Nuclear Energy

davidaugust,
@davidaugust@mastodon.online avatar

Turns out you can dial your global thermonuclear war to taste (extra crispy, life extinct-y).

Today I learned the United States' targeting (Major Attack Option 1) was once designed to avoid attacks on the russian government so as to permit negotiations.

Major Attack Option 2 expands to include Russian installations, making talking down the conflict less possible.

Likely still like this, needs to stop pretending nukes are toys.

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nuclear-vault/2024-05-31/ivory-item-carter-first-us-president-participate-nuclear

kravietz,
@kravietz@agora.echelon.pl avatar

nuclear, wind and solar industries call for urgent action to jumpstart grid decarbonisation

The Nuclear Industry Association, RenewableUK and Solar Energy UK, representing Britain’s three leading zero-carbon power generators, are calling for urgent action to build new wind, nuclear and solar capacity and for a binding target of 100% grid decarbonisation by 2035.

https://www.renewableuk.com/news/566256/UK-nuclear-wind-and-solar-industries-call-for-urgent-action-to-jumpstart-grid-decarbonisation.htm

rmblaber1956,
@rmblaber1956@mastodon.social avatar

@kravietz Let's leave out the nuclear, please. It's neither safe nor efficient - & it's far more expensive than the renewable alternatives, @Peternimmo.

kravietz,
@kravietz@agora.echelon.pl avatar

@rmblaber1956

Can you please quote some data in addition to those popular yet very misinformed stereotypes?

@Peternimmo

WePlanetAus,
@WePlanetAus@mastodon.au avatar

"I want my daughter to live with energy security and stability. I want her to enjoy the technology centric life we live. To do this we need to consider nuclear as a clean, reliable and stable energy source. Otherwise we will need to cut our energy use significantly… forever."

Jaz Diab – Engineer, Artist, Mum

Get the facts on nuclear energy: https://www.weplanetaustralia.org/rethinknuclearaus

shekinahcancook,
@shekinahcancook@babka.social avatar

@WePlanetAus

Out here in real life nuclear reactors are nothing but terror and war targets.

collectifission,
@collectifission@greennuclear.online avatar

Complete the sentence: A future needs because ____________.

Share us your answers in the comments below!

video/mp4

billiglarper, German
@billiglarper@rollenspiel.social avatar

Today I learned about the Finnish plant killing around 27.6 million fish a year (42.4t).

https://yle.fi/a/74-20090179

Thanks to @FabianLaasch for pointing this out.

Sustainable2050,
@Sustainable2050@mastodon.energy avatar

17 years - instead of the promised 4.5 years - after start of construction, Flamanville-3 should start generating electricity this year. To be taken offline again in 2026, for replacing its faulty reactor cover.
https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Fuel-loading-completed-at-French-EPR?s=09
#nuclear #NuclearPower #nuclearenergy

johnquiggin,
@johnquiggin@aus.social avatar

Nick Cater in the Oz is impressed by power in Finland, which has built one new plant this century, and has none currently under construction or even in planning stages.
OTOH, Finland has 7GW of wind, and much more is planned
https://www.both2nia.com/en/news/almost-7-gw-wind-power-finland

luis_in_brief,
@luis_in_brief@social.coop avatar

@johnquiggin even a few years ago, the interest in nuclear made some sense, but with the learning/price/deployment curves on wind, solar, and batteries, and the very extended timeline for any nuclear deployment… it’s rare you see such committed sunk cost fallacy.

kravietz, (edited )
@kravietz@agora.echelon.pl avatar

Second of the three European EPR ( Evolutionary Power Reactor) projects - - will be shortly connected to the grid. The projects caused many controversies due to long delays… but they are getting completed:

  • 🇫🇮 Olkiluoto 3 ✅ connected in 2023
  • 🇫🇷 Flamanville ✔️ finished, will be connected by end of 2024 : 🇬🇧 Hinkley Point C 🕓 will be completed by 2027

The moment these projects get connected, they start delivering gigawatt-hours of low-carbon electricity to the grid, which is desperately needed for prevention and mitigation.

Each of these has been criticised for delays (which is factually true but unfair) and “huge cost” (which is unfair and untrue).

Talking about the total investment cost in case of clean electricity sources that may live up to a century is a popular manipulation but what matters is LCOE.

It’s the cost of investment and operations divided by value of electricity produced over its life time. In case of nuclear power LCOE is quite low, in the range of $60/MWh because the relatively big initial costs is divided by decades of delivery of huge amounts of power. This is exactly the same case with very costly off-shore wind farms (e.g. the Doggerbank project) or huge solar farms (e.g. Ouarzazate in Morocco).

