A Nuclear Power Plant in Ireland?

Bigfellalixnaw

I don't need to tell you that the price of fuel has gone to extortionist levels or that soon enough within the next couple of decades we might very well be coming face to face a full blown energy crisis, and that we in Ireland, a small nation, will be facing the same fate. Currently we're doing our best (or some might say we could do better) to develop the renewable energy market to comply the demands of current times. But still we are a nation still dependent upon the burning of fossil fuels. Eventually, we are going to have to consider the inevitable and build a nuclear power (or perhaps a small to medium sized one to start with). However, if we were to build a nuclear power plant in Ireland within the next couple of years, how would we manage to go about it? What obstacles need to be overcome?
I know that first off the use of nuclear energy in Ireland would need to be legalised by the government before such a venture can be entertained.

666irishguy

I'd support it. One nuclear plant would solve a huge amount of energy needs. We could always use increasing amounts of renewable's and introduce them gradually. We are going to be held hostage energy wise by the middle-east when there is a major war there (and there will be) and once the oil demand from India and China reaches western levels in proportion to their population there is not going to be enough to go around.

Bigfellalixnaw

Economic security, a valid point my dear man.

KerryRed

I believe that Ireland should look into any options which would offer independence on the question of energy. I do believe though, that prior to any other investigation into the project, Ireland should first affirm her right to control her own resources and end the EU's stranglehold on national resources. We have for centuries battled imperialism and again we are at the will of a foreign invader, the EU. Ireland has to produce much of her own energy, whether it be oil or gas, renewable or nuclear, and they must ensure that all means of energy production are the sole property of the Irish people through the state. An end to corporations taking over Irish energy and charging criminal rates to the people in this country is essential

breadmonkey

This doesn't look even slightly suspicious...

Bigfellalixnaw

A constructive discussion on how nuclear power may come to be in Ireland would be nice instead of vague comments like the one made by breadmonkey.

Curly Judge

As a first step we should immediately develop a world class faculty of nuclear engineering in ......probably Limerick.
The former head of Limerick university held a doctorate in that subject and its proximity to Moneypoint might be useful.

nogoodnamesleft

Nuclear power in Ireland is going to be fraught with political and planning difficulties. With the stigma attached to nuclear power which was compounded even further by the Fukushima disaster (Germany cancelled its nuclear program) I cannot envisage many Irish people letting a nuclear facility being built in their locality never mind spent nuclear fuel being transported to a suitable facility abroad for disposal using Irish roads and ports.

Other challenges include technical factors as to where to site such a facility, transmission asset upgrades required as well as now many MW of nuclear generation would be required. Nuclear power is a non dispatchable generation source so significant consideration would be required regards generation capacity. It is a tricky technical challenge due to Irelands dispersed population (voltage control issues) and relatively small population.

What could have been a much better solution (provided the last government did not sell gas reserves off the West coast of Ireland) would have been for the Irish government to build modern CCGT (combined cycle gas turbines) to generate electricity and to sell off excess energy to the UK and Continental Europe via the new 500MW East - West and future inter-connectors thus generating revenue while keeping possession of the resource.

Has the op considered these technical and non technical challenges?

Turbulent Bill

Bigfellalixnaw wrote: »

A constructive discussion on how nuclear power may come to be in Ireland would be nice instead of vague comments like the one made by breadmonkey.

I'd love to see a constructive debate on Ireland's entire future energy policy (not just pro/anti-nuclear), with all sides chipping in. AFAIK there's no long-term plan from the Government, CER etc. on this, though I'm not in the industry. At the very least it would flush out proper demand estimates, cost/benefits of various options and get the public involved in the compromises needed. It's easy to pitch it just as a pro/anti-nuclear debate but the actual issue is much wider.

I haven't voted in the poll, simply because (along with probably 99.9% of the public) I don't have enough information to make an informed decision.

ted1

Why reinvent the wheel?

Sellafield is closer to Dublin than some parts of the west coast. Why not build a reactor to supply direct to Ireland??


it'd make the build and whole project cheaper, as well as avoid plannning hassles over here

Capt'n Midnight

How much would a nuclear power plant cost over it's life including decommissioning and financial costs ?

Would that money give a better return on investment and more reduction in imported if it was spent on insulating buildings ?

