Should the U.S. Revive Nuclear Power?

[Marlin]

Should the U.S. Revive Nuclear Power?


https://www.commentarymagazine.com/american-society/should-u-s-revive-nuclear-power/

[bigjoemonger]

There are ultimately some problems with widespread investment in nuclear. In the 50's and 60's when nuclear became big it was seen as the cure to our power problem. However though it does not produce carbon emissions it does produce radiactive waste. Sure that waste can be reprocessed a lot to make it really small but ultimately that infrastructure is not in place to handle an expansion. And the infrastructure we do have in place is old and falling apart. Also advancements in solar and wind make major investments in nuclear improbable.


However that doesn't mean nuclear will go away. One nuclear plant can power 2 million homes. The same power production would require hundreds of wind turbines or thousands of solar panels covering hundreds of square miles of land, and both of those aren't reliable forms of power generation. Wind dies down or increases beyond operating limits and solar panels dont work at night or in bad weather. They are merely supplementary. That kind of land coverage is not realistic.


If you want to go carbon free but still meet power production requirements then nuclear is really the only option. But until the waste problem is solved there will probably never be any form of nuclear expansion. Just a continuation of infrastructure already in place.

[Bonds 25]

Waste really isn't a problem. It sits in indestructible, self cooling, basically maintenance free casks with dose rates barely above background.

[Marlin]

   I tend to see the problem as one of vision. We have a "buggy whip" syndrome with the major suppliers. The grid is and will change probably to a more decentralized one that is contrary to the the one currently supported by government and industry. SMRs provide a scalable nuclear base load and potentially private supplies that would free industry from a volatile utility market. Solar, wind, and hydro are likely to be a larger portion of the supply depending on the advance in storage technologies probably not a reliable base line supply in the near future. Walk away designs ( I favor liquid metal atmospheric designs) traveling wave reactors to burn used fuel and extract more power in doing so, and reprocessing are the future. Modular designs that reduce up front cost bringing on line power while installing new modules seems like a good fix for the up front cost that is killing a lot of new construction in the face of cheap natural gas and fracking. Vision and entrenched industry (buggy whips) are a larger barrier to nuclear power than solvable and non existant problems.





"That's just my opinion I could be wrong" ...Dennis Miller

[Ksheed]

Waste really isn't a problem. It sits in indestructible, self cooling, basically maintenance free casks with dose rates barely above background.

You're right, the Federal Government is the problem. 19 1/2 years overdue is the federal repository for used fuel. While the names have changed over those two decades, it's still the same 536 people responsible.

[Marlin]

   I tend to see the problem as one of vision. We have a "buggy whip" syndrome with the major suppliers. The grid is and will change probably to a more decentralized one that is contrary to the the one currently supported by government and industry. SMRs provide a scalable nuclear base load and potentially private supplies that would free industry from a volatile utility market. Solar, wind, and hydro are likely to be a larger portion of the supply depending on the advance in storage technologies probably not a reliable base line supply in the near future. Walk away designs ( I favor liquid metal atmospheric designs) traveling wave reactors to burn used fuel and extract more power in doing so, and reprocessing are the future. Modular designs that reduce up front cost bringing on line power while installing new modules seems like a good fix for the up front cost that is killing a lot of new construction in the face of cheap natural gas and fracking. Vision and entrenched industry (buggy whips) are a larger barrier to nuclear power than solvable and non existant problems.





"That's just my opinion I could be wrong" ...Dennis Miller

Distributed energy sources can reduce cost of electricity up to 50%, study says


Traditional grids will have to change. Modeling can help find the best way forward.

https://arstechnica.com/science/2017/07/distributed-energy-sources-can-reduce-cost-of-electricity-up-to-50-study-says/