Netherlands considers more nuclear power

[Nicodeamus]

Netherlands Minister of Economic Affairs and Climate Eric Wiebes has said that more nuclear power may join solar and wind in the Dutch energy mix after 2030, in particular small modular reactors (SMR) with a capacity of up to 400MW.

“Various studies show that nuclear energy can be a cost-effective opportunity and is a positive business case,” Wiebes said in a letter to members of parliament. “SMRs can become an attractive alternative to larger nuclear reactors. Through serial production in factories, the shorter construction time and the modular design makes financing easier,” he added.

Netherlands considers more nuclear power - Nuclear Engineering International

Netherlands Minister of Economic Affairs and Climate Eric Wiebes has said that more nuclear power may join solar and wind in the Dutch energy mix after 2030, in particular small modular reactors (SMR) with a capacity of up to 400MW.

www.neimagazine.com

 

[Nicodeamus]

The Dutch is being sensible here, the project will probably take some time to materialize, but SMR reactors are a game changer.

 

[Lupus]

Nuclear is better than renewables, probably cheaper and better on the environment in the long run.

 

[Big Rat]

Nuclear is better than renewables, probably cheaper and better on the environment in the long run.

As long as all goes well. It is a stable process though, need human intervention to screw it up like Chernobyl, or really really bad earthquake/Tsunami like fukoshima. Which the Netherlands do not have. So yeah, cleaner option definitely.

 

[Lupus]

As long as all goes well. It is a stable process though, need human intervention to screw it up like Chernobyl, or really really bad earthquake/Tsunami like fukoshima. Which the Netherlands do not have. So yeah, cleaner option definitely.

In all the time that we've had nuclear it's killed less people than all the other options

 

[Johnatan56]

Netherlands Minister of Economic Affairs and Climate Eric Wiebes has said that more nuclear power may join solar and wind in the Dutch energy mix after 2030, in particular small modular reactors (SMR) with a capacity of up to 400MW.

“Various studies show that nuclear energy can be a cost-effective opportunity and is a positive business case,” Wiebes said in a letter to members of parliament. “SMRs can become an attractive alternative to larger nuclear reactors. Through serial production in factories, the shorter construction time and the modular design makes financing easier,” he added.

Netherlands considers more nuclear power - Nuclear Engineering International

Netherlands Minister of Economic Affairs and Climate Eric Wiebes has said that more nuclear power may join solar and wind in the Dutch energy mix after 2030, in particular small modular reactors (SMR) with a capacity of up to 400MW.

www.neimagazine.com

Notice the after 2030 case, currently SMR is not viable, would be dumb to say no nuclear whatsoever for a completely new tech without knowing pros/cons yet.
I kind of doubt they will add by then though, since renewables are already winning in cost/power, so SMR has quite a huge hurdle to overcome.

In all the time that we've had nuclear it's killed less people than all the other options

Directly*

Again, one of the main arguments against nuclear is not just the danger, but also the cost. I kind of doubt SMR will help with that, since making it smaller won't really help economies of scale with something that dangerous.

 

[Nicodeamus]

Notice the after 2030 case, currently SMR is not viable, would be dumb to say no nuclear whatsoever for a completely new tech without knowing pros/cons yet.
I kind of doubt they will add by then though, since renewables are already winning in cost/power, so SMR has quite a huge hurdle to overcome.

Directly*

Again, one of the main arguments against nuclear is not just the danger, but also the cost. I kind of doubt SMR will help with that, since making it smaller won't really help economies of scale with something that dangerous.

France has lower consumer costs than Germany.

So much for that theory.

 

[Lupus]

France has lower consumer costs than Germany.

So much for that theory.

For some reason people seem to think solar and wind are cheap... Like here's a thing how do you store that? That's the expensive side of things.

 

[Johnatan56]

France has lower consumer costs than Germany.

So much for that theory.

That theory is pretty BS, and I have written a couple of posts about it.
France has not factored in decommissioning costs, and Germany has added a large tariff to cover huge improvements to their grid system and is paying extra to hasten the move to renewable. Their prices this year will be the most they will ever pay, it's going to start coming down from next year onward. I wrote a post about it, but since MyBB decided to de-index OT, I can't find it and I'm not writing it up again.

For some reason people seem to think solar and wind are cheap... Like here's a thing how do you store that? That's the expensive side of things.

And another fallacy again, and I am pretty sure I corrected you in the other thread on it, yet you post it in every new thread.

 

[Nicodeamus]

That theory is pretty BS, and I have written a couple of posts about it.
France has not factored in decommissioning costs, and Germany has added a large tariff to cover huge improvements to their grid system and is paying extra to hasten the move to renewable. Their prices this year will be the most they will ever pay, it's going to start coming down from next year onward. I wrote a post about it, but since MyBB decided to de-index OT, I can't find it and I'm not writing it up again.



And another fallacy again, and I am pretty sure I corrected you in the other thread on it, yet you post it in every new thread.

The French government has considered decommissioning and they have an efficient waste management system.

The newly planned Cigeo facility for example will treat many of the high end waste.

They choose not to pass projected costs onto their consumers since the decomisioning costs at the time of construction is largely based on projections.

Sweden also has a high Nuclear Capacity and sensible prices.

 

[itareanlnotani]

The French government has considered decommissioning and they have an efficient waste management system.

The newly planned Cigeo facility for example will treat many of the high end waste.

They choose not to pass projected costs onto their consumers since the decomisioning costs at the time of construction is largely based on projections.

Sweden also has a high Nuclear Capacity and sensible prices.

