16 ms·

I don't really understand this argument. How are dozens of nuclear power plants a single point of failure? Because of the uranium mining and processing? Then we

I don't really understand this argument. How are dozens of nuclear power plants a single point of failure? Because of the uranium mining and processing? Then we can invest in fast reactors, which consume 100x less and require less R&D than renewables have benefited from in the last decades. Or seawater uranium, another 100x in reserves, distributed all around the world.

robryan 2y ago
The problem is more our lack of ability to build them quickly and in a cost effective way. An investment in solar will much more reliably and quickly turn into a certain amount of power generation. Hopefully this changes once every nuclear project isn't some complex bespoke thing that is likely to be late and over budget.
- panick21_ 2y ago
  And yet UAE a country without any technical knowlage built them in a cost effective way and quickly. In fact, any country that has built them in mass figured out how to do it cost effective and quickly. The reality is, its only not cost effective and quick when a country only builds a single reactor as a vanity project to keep the industry alive. No country that seriously tried to quickly increase production with nuclear has failed.
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    The UAE spent $30B and a decade building one nuclear plant. The technical knowledge (and the design, and the construction) came from South Korea.
    - ViewTrick1002 2y ago
      The true costs are unknown. All we have is the announced figure and then two parties with an interest in showing low costs despite a 4 year delay saying "Yes sir, all went according to plan!!" Even though it obviously did not all go according to plan.
ceejayoz 2y ago
> How are dozens of nuclear power plants a single point of failure? https://www.wired.com/story/nuclear-power-plants-struggling-to-stay-cool/ https://www.wired.com/story/nuclear-power-plants-struggling-... "Amidst a slow-burning heat wave that has killed hundreds and sparked intense wildfires across Western Europe, and combined with already low water levels due to drought, the Rhône’s water has gotten too hot for the job. It’s no longer possible to cool reactors without expelling water downstream that’s so hot as to extinguish aquatic life. So a few weeks ago, Électricité de France (EDF) began powering down some reactors along the Rhône and a second major river in the south, the Garonne. That’s by now a familiar story: Similar shutdowns due to drought and heat occurred in 2018 and 2019. This summer’s cuts, combined with malfunctions and maintenance on other reactors, have helped reduce France’s nuclear power output by nearly 50 percent." France is about the best existing case for nuclear, incidentally.
- kjkjadksj 2y ago
  Thats one of the shortcomings of using a river with variable flow over an ocean or large lake
  - Loughla 2y ago
    Ocean yes, but then that opens you up to hurricanes and/or tsunamis. Lakes can dry up. So that's no better than a river I would think. Either way, there are no fully safe and permanent sources of cooling water, is what I'm taking away from this.
    - kjkjadksj 2y ago
      Certain lakes aren’t going to dry up within human timescales. And disaster risk is present in a lot of places. Just something you take into account when you build it.
      - addaon 2y ago
        > Certain lakes aren’t going to dry up within human timescales. Which ones? The North American Great Lakes, maybe? Anything else? The Aral Sea was the third largest lake in the world. Within the human time scale of the last six decades, it's lost 90% of its area.
threeseed 2y ago
And who is going to pay for all of this R&D and investment. The market doesn't want it, banks don't want to finance it, researchers aren't interested and startups can't afford to. You can't fight against market dynamics when you're talking about capital expenditure this high.
- fraboniface 2y ago
  This has indeed been a big blocker, but the article is proof that the market now wants it. And there are plenty of new nuclear startups, as well as interested researchers. What was lacking so far was a real need energy-wise (in the absence of a high carbon tax) and regulatory stability/transparency. Edit: also, sodium fast reactors have existed for 20 years. The R&D has mostly already been done for that tech. But the lack of projects make it stuck to TRL 8.

robryan 2y ago

The problem is more our lack of ability to build them quickly and in a cost effective way. An investment in solar will much more reliably and quickly turn into a certain amount of power generation. Hopefully this changes once every nuclear project isn't some complex bespoke thing that is likely to be late and over budget.

panick21_ 2y ago
And yet UAE a country without any technical knowlage built them in a cost effective way and quickly. In fact, any country that has built them in mass figured out how to do it cost effective and quickly. The reality is, its only not cost effective and quick when a country only builds a single reactor as a vanity project to keep the industry alive. No country that seriously tried to quickly increase production with nuclear has failed.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  The UAE spent $30B and a decade building one nuclear plant. The technical knowledge (and the design, and the construction) came from South Korea.
  - ViewTrick1002 2y ago
    The true costs are unknown. All we have is the announced figure and then two parties with an interest in showing low costs despite a 4 year delay saying "Yes sir, all went according to plan!!" Even though it obviously did not all go according to plan.

ceejayoz 2y ago

> How are dozens of nuclear power plants a single point of failure? https://www.wired.com/story/nuclear-power-plants-struggling-to-stay-cool/ https://www.wired.com/story/nuclear-power-plants-struggling-... "Amidst a slow-burning heat wave that has killed hundreds and sparked intense wildfires across Western Europe, and combined with already low water levels due to drought, the Rhône’s water has gotten too hot for the job. It’s no longer possible to cool reactors without expelling water downstream that’s so hot as to extinguish aquatic life. So a few weeks ago, Électricité de France (EDF) began powering down some reactors along the Rhône and a second major river in the south, the Garonne. That’s by now a familiar story: Similar shutdowns due to drought and heat occurred in 2018 and 2019. This summer’s cuts, combined with malfunctions and maintenance on other reactors, have helped reduce France’s nuclear power output by nearly 50 percent." France is about the best existing case for nuclear, incidentally.

kjkjadksj 2y ago
Thats one of the shortcomings of using a river with variable flow over an ocean or large lake
- Loughla 2y ago
  Ocean yes, but then that opens you up to hurricanes and/or tsunamis. Lakes can dry up. So that's no better than a river I would think. Either way, there are no fully safe and permanent sources of cooling water, is what I'm taking away from this.
  - kjkjadksj 2y ago
    Certain lakes aren’t going to dry up within human timescales. And disaster risk is present in a lot of places. Just something you take into account when you build it.
    - addaon 2y ago
      > Certain lakes aren’t going to dry up within human timescales. Which ones? The North American Great Lakes, maybe? Anything else? The Aral Sea was the third largest lake in the world. Within the human time scale of the last six decades, it's lost 90% of its area.

threeseed 2y ago

And who is going to pay for all of this R&D and investment. The market doesn't want it, banks don't want to finance it, researchers aren't interested and startups can't afford to. You can't fight against market dynamics when you're talking about capital expenditure this high.

fraboniface 2y ago
This has indeed been a big blocker, but the article is proof that the market now wants it. And there are plenty of new nuclear startups, as well as interested researchers. What was lacking so far was a real need energy-wise (in the absence of a high carbon tax) and regulatory stability/transparency. Edit: also, sodium fast reactors have existed for 20 years. The R&D has mostly already been done for that tech. But the lack of projects make it stuck to TRL 8.