Allpar Forums banner

41 - 46 of 46 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,701 Posts
Lack of modern nuclear is just that they dont make the buisness case, its to costly per produced kwh.
- if one would use the money for a new nuclear site for building energy storage like pumped hydro you would have a buisness case that works with solar and wind, the two chaepest electrical producers.
You can dig a lot of large lakes for the money. I think that energy storage is the next place to use substities to get it going, wind and solar are alredy working on an commercial scale.
That's a great idea where it works, but that only works where you can connect to a place with lots of water, sustainable replenishment from evaporative loss, AND a suitableplace to store it to run a "hydroelectric battery." Then removing all that earth potentially removes lots of agricultural ground from production. Not to mention the geological and environmental problems you have to overcome. Nevermind the NIMBYs.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
295 Posts
You could listen to a financial services company, or go to the Energy Information Administration. They will tell you an industrial frame Diesel turbine is best. Next comes combined cycle natural gas. Photovoltaic with axis tracking is moderately expensive now, but is projected to come down to natural gas levels in around 20 years.

U.S. Energy Information Administration - EIA - Independent Statistics and Analysis
I could do that, but since they just report what power companies tell them without further analysis, I'm not inclined to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,510 Posts
That's a great idea where it works, but that only works where you can connect to a place with lots of water, sustainable replenishment from evaporative loss, AND a suitableplace to store it to run a "hydroelectric battery." Then removing all that earth potentially removes lots of agricultural ground from production. Not to mention the geological and environmental problems you have to overcome. Nevermind the NIMBYs.
Only one of the fourth generation reactor designs is water cooled.


Summary of designs for generation IV reactors[40]
SystemNeutron SpectrumCoolantTemperature (°C)Fuel CycleSize (MW)Example developers
VHTRThermalHelium900–1000Open250–300JAEA (HTTR), Tsinghua University (HTR-10), X-energy[41]
SFRFastSodium550Closed30–150, 300–1500, 1000–2000TerraPower (TWR), Toshiba (4S), GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (PRISM), OKBM Afrikantov (BN-1200)
SCWRThermal or fastWater510–625Open or closed300–700, 1000–1500
GFRFastHelium850Closed1200Energy Multiplier Module
LFRFastLead480–800Closed20–180, 300–1200, 600–1000Rosatom (BREST-OD-300)
MSRFast or thermalFluoride or chloride salts700–800Closed250, 1000Seaborg Technologies, TerraPower, Elysium Industries, Moltex Energy, Flibe Energy (LFTR), Transatomic Power, Thorium Tech Solution (FUJI MSR), Terrestrial Energy (IMSR), Southern Company[41]
DFRFastLead1000Closed500–1500Institute for Solid-State Nuclear Physics[42]


"Relative to current nuclear power plant technology, the claimed benefits for 4th generation reactors include:

  • Nuclear waste that remains radioactive for a few centuries instead of millennia[35]
  • 100–300 times more energy yield from the same amount of nuclear fuel[36]
  • Broader range of fuels, and even unencapsulated raw fuels (non-pebble MSR, LFTR).
  • In some reactors, the ability to consume existing nuclear waste in the production of electricity, that is, a closed nuclear fuel cycle. This strengthens the argument to deem nuclear power as renewable energy.
  • Improved operating safety features, such as (depending on design) avoidance of pressurized operation, automatic passive (unpowered, uncommanded) reactor shutdown, avoidance of water cooling and the associated risks of loss of water (leaks or boiling) and hydrogen generation/explosion and contamination of coolant water."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,691 Posts
80383
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tony K

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,701 Posts
Only one of the fourth generation reactor designs is water cooled.
Appreciate the info, but...what did that have to do with my point about the downsides of hydroelectric?
 
  • Like
Reactions: David S

·
Registered
Joined
·
276 Posts
I'm for nuclear for one very simple reason - you can't plant anything in a solar array. At least not the way the solar and electrical industry wants to build solar fields on the cheap - on the best flat farmground, and in one large clump. We stand to lose half of our farm - about 400 acres - which stands in the "ALCOA bottoms" east of Evansville, IN. Vectren wants to put in a solar farm on several thousand acres of the flat and easily accessible old glacial lakebed directly along their high voltage line north of the ALCOA smelter - Kaiser Aluminum now owns the roller mill - and Vectren Culley plant at Yankeetown. Nevermind that Warrick County has tons of old strip mines they could repurpose with less negative crop production effect and loss to farmers.
Not to mention up north solar is useless in the winter, it would take thousands of acres to make a dent, when the sun is rarely out. Hence small nukes
 
41 - 46 of 46 Posts
Top