I have received a chorus of complaints about the recent CO2 versus grid cost piece. For once, the uppity choir is on solid grounds. The key point that should-cost nuclear can protect us from our ignorance of the social cost of CO2 got lost in the lousy graphics and impenetrable wording. So I decided to try again. Apologies for redundantly cluttering your inbox.
Does it make sense to build battery storage for day/night load variance and ro reduce the number of NPPs but run the at higher utilisation?
Newer reactor designs (Terrapower, Westinghouse Lead breeder) include thermal storage and oversized turbines&generators for load following, this perhaps could remove the uptick in cost for very low CO2 emissions.
Almost certainly not. The GKG grid model has that option and at least for Germany makes almost no use of it, despite some pretty optimistic cost assumptions for batteries. Batteries are just too expensive. Batteries may have a role in momentary frequency control.
ThorCon looked at multi-hour thermal storage and came away unimpressed even tho our heat was already molten salt at 600+C. This idea only makes sense if your fission island is prohibitively expensive in which case you have already lost the game. Terrapower and Westinghouse are admitting that their plants are too expensive to be anything other than a drain on the taxpayer.
Thanks for your reply! You worked at ThorCon? Very cool!
Edit: Just read you are the founder, good luck to your company! Floating NPP construction in factories could really be what gives nuclear power its steep learning rates from the 60s back.
Btw., do you know the DualFluid reactor concept of the German-Canadian reactor startup of the same name, and what do you think of it?
The central thesis of the Gordian Knot News is that nuclear's problem is not technical and can not be solved by this or that technology. Moreover, if we had the regulatory system we need, the market will decide who the winners are, not some self-anointed expert. Accordingly, GKN avoids comments about specific technologies. Let a 1000 flowers bloom.
The swipe at Natrium and Westinghouse was really aimed at the NRC which makes the fission island far more expensive than it should be. In a rational world, the fission island would be cheaper than the turbine hall. Any engineer who suggested using thermal storage to make the fission island smaller and the turbine hall bigger would be laughed out of the room.
Does it make sense to build battery storage for day/night load variance and ro reduce the number of NPPs but run the at higher utilisation?
Newer reactor designs (Terrapower, Westinghouse Lead breeder) include thermal storage and oversized turbines&generators for load following, this perhaps could remove the uptick in cost for very low CO2 emissions.
Walter,
Almost certainly not. The GKG grid model has that option and at least for Germany makes almost no use of it, despite some pretty optimistic cost assumptions for batteries. Batteries are just too expensive. Batteries may have a role in momentary frequency control.
ThorCon looked at multi-hour thermal storage and came away unimpressed even tho our heat was already molten salt at 600+C. This idea only makes sense if your fission island is prohibitively expensive in which case you have already lost the game. Terrapower and Westinghouse are admitting that their plants are too expensive to be anything other than a drain on the taxpayer.
Thanks for your reply! You worked at ThorCon? Very cool!
Edit: Just read you are the founder, good luck to your company! Floating NPP construction in factories could really be what gives nuclear power its steep learning rates from the 60s back.
Btw., do you know the DualFluid reactor concept of the German-Canadian reactor startup of the same name, and what do you think of it?
Walter,
The central thesis of the Gordian Knot News is that nuclear's problem is not technical and can not be solved by this or that technology. Moreover, if we had the regulatory system we need, the market will decide who the winners are, not some self-anointed expert. Accordingly, GKN avoids comments about specific technologies. Let a 1000 flowers bloom.
The swipe at Natrium and Westinghouse was really aimed at the NRC which makes the fission island far more expensive than it should be. In a rational world, the fission island would be cheaper than the turbine hall. Any engineer who suggested using thermal storage to make the fission island smaller and the turbine hall bigger would be laughed out of the room.
Understood, makes sense!