What is the storage cost €/MwHr for renewables that would render nuclear obsolete ?
(How much storage capacity can be mitigated by the use of smart meters and appliances ?)

With the current trend of reducing renewable costs , wind -14% every time capacity doubles, solar -7% per year and a reduction of demand for electricity as insulation usage goes up and LED prices drop by a factor of 10 every decade, what are the chances that our electrical demands will start to level off ?

nogoodnamesleft

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

How much would a nuclear power plant cost over it's life including decommissioning and financial costs ?

Would that money give a better return on investment and more reduction in imported if it was spent on insulating buildings ?

What is the storage cost €/MwHr for renewables that would render nuclear obsolete ?
(How much storage capacity can be mitigated by the use of smart meters and appliances ?)

With the current trend of reducing renewable costs , wind -14% every time capacity doubles, solar -7% per year and a reduction of demand for electricity as insulation usage goes up and LED prices drop by a factor of 10 every decade, what are the chances that our electrical demands will start to level off ?

In the UK at present rockwool insulation is subsidised to encourage people to insulate their homes better.

Storage of electrical energy from renewable is in infancy and is not currently feasible on a large scale. There has been suggestions that electrical vehicles plugged into the grid to charge at night time could also have an ancillary use as a storage device. However many EV vehicles plugged into the grid could be represented as a large capacitor banks which could lead to over voltages on distribution lines. Intelligent smart meters will be required to report voltages throughout the distribution network in order to ensure voltages remain within nominal levels as per the IEC 60038 standard.


Renewable alone will not be able to meet demand on their own as by their very nature they are a variable resource. To meet demand Ireland would have to have a certain percentage of dispatchable and non dispatchable generation to keep the lights on.


From looking at the EU load statistics even with increased technology inefficiencies the load profiles remain roughly the same. The ENTSO-E publishes many statistics regards generation and load in an annual report.


Regards cost per Mwh Mott Macdonald compiled a report for the UK generation costs taking into account present technology as well as future advances. It also complies operational costs per generation technology as well as the capital required to build the asset. The link is

http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/statistics/projections/71-uk-electricity-generation-costs-update-.pdf

Capt'n Midnight

nogoodnamesleft wrote: »

In the UK at present rockwool insulation is subsidised to encourage people to insulate their homes better.

very heavily subsidised

Storage of electrical energy from renewable is in infancy and is not currently feasible on a large scale. There has been suggestions that electrical vehicles plugged into the grid to charge at night time could also have an ancillary use as a storage device.

I think using EV's is a non starter unless it can be shown that it won't shorten battery life. Othewise you are using an €8,000 battery to store a few euros worth of electricity.

Renewable alone will be be able to meet demand on their own as by their very nature they are a variable resource. To meet demand Ireland would have to have a certain percentage of dispatchable and non dispatchable generation to keep the lights on.

I haven't looked at the figures in detail but CAES + CCGT looks good, using renewables to compress the air. Would a mechanical air compressor and pipes be significantly cheaper than generator and motor ?

nogoodnamesleft

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

very heavily subsidised

I think using EV's is a non starter unless it can be shown that it won't shorten battery life. Othewise you are using an €8,000 battery to store a few euros worth of electricity.


I haven't looked at the figures in detail but CAES + CCGT looks good, using renewables to compress the air. Would a mechanical air compressor and pipes be significantly cheaper than generator and motor ?

Development is on going into less developed technologies such as tidal range and tidal stream. A very interesting project in the South west of the UK is the Severn barrage however is it at a standstill due to the capital cost required to built the asset (It is estimated to cost in the region of £10 - £34 billion). The scheme was unsuccessful in securing governmental funding and is relying on private investment at present.

CAES may be a proven concept however it would be difficult to roll out on a commercial scale as its under developed at present and many countries are under pressure already to meet their energy and carbon reduction requirements by 2020 (i.e. the ETS).

I personally think that with Ireland being fortunate to have some of the highest wind speeds in Europe should capitalise on this natural asset. If further gas exploration on the west coast of Ireland is fruitful. The Irish government should learn from their past mistake and retain control of this asset ensuring energy security. CCGT plants built (ay hypothetically on the west coast) near load centers for instance (e.g. near Galway and Limerick). Waste heat from the generators could be used in order to head local homes and increase efficiency of the generator (i.e. district heating) whilst also reducing electricity demand for space and water heading.

