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

Three Mile Island nuclear plant restart in Microsoft AI power deal

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 338 posts

Re: Three Mile Island nuclear plant restart in Microsoft AI power deal

#51

Post by jakewins »

atomic128 wrote: post #30

No battery farm can protect a solar/wind grid from an arbitrarily extended period of bad weather. If you have N days of battery storage and the sun doesn't shine for N+1 days, you're in trouble. Nuclear fission is the answer. Today there are 440 nuclear reactors operating in 32 countries. Nuclear fission power plants are expensive to build but once built the plant can last 50 years (maybe 80 years, maybe more) and th…

> No battery farm can protect a solar/wind grid from an arbitrarily extended period of bad weather.

I don’t understand why wind solar is subject to absolutes devoid of probability - “what if the sun and wind stop simultaneously for 2 months?”

We know the probability that the sun stops shining and the wind stops blowing for N days, we can calculate it from historical data.

You can absolutely build solar+wind+storage systems that deliver 24/7/365 energy with many nines SLAs, on the real earth with real statistics on weather.

Re: Three Mile Island nuclear plant restart in Microsoft AI power deal

#52

Post by AnimalMuppet »

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #36
gkfasdfasdf wrote: post #21

Was anyone else horrified because they thought the powerplant was going to be run by a Microsoft AI? (TFA is about Microsoft purchasing nuclear power to run their AI)

Nuclear powered Clippy.

Worse: Clippy running a nuclear plant.

Re: Three Mile Island nuclear plant restart in Microsoft AI power deal

#53

Post by elil17 »

Y-bar wrote: post #43
alright2565 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coal plants have killed a minimum of 500k people over the past 20 years[1]. It's not an accident in that case, it's known and planned for (or at least easily predicted enough that it should have been). But when a few hundred people, or really just 0 people[2] die in one place at one time, people lose their minds. [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/23/coal-pow... [2]: An inter-agency analysis conclu…

I’m not the person you responded to, but have an honest question here since we are specifically talking about NIMBYism: How much less of NIMBY is there against coal power plants? For example are there examples of people rejecting NPP in their vicinity while accepting CPP?

How is that a valid comparison though? Fighting against a coal plant makes sense, fighting against a nuclear plant doesn't - that's the key difference.

Re: Three Mile Island nuclear plant restart in Microsoft AI power deal

#54

Post by 1970-01-01 »

fergonco wrote: post #19
1970-01-01 wrote: post #14

More nuclear is a good thing. FAANG nuclear is even better, because they will be be ready and equipped to push back the insane NIMBY crowd(s) and also don't need to be worried about getting reelected.

How are nimby crowds insane? Accidents may happen. And did happen in the past in that same place: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident

Accidents will happen daily. Those accidents are extremely well controlled. You are providing an excellent example by jumping to that insane NIMBY conclusion. I think MS can successfully bulldozer these extremely weak arguments about catastrophic accidents better than I could. Stay tuned.

Re: Three Mile Island nuclear plant restart in Microsoft AI power deal

#55

Post by roenxi »

Y-bar wrote: post #43
alright2565 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coal plants have killed a minimum of 500k people over the past 20 years[1]. It's not an accident in that case, it's known and planned for (or at least easily predicted enough that it should have been). But when a few hundred people, or really just 0 people[2] die in one place at one time, people lose their minds. [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/23/coal-pow... [2]: An inter-agency analysis conclu…

I’m not the person you responded to, but have an honest question here since we are specifically talking about NIMBYism: How much less of NIMBY is there against coal power plants? For example are there examples of people rejecting NPP in their vicinity while accepting CPP?

They get a fairer run than nuclear - it is conceivable that a coal plant gets built and is allowed to run. However I imagine the US followed the same broad trends as everyone else in the 90s and started restricting infrastructure construction for environmental reasons so it is probably quite challenging to get a plant built.

There is a reason all the growth is happening in Asia. Their focus is on improving their wealth and material standard of living.

Re: Three Mile Island nuclear plant restart in Microsoft AI power deal

#56

Post by AnimalMuppet »

weberer wrote: post #42
rgmerk wrote: post #16

Hmmm. 50 years old and out of action for half a decade. That’s going to require a lot of work to persuade the NRC it’s safe to operate. Given how difficult it’s proven to build new nuclear around the world, what are the odds of this recommissioning being on time and budget?

They're not restarting reactor 2. They're starting the one that shut down in 2019.

I think the GP knows that. That's why they said "out of action for half a decade".

Re: Three Mile Island nuclear plant restart in Microsoft AI power deal

#57

Post by jonkoops »

jameshart wrote: post #27

> restart one of the units at the noted Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania Ah yes, the ‘noted’ Three Mile Island. I wonder why this particular plant enjoys a degree of fame? The name certainly is familiar… Seems like a rebranding might have made sense - like the UK switched Sellafield to Winscale.

IMHO a infamous reactor such as Three Mile Island re-starting, if successful is only good publicity in the resurgence of nuclear power.

Re: Three Mile Island nuclear plant restart in Microsoft AI power deal

#58

Post by bfrog »

Presumably all the things that have gone wrong have been fixed? I can honestly say the micro reactors and pebble beds look far more fail safe than the typical PWR/BWR that must have power and a pump running as I understand things to prevent catastrophe.

Re: Three Mile Island nuclear plant restart in Microsoft AI power deal

#59

Post by organsnyder »

Y-bar wrote: post #43
alright2565 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coal plants have killed a minimum of 500k people over the past 20 years[1]. It's not an accident in that case, it's known and planned for (or at least easily predicted enough that it should have been). But when a few hundred people, or really just 0 people[2] die in one place at one time, people lose their minds. [1]: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/23/coal-pow... [2]: An inter-agency analysis conclu…

I’m not the person you responded to, but have an honest question here since we are specifically talking about NIMBYism: How much less of NIMBY is there against coal power plants? For example are there examples of people rejecting NPP in their vicinity while accepting CPP?

The worse impacts of coal plants disproportionately impact disadvantaged communities that don't have the resources to be effective NIMBYs.

Coal also has a much wider low-level impact: for instance, it's not safe to consume more than small amounts of fish from the great lakes because of mercury levels, largely due to coal power plants.

Re: Three Mile Island nuclear plant restart in Microsoft AI power deal

#60

Post by epoxia »

atomic128 wrote: post #30

No battery farm can protect a solar/wind grid from an arbitrarily extended period of bad weather. If you have N days of battery storage and the sun doesn't shine for N+1 days, you're in trouble. Nuclear fission is the answer. Today there are 440 nuclear reactors operating in 32 countries. Nuclear fission power plants are expensive to build but once built the plant can last 50 years (maybe 80 years, maybe more) and th…

The issue of dunkelflaute is measurable and you can approach it the same way that storms are rated as being 100,1000-year storms. Not that I wouldn't appreciate more nuclear.
Post reply on HN