Eskom looking at nuclear power reactors

[ɹǝuuᴉM]

To be honest I think the future is not nuclear, but a blend of many different types of power sources. Renewables, Nuclear being the 2 main ones.. Coal needs to sunset and sunset yesterday....

I on the other hand think that nuclear is the way to go. Not fission though but fusion. If you are in your mid 20s (like me) by the time you are 50 you can expect to see the first reactors going online. But if you are already 35years + than you are right. Nuclear is not the future

 

[Mystic Twilight]

So, about that previous nuclear deal with the russians...

 

[Nithan15]

So will the employees glow in the dark?

 

[PaulGherkin]

So, about that previous nuclear deal with the russians...

Probably gonna make it happen now. But either way, any relief is many years away.

 

[ToxicBunny]

I on the other hand think that nuclear is the way to go. Not fission though but fusion. If you are in your mid 20s (like me) by the time you are 50 you can expect to see the first reactors going online. But if you are already 35years + than you are right. Nuclear is not the future

Putting all your eggs in one basket when there are multiple solutions is daft... And at the current rate of progress I would be surprised if fusion is commercially viable as base load in 30 years.

 

[Swa]

Hello hello hello
Article from 2011
Please can you follow up and see what the Prof has come up with as far as -- energy STORAGE is concerned..???

I just love it when people always come up with the "storage problem". Like nuclear/coal doesn't already use storage and Eskom didn't replenish that storage with its load shedding last night. I also love it how it's always made out to be coal/nuclear vs PV when renewables are actually a much bigger mix of technologies. Renewables are probably the only technology where you can easily overprovision to such an extent that you don't even need storage.

About the last bit with cost effective, everyone usually uses France as example.

Note how they did not add the cost of decommissioning to the price, now they have some of the most expensive prices to make up for it.

Yeah this is something I always point out wrt cost of nuclear. Decommissioning costs are usually not included in the calculations and where they are they are always inadequate costing multiple times more.

Why on earth did ESKOM ever turn its back on this? So much time wasted and too many people listening to the wrong advice.

The state has to write out ESKOM as the sole direct supplier of electricity in SA law. This will allow competitors to tap directly into the power grid and provide power to blocks (geographical areas) that would rather buy electricity from a IPP that has a small PBNR which can supply far more reliable electricity 100% of the time.

This is still the cheapest and cleanest way to generate power - and despite the anti-nuclear propagandists its very safe.

Small modular nuclear reactors, is really the solution for Africa's electricity challenges. But the government should not be allowed to dominate the supply. Because its clearly corrupt.

And where are these reactors? Afaik there aren't any beyond proof of concept yet. Nuclear also can't be deployed everywhere which is something the nuclear pro-pagandists ignore. But anyway it will not happen because we can't afford it.

 

[IdlePhaedrus]

At the time that the PBMR project was shut down I did a bunch of reading on the subject and was lucky enough to have a fairly long email conversation with one of the nuclear engineers on the project. I also live just five kilometres from Koeberg. On paper the project appeared viable at the time it was canned by guavament.

If I recall correctly by then the cost was just short of R1T, but I might be completely wrong on this number, so please don't quote me.

The problem is, while the IP exists, the team that developed it is now dispersed (probably working in the UAE and elsewhere). So the project is essentially still just experimental. It will be a mammoth task to bring it back online and cost a shedload of money and time which we don't have to move it from experimental to production.

NECSA is currently borked and riddled with corruption it would appear.

So while it is a "nice" idea it just can't happen until Eskom is stabilised which is likely to be at least two years down the line if it happens at all and has a lot to do with Gweezy (who I think should be fired). So far I am happy with the noises coming from De Reyter, except for this.

 

[Vox Populi Vox Dei]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1223237925137240064

 

[Swa]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1223237925137240064

Does this mean they're selling it?

 

[IdlePhaedrus]

Thanks @Chris_the_Brit I wasn't aware of this. If the intent is to sell the IP rather than try and implement it, then I am fairly happy with that.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Thanks @Chris_the_Brit I wasn't aware of this. If the intent is to sell the IP rather than try and implement it, then I am fairly happy with that.

Agreed...

Of course I can almost guarantee how this will pan out.

Government will try license the technology to someone (at an exorbitant cost or retarded requirements) and nobody will be interested and it will just sit a grow cobwebs. Instead of just manning up and selling the IP with some requirement that the company is SA incorporated or something, we will waste the opportunity to become a possible world leader in the PBMR field again.

 

[Magnum]

Kak idea

Second!

 

[Swa]

Agreed...

Of course I can almost guarantee how this will pan out.

Government will try license the technology to someone (at an exorbitant cost or retarded requirements) and nobody will be interested and it will just sit a grow cobwebs. Instead of just manning up and selling the IP with some requirement that the company is SA incorporated or something, we will waste the opportunity to become a possible world leader in the PBMR field again.

Don't forget the BEE requirement. Can't support the Western colonialists.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Don't forget the BEE requirement.

Thats covered in the retarded requirements portion

 

[Gordon_R]

To me it seems this whole story is based on wrong assumptions by the media:

Business | News24

www.fin24.com

 

[newby_investor]

I on the other hand think that nuclear is the way to go. Not fission though but fusion. If you are in your mid 20s (like me) by the time you are 50 you can expect to see the first reactors going online. But if you are already 35years + than you are right. Nuclear is not the future

Except that people have been talking about fusion for several decades now, and ... research AFAIK is inching closer, but it's kind of like watching a snail crawl up the first step towards Table Mountain.

Nuclear power does certainly belong in the mix, unfortunately it's a politically (and emotionally) charged topic. If people had just been rational about it, we'd have far more nuclear plants than coal at this point.

 

[Swa]

Except that people have been talking about fusion for several decades now, and ... research AFAIK is inching closer, but it's kind of like watching a snail crawl up the first step towards Table Mountain.

Nuclear power does certainly belong in the mix, unfortunately it's a politically (and emotionally) charged topic. If people had just been rational about it, we'd have far more nuclear plants than coal at this point.

Fusion has stalled if you'll excuse the pun. There were a few hopeful technologies but they all came to nothing. With fusion it's all or nothing and you don't get any inching closer.

 

[newby_investor]

Fusion has stalled if you'll excuse the pun. There were a few hopeful technologies but they all came to nothing. With fusion it's all or nothing and you don't get any inching closer.

That's not quite true. For one, the scientific theory is advancing. For another thing, the practical aspect is making progress as well. In recent years, research teams have managed to achieve self-sustaining fusion reactions, BUT they produce very little power and require something of the order of megawatts to make the magnetic field needed to keep them stable.

So yeah. Inching.

 

[Swa]

That's not quite true. For one, the scientific theory is advancing. For another thing, the practical aspect is making progress as well. In recent years, research teams have managed to achieve self-sustaining fusion reactions, BUT they produce very little power and require something of the order of megawatts to make the magnetic field needed to keep them stable.

So yeah. Inching.

These reactions still produce less energy than what you use so they aren't really self-sustaining. With fusion you either have something that can sustain a reaction or you don't. It's not like coal where you can refine the energy output using different quality coal.

 

[OCP]

Great idea. I fully support them giving this a serious look. The future is nuclear, and the sooner we go there the better.

This country is on the brink of nuclear.
A few more months of ANC governance and will go boom!