Bigfellalixnaw

One possibility to factor in the location of a nuclear reactor in Ireland would be splitting Ireland into sectors that will house particular energy types. My reckoning would be to have the west coast of Ireland designated for the purpose of renewables (wind energy, wave and tidal energy, etc) and a have the east coast of Ireland (well a patch of the east coast if we are to only have one nuclear reactor) designated for the purpose of nuclear energy.

Turbulent Bill

Bigfellalixnaw wrote: »

One possibility to factor in the location of a nuclear reactor in Ireland would be splitting Ireland into sectors that will house particular energy types. My reckoning would be to have the west coast of Ireland designated for the purpose of renewables (wind energy, wave and tidal energy, etc) and a have the east coast of Ireland (well a patch of the east coast if we are to only have one nuclear reactor) designated for the purpose of nuclear energy.

This would necessitate separate grids, with backup power supplies for each, otherwise it's a political non-starter. Imagine what would happen if a Dublin nuclear station was being used to supplement Galway's renewable supply (for example), giving the West 'clean' energy without having nuclear on their doorstep.

It would need to be a nationwide (maybe all-Ireland) solution.

nogoodnamesleft

Bigfellalixnaw wrote: »

One possibility to factor in the location of a nuclear reactor in Ireland would be splitting Ireland into sectors that will house particular energy types. My reckoning would be to have the west coast of Ireland designated for the purpose of renewables (wind energy, wave and tidal energy, etc) and a have the east coast of Ireland (well a patch of the east coast if we are to only have one nuclear reactor) designated for the purpose of nuclear energy.

Separate sectors? How would a utility manage such an infrastructure? Separate control centers for each sector?

The EU has proposed plans to construct a EU wide "supergrid" interconnecting all electricity grids both existing AC and by the construction of HVDC links to transfer bulk power not separate them. An interconnected grid would mitigate more Co2 emissions and allow more efficient energy utilization by capitalising on renewable resources such as offshore wind in the North Sea, Hydro resource in Sweden etc.

Bigfellalixnaw

The project would die its death in planning applications anyway.

dvcireland

http://www.bene.ie/Home.html

http://dynamic.rte.ie/quickaxs/209-r1-todaywithpatkenny-2011-06-24.smil

BENE’s Philip Walton and Mark Deary of the Green Party had a 26-minute interview with Pat Kenny on his RTE Radio1 show on 24 June 2011 concerning the UK’s plans to replace their nuclear fleet with newer, safer nuclear plants. Starts at 04:10.

from rte / pat kenny website

".....As Germany decides to close all its nuclear power plants by 2022, in the wake of growing public opposition following the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, Britain have gone the opposite way and have published plans to build eight privately built nuclear power plants in England and Wales, including 2 at existing installations in Sellafield. What will this mean for Ireland? Minister Phil Hogan has said that it is a matter for the UK to decide on its energy policy.
Pat was joined by Philip Walton, Professor Emeritus of Applied Physics from NUIG and Mark Deary, Green Party member and resident of Co. Louth....."

shanered

Like I've always said, we built port tunnel...leaks
we built national aquatic center.....leaks
I just feel like a trend could be continued if we go nuclear!

Hibbeler

shanered wrote: »

Like I've always said, we built port tunnel...leaks
we built national aquatic center.....leaks
I just feel like a trend could be continued if we go nuclear!

Would a nuclear plant built today not be over-engineered to the max?

I'm sure many other countries have had some minor issues such as these with public works projects? Happens all the time I'd imagine, so I don't see why Ireland should be any different in that regard, it certainly should not be a main reason to discount what could be a viable energy solution.

Bigfellalixnaw

I am not aware of any problems concerning the safety of Ireland's current power generating facilities. Therefore, the safety of a nuclear power plant in Ireland might yield the same results. Of course, if there are any problems concerning Ireland's power facilities do inform us.

martomcg

Generation IV Nuclear power plants are the way forward. Just one of these could generate enough electricity to cover the entire country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_IV_reactor

I actually did my thesis on Pebble Bed Reactors and they are pretty much meltdown proof.

http://dvice.com/archives/2011/03/how-to-make-a-n.php

China currently has one in operation (HTR-10) and is scaling it up.

