Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Nuclear Energy for Ireland?

Options
123457»

Comments

  • Options
    #182
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 18,297 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    I dont follow all these developments but still hoping for modular reactors etc to jump out of the lab and become no brain solutions in the future

    https://twitter.com/RollsRoyce/status/1804199223191105978

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #183
    PommieBast
    Registered Users Posts: 2,746 ✭✭✭PommieBast


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122329159#Comment_122329159

    Hard to say what's going on with SMRs. In the case of Rolls Royce they are clearly looking for an alternative market for their experience with submarine reactors, so hard to tell how close they really are to production.

    Suspect that a lot of the incumbant nuclear industry see SMRs as a threat so the likes of EDF will be lobbying against them.



  • Options
    #184
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 18,297 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122331554#Comment_122331554

    there is going to be a need for micro /modular reactors in space for example so a market for modular stuff on earth would spur other developments

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #185
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 91,621 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122332037#Comment_122332037

    Plutonium 238 emits 570 watts per kg, with a half life of nearly 90 years. It's a unregulated heat source, it's not a reactor. Yes you can use the heat to produce electricity but the main use is to keep probes and rovers from freezing. And apart from that nuclear in space is a solution looking for a problem.

    The biggest reactors flown in space had an output of about 0.00001 GW. USA's SNAP-10A disintegrated in orbit, Russia's Kosmos 954 disintegrated in Canada.

    Sunlight at Jupiter is only 4% of what you get here. Juno is solar powered because it was cheaper than nuclear.

    The only places in the solar system closer than Jupiter where nuclear can compete with solar is where there's extended periods of darkness.

    LEO satellites will be back in sunlight in less than an hour, while at GEO the maximum 'eclipse' is 72 minutes and it only happens at certain times a year.

    There's niche cases like providing power for energy to fuel on the surface of Mars, but even then it may be lighter (and hence cheaper) to just bring more hydrogen with you and/or use thin film solar.

    At the poles on the Moon solar power would be available pretty much all the time. The Moon has a radius of ~1737km which means a maximum of 2729km from pole to equator, or from darkness to light. The longest HVDC line in China is 3,293 km long so long term solar wins on the moon. Alternatively to say in constant sunlight at the equator on the moon you'd have to travel 10,916 km in 29.53 days which works out at 15.4 kmph (the Lunar Rover could do 18kmph.) And the further from the equator you go the slower you'd need to go.

    On Mercury travelling at 10.892 kmph would keep you near dawn. During the day it's up to 430 °C (mercury boils at 356.73 °C at one atmosphere) and night drops to a chilly -180 °C (mercury freezes at −38.83 °C) so you could even use a mercury turbine.



  • Options
    #186
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 91,621 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122329159#Comment_122329159

    Rows of SMR's in Trench 94 with thermal outputs in the 220MW range.

    Modular reactors jumped out of the lab a long time ago and are still the main solution for a very specific use case. The U.S.S. Nautilus was launched nearly 70 years ago on 21 January 1954.

    ==========================================================

    2030 is the target to reduce emissions to 20% and then it's down to 0 by 2050.

    If instead of investing in renewables we could hypothetically get nuclear up and running in 2034 we'd still have had 4 years of 100% emissions providing backup power while waiting for nuclear.

    As 4 years by 100% would be the same as 20 years at 20% it means Nuclear delivered after 2034 has higher emissions than our current plan.

    And that's assuming we wouldn't reduce emissions at all between 2030 and 2050. Using renewables to reduce emissions by 2% a year between 2030 and 2050 would mean nuclear would have to be delivering by end of 2032 at the latest.

    EDF themselves admit that Hinkley-C's first unit could be delayed to 2031 (and operational doesn't necessarily mean it's commercially operational as there could be a half year of testing) and no date was given for the second unit. And so far they've been wrong about dates and costs every time.

    Cost given at £34Bn(2015) which is £45.53Bn(May 2024) which is an eye watering €53.75Bn

    And that's not including how much it'll cost to keep Drax going to cover for Hinkley C not producing any power

    image.png

    And that doesn't include the fuel costs or operation and maintenance costs.

    In 2027, Drax’s £10 billion of subsidies to burn wood for power will come to an end, and Drax plans to build the world’s first bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) plant

    I keep saying , with nuclear the more you look at it the worse it gets.



  • Advertisement
Advertisement