The reasons for delays are… complex. This article[1] by Joris van Dorp is probably the best explainer to why exactly Hinkley Point C was delayed so much. It’s a mix of reasons, starting from “first of kind” scale of the project to prohibitive and often absurd safety requirements lobbied after Fukushima by countries who saw an opportunity in replacing EU nuclear by Russian fossil gas. And they were absurd, for example because you don’t get earthquakes and tsunamis on the La Manche Channel.

And the reasons are complex, for example due to general UK attitude to funding infrastructure projects - they exclusively opt for private funding, which means the investors need to get a direct financial profit. Most people see the absurdity of private ownership of UK water utilities (which leads to no investments in the network and dumping of sewage into rivers by underregulated companies) but nobody sees the same absurdity in funding the electricity grid (which is in turn overregulated).

DE8AH,

@kravietz never

kravietz,
@kravietz@agora.echelon.pl avatar

@DE8AH

Hmmm weird, because now you seem to very much believe in the current decarbonisation plan involving further increase in renewables and fossil gas which may be in unspecified future replaced by hydrogen?

mark_melbin,
@mark_melbin@mastodon.online avatar
bojacobs,
@bojacobs@hcommons.social avatar

Why clean up or compensate the decades old radiological contamination in #STL when you can give tax breaks to fund further contamination?

"Missouri lawmakers approve tax break for Kansas City nuclear weapons facility expansion"

#MO #KC #NuclearWeapons #nuclear

https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article288552392.html

ChrisMayLA6,
@ChrisMayLA6@zirk.us avatar

Another bit of Brexit related attempted policy cherry-picking comes unstuck.

The UK would like to continue to be part of the world's largest nuclear fusion experiment (based in the EU).... but the EU is now insisting that this can only continue if the UK rejoins the bloc's Euratom research scheme.

Once again the UK hopes it can knit together a bespoke research collaboration, but it seems the EU has lost patience with such 'special arrangements'.

More Brexit hubris

h/t FT

doomscroller,
@doomscroller@mastodon.online avatar

The True Extent of US Spy Satellite Capability
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6uPjTTGHzE
A little bit on satellites that detect missile launches... as Annie Jacobsen mentions in 'Nuclear War A Scenario'
#Nuclear

kyonshi,
@kyonshi@dice.camp avatar

if i noticed something when talking with outspoken pro-nuclear people it's that you really can't trust anything they say. they are intellectually bankrupt, will use all kinds of shady argumentation tactics, ad hominems, and can't even be bothered to write their own arguments (instead using AI for that)

but they do expect you to provide sources.

I wouldn't trust anything from them

kyonshi,
@kyonshi@dice.camp avatar

@Fywillan well, I guess it comes down to you having more faith in humans than I sometimes have

Fywillan,

@kyonshi Humans are amazing as long as they can be held responsible for their actions. Notice how both nuclear meltdowns happened in countries where the political elite is much more entrenched than in the west. And while our politicians can get away with way more than they should, they wouldn't be able to get away with irradiating large swathes of their own country.

robryk,
@robryk@qoto.org avatar

Why do PWR reactors use boric acid, as opposed to some random salt of boron? Apparently boron salts are often well soluble, from the nuclear POV we only care about boron being present, and I'd expect salts to cause fewer chemical problems due to their closer-to-neutral pH. In fact some random papers (https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/28/034/28034575.pdf) describe tradeoffs involved in maintaining pH as boric acid concentration changes.

There clearly must be some reason why boric acid is preferred over any simple boron salt. What is it?

robryk,
@robryk@qoto.org avatar

Hm~ is it about those salts decomposing into something else in solution at high temperature?

doomscroller,
@doomscroller@mastodon.online avatar

Five Things the “Nuclear Bros” Don’t Want You to Know About Small Modular Reactors
https://blog.ucsusa.org/edwin-lyman/five-things-the-nuclear-bros-dont-want-you-to-know-about-small-modular-reactors/

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • nuclear
  • DreamBathrooms
  • ngwrru68w68
  • modclub
  • magazineikmin
  • thenastyranch
  • rosin
  • khanakhh
  • InstantRegret
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • Durango
  • kavyap
  • mdbf
  • GTA5RPClips
  • megavids
  • tacticalgear
  • normalnudes
  • tester
  • osvaldo12
  • everett
  • cubers
  • ethstaker
  • anitta
  • Leos
  • cisconetworking
  • provamag3
  • JUstTest
  • lostlight
  • All magazines