HTR-10 is a 10 MWt prototype pebble bed reactor at Tsinghua University in China. Construction began in 2000 and it achieved first criticality in January 2003.
In 2005, China announced its intention to scale up HTR-10 for commercial power generation. The first two 250-MWt High Temperature Reactor-Pebblebed Modules (HTR-PM) will be installed at the Shidaowan plant in Shandong Province and together drive a steam turbine generating 200 MWe. Construction is scheduled to begin in 2009 and commissioning in 2013.

Capt'n Midnight

martomcg wrote: »

Generation IV Nuclear power plants are the way forward. Just one of these could generate enough electricity to cover the entire country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_IV_reactor

Come back when they've been commercialised and and a consistent uptime of more than 80%

I actually did my thesis on Pebble Bed Reactors and they are pretty much meltdown proof.

http://dvice.com/archives/2011/03/how-to-make-a-n.php

China currently has one in operation (HTR-10) and is scaling it up.

While that article does mention the dust problem it didn't mention the jamming problem where all the pebbles got wedged in real tight. Like most nuclear technologies introduced since the 1950's this is still under development.

miss no stars

martomcg wrote: »

I actually did my thesis on Pebble Bed Reactors and they are pretty much meltdown proof.

Just like the titanic was unsinkable? Statements like that make me worry... What's been missed?

martomcg

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

While that article does mention the dust problem it didn't mention the jamming problem where all the pebbles got wedged in real tight. Like most nuclear technologies introduced since the 1950's this is still under development.

I'm aware its under development, but now would be the time for Ireland to start looking into these technologies. Renewables here don't have the potential for energy independence and we're on borrowed time with fossil fuel.

Wind Energy isn't worth a salt, yet it seems to be the 'go-to' solution to the problem.

Just like the titanic was unsinkable? Statements like that make me worry... What's been missed?

They've induced melt-down (i.e removed the cooling rods) on multiple occasions in the Chinese reactor mentioned above with no consequence. The pebbles dont start to sublimate untill nearly 4000C which is over twice the temperature a nuclear reactor can achieve.

nogoodnamesleft

martomcg wrote: »

I'm aware its under development, but now would be the time for Ireland to start looking into these technologies. Renewables here don't have the potential for energy independence and we're on borrowed time with fossil fuel.

Wind Energy isn't worth a salt, yet it seems to be the 'go-to' solution to the problem.



They've induced melt-down (i.e removed the cooling rods) on multiple occasions in the Chinese reactor mentioned above with no consequence. The pebbles dont start to sublimate untill nearly 4000C which is over twice the temperature a nuclear reactor can achieve.

So you propose for Ireland to embark upon a intensive R&D program in order develop this particular nuclear solution to a commercialisation stage.....even though we are in the midst of a recession and as a country have no background, education facilities to enable us to carry out the task.

Wind energy not worth salt.....you obviously are not aware of the developments within electrical engineering at present in order to optimise wind energy across EU (e.g VSC HVDC, HVDC cables, HVDC CB development, existing transmission infrastructure upgrades etc).

Granted wind energy is intermittent and Ireland as well as other nations rely upon traditional fossil generation (primarily natural gas) to meet future demand. However from analysis of wind statistics of the North Sea. Wind has an average capacity factor of 40% (offshore). Essentially free energy negating the capital and maintenance cost.

In future it is likely that the EU will be one Supergrid, the NSCOGI released a report last month backed by many European bodies of an offshore grid study which exploits wind, hydro etc nuclear across the EU which includes grid proposals that siting capacity ratings of HVDC as well as potential substations which would provide a means to interconnect the countries involved.

http://www.benelux.int/NSCOGI/NSCOGI_WG1_OffshoreGridReport.pdf

The report also gives a breakdown of generation technologies per country to 2030. In this study or any others that I have researched has determined that Ireland would not require Nuclear generation. Ireland has a relatively small electrical load compared to other EU countries and Ireland has an abundance of wind (be it variable). In future we will import or export electrical energy as required rather than embarking on a nuclear development scheme or commission a nuclear plant like the one you propose.

pljudge321

martomcg wrote: »

Wind Energy isn't worth a salt, yet it seems to be the 'go-to' solution to the problem.

