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

Hungary nuclear plant cuts output because of warm Danube waters

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 83 posts

Re: Hungary nuclear plant cuts output because of warm Danube waters

#51

Post by stephen_g »

taylodl wrote: post #21

Nuclear power plants and coal-fired power plants work off the same principle: Use the heat to boil water to create steam, run the stream through a steam turbine, and condense the steam back to water. This water is continually recycled throughout the system. The river water is used to condense the steam back to water and then the water is discharged back to the river - warmer than it came in. If the water coming in fr…

We have this problem with coal plants in Australia - in Summer often there are unplanned coal unit outages on hot days (due to this kind of thing, among other reliability issues with the aging plants - I don’t think ours use river water but this kind of cooling issue), and it’s always right when the grid is stressed with all the air conditioners running…

And of course the rightwing media starts the chorus of ‘those bloody renewables’ causing problems, even when solar especially is actually helping us ride through some of the coal unreliability!

Re: Hungary nuclear plant cuts output because of warm Danube waters

#52

Post by freeone3000 »

no_wizard wrote: post #44

what if you just pooled the water until it cooled down naturally under shade before discharging back into the Danube?

The water, coming from uphill, is already cooler than it would be if it sat still at the current altitude. Streams and springs average the temperature out over months, not simply a few hours.

Re: Hungary nuclear plant cuts output because of warm Danube waters

#53

Post by spywaregorilla »

kshahkshah wrote: post #40
spywaregorilla wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rare anomalies currently. Will they continue to be rare anomalies going forward? Also, high heat moments are the times when you likely need more power than ever...

Is it not a chicken and egg? If we don’t build waters get warmer faster from the existing primary sources of power, albeit indirectly

There are scenarios where it could be a chicken and egg. But there's also likely many scenarios where you ought to acknowledge that it's a dumbass place to build a nuclear plant because the water supply it depends on are not reliable and are expected to get worse with no regard to the plant itself. I'm not saying that's the case here. But... I would guess it's likely.

Re: Hungary nuclear plant cuts output because of warm Danube waters

#54

Post by freeone3000 »

Moldoteck wrote: post #37
senectus1 wrote: post #22

nuclear power plants are not environmentally friendly. sure they're carbon friendly and "green" in other ways, but the mining of uranium is horrendously dirty, the long term storage of the waste is dirty as hell and this waterways heating issue is just another problem. green renewable should be our goals, we're bathed in power every day it just needs to be bottled. nuclear plants have their place, but its few and far…

the long term storage of the waste is dirty as hell - It's not! France manages to recycle a lot of it's fuel(not sure if all), 90% gets back to reactor, 10% is transformed in solid state via vitrification for long term storage, where only first ~300 yrs are really dangerous bc of the decay speed of these 10% Why others don't do this? Fk knows, fossils lobby I guess+ some other 'reasons' that are not that important. T…

US doesn’t do it because the highly-radioactive byproducts generated by the reactors were at one point the desired end-product. But even so, it’s a miniscule amount — such that things like “having an off-site storage facility” are problems that have been put off for decades (and probably can be for a few more).

Re: Hungary nuclear plant cuts output because of warm Danube waters

#56

Post by throwbadubadu »

domenkozar wrote: post #17

Note that warm waters is a typical strawman argument against nuclear power. These are rare anomalies and there's dry-cooling of nuclear power plants (although it's less efficient and costs more).

Never heard of dry-cooling nuclear reactors, how much less efficient, also less safe? Does a prototype even exist? Some reference please.

Will we call the rare anomalies rare until it they are the norm? And then?

Re: Hungary nuclear plant cuts output because of warm Danube waters

#57

Post by throwbadubadu »

onemoresoop wrote: post #50
akamaka wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Creating heat to turn into electricity is an outdated 19th century idea at this point. Now that we’ve mastered the technology to turn ambient energy directly into electricity, traditional nuclear reactors are an overly complex technological dead end.

Though it seems inefficient why don't we see alternative methods take over?

I'm seeing them? (:

Re: Hungary nuclear plant cuts output because of warm Danube waters

#58

Post by epistasis »

onemoresoop wrote: post #50
akamaka wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Creating heat to turn into electricity is an outdated 19th century idea at this point. Now that we’ve mastered the technology to turn ambient energy directly into electricity, traditional nuclear reactors are an overly complex technological dead end.

Though it seems inefficient why don't we see alternative methods take over?

We are seeing alternative methods take over....

Check out the interconnection queue for new generation where there's price competition, and you will see it completely dominated by non-thermal tech.

And the thermal tech that is there, natural gas, is partially combustion turbine driven, and without that combustion turbine component it would likely not be competitive at all. It's likely that within a decade a lot of those new natural gas CCGT assets will be completely stranded and uneconomical.

And as with any high-capital established industry, there are a lot of dinosaurs that will not move until they die off. They will be victims of creative destruction, rather than survive and pivot sooner.

Re: Hungary nuclear plant cuts output because of warm Danube waters

#59

Post by spywaregorilla »

nradov wrote: post #46
spywaregorilla wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cost performance tradeoffs aren't some minor thing. If you cannot produce energy at a cost effective level, you might as well not produce it at all. The theoretical capabilities of the thing are not relevant if the economics of them don't work.

Well sort of. Reliable base load power (nuclear, coal, gas, hydroelectric) has become essential to modern civilization in a way that transcends economics. If we can't keep the lights on then nothing else matters. Thus, competent governments will find ways to keep those plants running regardless of cost or environmental impacts. Those that don't will end up as failed states like what is happening to South Africa right…

Maybe, but irrelevant. If the nuclear plant goes up in costs by 10x then you're just going to buy more fossil fuels. Ignoring costs associated with running and changing the nuclear plant that might cause you to run it anyway and just lose a ton of money. The backup answer is always fossil fuels more or less.

Re: Hungary nuclear plant cuts output because of warm Danube waters

#60

Post by throwbadubadu »

spywaregorilla wrote: post #53
kshahkshah wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it not a chicken and egg? If we don’t build waters get warmer faster from the existing primary sources of power, albeit indirectly

There are scenarios where it could be a chicken and egg. But there's also likely many scenarios where you ought to acknowledge that it's a dumbass place to build a nuclear plant because the water supply it depends on are not reliable and are expected to get worse with no regard to the plant itself. I'm not saying that's the case here. But... I would guess it's likely.

Very curious, where do we have the reliable water supply? Just move existing fleet, or build all new now with what we fail already? And then cool them with the unproblematic salty sea water, boiling the oceans that also start getting temperature problems already? Very confused..
Post reply on HN