/france-to-buil... - Announcing new reactors, Macron bets on nuclear power in carbon-neutral push https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20220210-announcing-new-r... - France announces a major buildup of its nuclear power pro…

Also first one to be in service from 2035

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#264

Post by polskibus »

misja111 wrote: post #262
polskibus wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lack of enough wind and sun is basically what happened in EU end of last year and caused energy and gas prices to sky rocket. It is not as rare as you think, moreover it happens over large areas at the same time which exacerbates stress on the grid.

This is nonsense. The crazy gas prices had two main causes: insufficient gas buffers during the uptick of the economy after Corona, and Russia closing part of its huge gas supply to Europe.

Some businesses have a choice whether to use gas or electricity for example for heating. High prices of one caused them to switch too. I agree that effects on gas demand were secondary relative to energy, nevertheless my point stands that it is not unusual, and also we can’t count on gas when wind and solar farms are quiet.

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#265

Post by yason »

epistasis wrote: post #242
ike0790 wrote: post #235

Looks like a G20 country is serious about the impending "climate emergency". Regardless of the motives and timing behind this, I think its great to see a country is actually being serious and practical. Anyone going on about the climate and refuses to put nuclear energy at the forefront of the conversation is unserious and is only interested in virtual signaling in my opinion.

They will be serious if they actually build it, unlike Flamanville. While you call non-nuclear options "virtue signaling," the attempts at building it in France and the US have been virtue signaling. We don't have the industrial capacity to build nuclear. Meanwhile, we are deploying GW of solar, wind, and storage on time, on budget, ar ever decreasing costs. Locking in the high costs of nuclear, for the 60 year lifet…

The cost of nuclear goes down if we build more of smaller standardized reactors rather than a huge, advanced plants every few decades where everything is new and untested each time, warranting long periods of validation and certification, and where the people building it have changed after each built power plant.

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#266

Post by oblib »

loeg wrote: post #114
oblib wrote: post #83

Meanwhile in Japan...

France is not building reactors forty years ago, with generators below sea level, on a major fault line.

We and France are no where near solving that problem. And it's likely we never will...

https://www.power-technology.com/features/managing-nuclear-w...

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#268

Post by Krasnol »

Krssst wrote: post #188
Krasnol wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to be joking... France just had to turn off 3 of their rotting reactors[0] and they lowered their estimates for this year to 295-315 TWh[1]. They're desperate, it's election year and they failed to come up with a diversified energy plan for the future. Luckily the recent taxonomy decision may help to avoid sharp tax rises to finance this backward and hilariously expensive[2] strategy but those EU funds won't…

> they failed to come up with a diversified energy plan for the future Why diversify? If you have enough power when you need it without emitting CO2 I would think that would be enough. However, no new nuclear construction for that many years does look like a mistake as France looks like it is slightly increasing use of coal this winter: https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20220112-france-fires-up-coal-p... If France had mor…

> Why diversify? If you have enough power when you need it without emitting CO2 I would think that would be enough.

Ask that question next summer when the rivers get too hot again and they have too shut down.

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#269

Post by sendben2 »

simion314 wrote: post #260
epistasis wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They will be serious if they actually build it, unlike Flamanville. While you call non-nuclear options "virtue signaling," the attempts at building it in France and the US have been virtue signaling. We don't have the industrial capacity to build nuclear. Meanwhile, we are deploying GW of solar, wind, and storage on time, on budget, ar ever decreasing costs. Locking in the high costs of nuclear, for the 60 year lifet…

>Meanwhile, we are deploying GW of solar, wind, and storage on time, on budget, ar ever decreasing costs. That is the easier part, show me the battery deployments please , the ones that can backup the country/state for a week.

Yes. This. Storage is still expensive. Also France is already a world leader in nuclear grid energy. They already have a long history of building and maintaining nuclear plants.

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#270

Post by adrianN »

Manuel_D wrote: post #64
chrisseaton wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't environmentalists' argument that we should reduce our power consumption, rather than destroying the environment to keep providing so much power? That's not as crazy a position as you make it out to be is it?

Standards of living are highly connected to energy consumption. Reducing power consumption without also reducing living standards is difficult to do. Furthermore, power consumption is going to increase as transportation and industrial processes become electrified.

Electricity consumption is going to rise with electrification. Power consumption is going down. A heat pump is about three times as efficient as heating with oil. An electric engine is about twice as efficient as an ICE, and so on.
Post reply on HN