Interesting fact. This year we generated the same % of our total electricity demand from wind as the UK did from their nuclear plants. Wind has problems related to it, as any generation source does, but the argument that it is useless has well and truly been squashed by this stage.

Capt'n Midnight

martomcg wrote: »

I'm aware its under development, but now would be the time for Ireland to start looking into these technologies. Renewables here don't have the potential for energy independence and we're on borrowed time with fossil fuel.

Under development. The technologies you are talking about are 20-40 years in the future. At best. And that estimate is from the same sort of guys who still haven't commercialised breeder reactors despite large scale plutonium production having started in 1944. And if they go ahead then current economic reserves of uranium will have run out by then.

Thorium is basically a breeder reactor except in that case it wasn't until 1946 that the cycle was made public.

Meanwhile wind and solar are dropping in price and a good storage solution is all that's needed for energy independence.

Geothermal is also interesting, not sure how it compares with the economics of nuclear but it more reliable and controllable.

mandrake04

I am Pro-Nuclear energy myself (I also work in Nuclear Medicine/Diagnostics so have a good grasp on safety issues) but I don't think Ireland is developed enough to handle NP at the moment or in the near future.

eoghan_85

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Under development. The technologies you are talking about are 20-40 years in the future. At best. And that estimate is from the same sort of guys who still haven't commercialised breeder reactors despite large scale plutonium production having started in 1944. And if they go ahead then current economic reserves of uranium will have run out by then.

Thorium is basically a breeder reactor except in that case it wasn't until 1946 that the cycle was made public.

Meanwhile wind and solar are dropping in price and a good storage solution is all that's needed for energy independence.

Geothermal is also interesting, not sure how it compares with the economics of nuclear but it more reliable and controllable.

Nuclear energy has been proven to be the safest and cleanest form of electricity generation over the last 30 years. The Fukushima "disaster" shows just another case of overreaction by the ultra liberals who are too quick to kick up at the mere mention of Nuclear energy based on the Chernobyl meltdown.

Could you please explain how wind and solar are dropping in price? The entire Irish grid (and every other grid) was designed and developed to facilitate radial transmission and distribution from centralised generation sources. The trend towards wind energy in the last ten years has seen the entire grid completely rebuilt to facilitate small pockets of undependable and expensive (yes, expensive) renewable generation. This rebuilding of the network is not and has not been cheap and is certainly not getting any cheaper. Furthermore it is a primal cause in driving up the cost to the end consumer of electricity.
Also, a good form of storage "is all that's needed" for energy independence? And 100 billion euro is all that's needed for financial independence from the current economic quagmire! Currently, we have Turlough Hill with an output of approx 280 MW which is really only used as backup. To develope a storage facility where we could get any relative amount of energy independence would require at least another few GW of wind energy and at least a similar amount of GW available in storage - all in all it's a non runner and the longer our govt. and Eirgrid insist on the facile run towards green energy, the more money the electricity consumer will be paying.

Just to highlight a few other myths that really annoy me about this debate:
- The East west interconnector will only be used as an effective power station by Eirgrid with power only ever flowing one way, to compensate for the lack of investment in power stations over the last ten years. (not that it really matters much at the moment, as with the countless millions poured into it, it's currently operating on a max through flow of 40MW due to the interference it's causing in North Dublin!).

- Denmark is hailed as the successful business model in the wind energy debate. Every night Denmark dumps a few hundred MW onto the European grid per gratis. Wind energy hits it's peak at night time when demand is at it's least. Wind energy also hit's it's trough at the coldest days when demand is at it's highest.

- As I mentioned already, the Irish grid was developed in a radial nature with centralised generation points. The trend towards pockets of generation spread across the country has actually destabilized the entire network to the point where Ireland has seen more frequency dips in the last 5 years than it did in the previous 15 years. Due to our island network we are already fragile as we are not supported by the larger European grid like other countries. The likelihood of a blackout in Ireland is probably 5 times more likely than any other country in the Western world.

Rant over - needless to say I'm not a fan of wind energy and I do believe that Nuclear is the best way forward - Carnsore is the greatest travesty ever to hit the Irish electricity generation sector! What could have been the perfect place for a nuclear facility now stands some poxy windfarm!