Funny that, as every indicator is that they're woefully underprepared for the costs, and EDF basically said the state must pay.

Most of their reactors are around 40 years old, and need to be either discontinued and dismantled, or renewed and renovated.

Renewal and renovation costs are far higher than new build solar or wind. FAR higher.

France has a huge upcoming bill for Nuclear - it's not cheap to run when you counter in all the actual costs.

Suggest read this years World Nuclear Report - it came out this month. (I'm still going through it).

World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2020

The WNISR2020 assesses on 361 pages the status and trends of the international nuclear industry and analyzes the additional challenges nuclear power is facing in the age of COVID-19. A focus chapter analyzes nuclear programs in the Middle East as the first reactor started up in the Arab world...

www.worldnuclearreport.org

 

[Pegging]

Can these not be used in a city?

A US aircraft carrier has a 700 Megawatt reactor.

A1B reactor - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Arthur]

Good news. Glimmers of sense from the Dutch.

In the not-too-distant future people will look back and snigger at the anti-nuke lunacy that gripped people in the eighty or so years from 1960s.

 

[Nicodeamus]

Funny that, as every indicator is that they're woefully underprepared for the costs, and EDF basically said the state must pay.

Most of their reactors are around 40 years old, and need to be either discontinued and dismantled, or renewed and renovated.

Renewal and renovation costs are far higher than new build solar or wind. FAR higher.

France has a huge upcoming bill for Nuclear - it's not cheap to run when you counter in all the actual costs.

Suggest read this years World Nuclear Report - it came out this month. (I'm still going through it).

World Nuclear Industry Status Report 2020

The WNISR2020 assesses on 361 pages the status and trends of the international nuclear industry and analyzes the additional challenges nuclear power is facing in the age of COVID-19. A focus chapter analyzes nuclear programs in the Middle East as the first reactor started up in the Arab world...

www.worldnuclearreport.org

Everyone knows that the state will pay, this is how France works, but fortunately for them they have many powerplants so a sensible national strategy can be employed and they are currently working on them.

The reactors generally have their licenses renewed every 10 years and extension becomes uneconomical beyond 80 years. So while the bucket is being kicked, it will be solved.

Saying that the costs is far highest is slightly misleading as it depends on the particular power plant and the type of extension that needs to be done. In many cases it means just thickening the concrete walls in other cases many parts need to be replaced.

No one doubts the huge initial cost that Nuclear Plants have to undergo (and the often wastage that goes along with it), but the metric that you need to use is the consumer cost price of Energy. It's all good and well that Solar Panels have come down, but that statement is meaningless if you don't consider the entire system. Where are the solar panels located? How much does it increase the transmission cost? What are the storage costs? What is the decommissioning cost?

Compare those to Nuclear and then we can have a honest conversation.

 

[Nicodeamus]

Good news. Glimmers of sense from the Dutch.

In the not-too-distant future people will look back and snigger at the anti-nuke lunacy that gripped people in the eighty or so years from 1960s.

I am in a way glad that Germany and California ran the experiments for the rest of the World.

saldy many Californians have been plunged into Energy poverty.

How California Promotes Energy Poverty

For the state’s elites, fighting climate change comes first — no matter the cost. In a recent column in the Orange County Register, demographer Joel Kotkin wrote, “California is a great state in which to be rich,” but he added that affluence in California “co-exists alongside unconscionable...

www.manhattan-institute.org

 

[konfab]

Nuclear is better than renewables, probably cheaper and better on the environment in the long run.

Traditional nuclear plants are not cheaper. That much is pretty clear.

SMRS on other hand are going to blow away renewables.

 

[konfab]

For some reason people seem to think solar and wind are cheap... Like here's a thing how do you store that? That's the expensive side of things.

They cannot be cheap because the energy they harvest is extremely diffuse. You have to cover a large area in an optimum place to have them. So for an energy grid they are not a good idea.

However, what you can say about solar panels, is they allow you to state-proof your life a good portion of your life. Which in South Africa is a much bigger threat than climate change.

 

[itareanlnotani]

For some reason people seem to think solar and wind are cheap... Like here's a thing how do you store that? That's the expensive side of things.

Why do you have a fixation on storing it?

Ideally you want to use what you generate. Storage involves losses both sides (in and out).
Storage is worthwhile if you have too much energy, or need to time shift (i.e. pumped storage for evening peaks).

 

[Lupus]

Why do you have a fixation on storing it?

Ideally you want to use what you generate. Storage involves losses both sides (in and out).
Storage is worthwhile if you have too much energy, or need to time shift (i.e. pumped storage for evening peaks).

Because most of the electricity used isn't between the hours of 6am to 5pm. There's a reason why there is peak and off peak periods. Now you'd want the most bang at peak not off peak right?

 

[itareanlnotani]

Because most of the electricity used isn't between the hours of 6am to 5pm. There's a reason why there is peak and off peak periods. Now you'd want the most bang at peak not off peak right?

Storage is worthwhile if you have too much energy, or need to time shift (i.e. pumped storage for evening peaks).

Max load is during the day. Always is, always will be. We live in the day, and use most of the power when we're awake (and working). Duck curve at the end of the day for the evening peak.

If I could find some load graphs, I'd post. Link if you can find, my googlefu betrays me today.

Typically load is low in morning, highest daytime, then slopes off again.
There is an evening peak at around 7pm tailing off to 9pm (cooking and heating mostly), then it basically dies till the morning again.

Adding decent amounts of solar and/or wind in a country where both wind and solar generation are the best in the world is not a hard decision.

Storage is not quite necessary here yet, although it would be nice.
We're better off adding a lot more generation.