Small nuclear reactors: tiny NuScale reactor gets safety approval • Hacker News Board

Re: Small nuclear reactors: tiny NuScale reactor gets safety approval

#551

Post by kelnos » Wed, Sep 09, 2020, 7:38 AM UTC

roenxi wrote: post #542

Klinky wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting I am not taking it seriously, while also saying "Sure I can" when it comes to ignoring nuclear waste storage issues? Waste amounts are "tiny", and "bury it in a hole somewhere", ignoring time and cost components. Hard to take you seriously.

> Are you suggesting I am not taking it seriously[?] .... [it is h]ard to take you seriously. I was sorely tempted towards sarcasm by that combination. But I'm suggesting exactly that, and that we should standardise to not taking the waste of either solar panels or nuclear particularly seriously, given they are both very minor problems that can be handled by the people involved.

Given how we've so far failed to deal with our nuclear waste in a reasonable way, after decades of opportunity to figure it out, I think it's a mistake to call that a "minor problem".

I don't know much about solar waste handling, though someone upthread suggests there's a French company that can recycle 95% of the components of retired solar panels with the remaining 5% going to other uses. Of course, no idea how much that process costs, but I'd bet it's nowhere near as hazardous to deal with as nuclear, and doesn't have any of the nuclear security requirements since I don't expect people can make nuclear bombs out of retired solar panels.

Re: Small nuclear reactors: tiny NuScale reactor gets safety approval

#552

Post by foxyv » Wed, Sep 09, 2020, 6:25 PM UTC

mikeyouse wrote: post #44

foxyv wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$0.24 per kwh is a rough estimate I've seen for NuScale. Typically initial costs for microreactors right now are around $0.25 to $0.30/kwh which is about the cost of energy created by diesel generators. Natural gas is much lower. However they hope that as we make a lot of them the cost will drop.

Wow. That’s substantially more expensive than I was expecting. It’s been years but we always assumed ~$0.08/KWh for on-site natural gas generated electricity on US based projects.

Right now they are bespoke reactors so that means that they will cost a ton. But if they are turning them out like Toyotas then the cost will drop really fast.

The hope is that it will be similar to the drop in cost for solar that we've seen in the past ten years. Solar originally cost about $0.28/kwh and now it's around 6 cents.

Re: Small nuclear reactors: tiny NuScale reactor gets safety approval

#553

Post by foxyv » Wed, Sep 09, 2020, 6:31 PM UTC

7952 wrote: post #233

foxyv wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just barely too big to go on a standard tractor trailer. But small enough to be portable by a oversize load tractor trailer. Kind of like the blades for very large wind turbines in west Texas.

The weight (590 tonnes according to wiki) is likely to be an issue. You need specialist vehicles that connect to a waterway or railroad.

Yeah there is no way that will be transportable on a road unless it is transported in parts. 75 tonnes is about the limit with special permits. I wonder if the 590 tons includes the fuel?

Re: Small nuclear reactors: tiny NuScale reactor gets safety approval

#554

Post by marcusverus » Tue, Sep 15, 2020, 8:54 PM UTC

mnw21cam wrote: post #432

tandr wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you. I don't get why this is not considered as an option anywhere.

Because it's a really really bad idea, for several reasons. 1. If your rocket has a failure during launch, you're likely to spread the nuclear waste over a large land area. 2. Even though we really haven't generated that much nuclear waste, it's still many many rocket-launches-worth. That gets expensive. Much more expensive than sticking it in a hole in the side of a mountain. 3. Launching something into the sun take…

Based on a Google search, we produce 10,000 tons of 'High Level' nuclear waste every year. This is far more than the total annual lift capacity of all launch providers combined.

For context, it would require 71 Saturn V launches every year just to get that tonnage up to Low Earth Orbit!