Nuclear-powered Electricity generation

Forums › Off topic › Nuclear-powered Electricity generation

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

935 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#2764142 21-Aug-2021 10:07

networkn:
driller2000:

This is an interesting read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_nuclear_power_plants#Cost_overruns

If you didn't do anything because projects before of a similar nature cost more than expected then Noone should build houses, roads or convention centers, transport hubs and the list goes on forever

There are some valid reasons to not do nuclear power potentially but because it 'might' go over budget shouldn't be one of them.

Interesting takeaway.

As someone with close on 30 years of experience delivering infrastructure projects - looking at past projects and lessons from them is essential.

It doesn't mean you don't do it - but it means you assess risk and your ability to mitigate these risks - and if your mitigation strategies can't reduce the risk e.g. of significant cost increases to an acceptable level - then it should be NO GO'd.

And clearly given the vast no. of nuke projects that have been cancelled (see link below) - by experts in this specific and specialist space (ie. not you or me) - clearly they have decided that not proceeding was the wise decision.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cancelled_nuclear_reactors_in_the_United_States

Dingbatt

6756 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2764164 21-Aug-2021 10:44

The cancelled US reactors list you link makes interesting reading.

Firstly to correct something I wrote earlier, according to that Wikipedia list, the remaining units at Chernobyl are shutdown and being decommissioned. They were run for a while because the electricity was needed. But Ukraine still operates multiple nuclear power facilities and has more planned.

For anybody that didn’t bother to follow the link, it is a list of past, present and planned nuclear power plants worldwide. Of particular note is the huge number in China. On the whole, more seem to be being built rather than closed down. Just as with coal fired power stations, China sees the connection between energy and prosperity and won’t let regulation get in its way.

There is an excellent chapter (Chapter 12: The Atomic Age) in Where Is My Flying Car? A Memoir of Future Past by J Storrs Hall that lays out what has killed the ‘Atomic Age’ particularly in the USA. It is basically excessive regulation and vested interests. The book is well worth a read during lockdown for précis of the progress (or lack of progress) of a number of technologies in the last 150 years.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

driller2000

935 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#2764231 21-Aug-2021 11:19

Dingbatt:

The cancelled US reactors list you link makes interesting reading.

Firstly to correct something I wrote earlier, according to that Wikipedia list, the remaining units at Chernobyl are shutdown and being decommissioned. They were run for a while because the electricity was needed. But Ukraine still operates multiple nuclear power facilities and has more planned.

For anybody that didn’t bother to follow the link, it is a list of past, present and planned nuclear power plants worldwide. Of particular note is the huge number in China. On the whole, more seem to be being built rather than closed down. Just as with coal fired power stations, China sees the connection between energy and prosperity and won’t let regulation get in its way.

There is an excellent chapter (Chapter 12: The Atomic Age) in Where’s My Flying Car? A Memoir of Future Past by J Storrs Hall that lays out what has killed the ‘Atomic Age’ particularly in the USA. It is basically excessive regulation and vested interests. The book is well worth a read during lockdown for précis of the progress (or lack of progress) of a number of technologies in the last 150 years.

Yep certainly a surge in places like China - that said their env/regulatory/economic environment is somewhat different cf. the west - and certainly far easier then NZ. One upside in their case is they will be replacing dirtier plants.

But as per my post right back on page 1 in terms of applicability for NZ:

TL:DR - Too hard + Too expensive + We have better lower cost alternative options = It will never happen in NZ.

That said - I think nuke plants should be included in any options assessment of NZ's potential future energy sources - I just cannot see them getting past the 1st stage of a robust multi criteria analysis.

Note: Edited because of bad england.

Dingbatt

6756 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2764249 21-Aug-2021 11:42

driller2000:

Yep certainly a surge in places like China - that said their env/regulatory/economic environment is somewhat different cf. the west - and certainly far easier then NZ. One upside in their case is they will be replacing dirtier plants.

But as per my post right back on page 1 in terms of applicability for NZ:

TL:DR - Too hard + Too expensive + We have better lower cost alternative options = It will never happen in NZ.

That said - I think nuke plants should be included in any options assessment of NZ's potential future energy sources - I just cannot see them getting past the 1st stage of a robust multi criteria analysis.

But aren’t China adding a coal fired power plant each week, and have leave to do so until 2030?

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

D1023319

524 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#2764259 21-Aug-2021 11:54

driller2000:

That said - I think nuke plants should be included in any options assessment of NZ's potential future energy sources - I just cannot see them getting past the 1st stage of a robust multi criteria analysis.

I see this as the problem with modern NZ of Analysis Paralysis while our comfortable lives are based on infrastructure decisions of the past but the excess capacity they prudently built then is rapidly being used up.

If we had of invented Fire in this country hundreds of thousands of year ago - we'd still be undertaking analysis to discuss the benefits and holding health and safety committee meetings to consider the risks of implementing fire and designing standards for its use while we freeze our butts off eating raw food.

I like to ask people how much of Wellington would be rebuilt if we went back in time to 1840 and started again.
Would they reclaim the harbour, build the Rongotai Airport, fill in Evans Bay to make Cobham Drive, fill in Valleys with rubbish tips that have made parks, create Ngauranga Gorge road, drain the Newtown Valley etc

ezbee

2405 posts

Uber Geek

#2764266 21-Aug-2021 12:17

Why is China still building Coal Power plants ?
Quick and easy to build with local expertise, they have coal with no other use and huge mining workforce to keep busy ?
Coal power plants are also fairly flexible can adjust to loads quickly if infrastructure is a bit chaotic ?
Actually they are also taking their quick coal plant building expertise to Africa as well.

Could also be... ?

This article indicates 40,000 or so hydro projects are due for the axe, as they age.
Mao vowed to top Soviet and Western achievements, and rampant Dam building was much more successful than village steel production.

China Has Thousands of Hydropower Projects It Doesn’t Want
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-08-14/china-wants-to-shut-down-thousands-of-dams

""
As President Xi Jinping calls for greater environmental protection, officials are eager to demolish badly-planned dams. But the country will need vast amounts of clean hydroelectric power to meet its net-zero goal.
""
China is trying to wean its massive economy off coal and fossil fuels to meet its ambitious goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2060. So why is it trying to shut down as many as 40,000 hydropower plants?
""

driller2000

935 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#2764289 21-Aug-2021 13:16

Dingbatt:

But aren’t China adding a coal fired power plant each week, and have leave to do so until 2030?

Not sure about 1 per week - but they are planning a truckload for sure :/

https://time.com/6090732/china-coal-power-plants-emissions/

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

driller2000

935 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#2764293 21-Aug-2021 13:25

D1023319:

I see this as the problem with modern NZ of Analysis Paralysis while our comfortable lives are based on infrastructure decisions of the past but the excess capacity they prudently built then is rapidly being used up.

If we had of invented Fire in this country hundreds of thousands of year ago - we'd still be undertaking analysis to discuss the benefits and holding health and safety committee meetings to consider the risks of implementing fire and designing standards for its use while we freeze our butts off eating raw food.

I like to ask people how much of Wellington would be rebuilt if we went back in time to 1840 and started again.
Would they reclaim the harbour, build the Rongotai Airport, fill in Evans Bay to make Cobham Drive, fill in Valleys with rubbish tips that have made parks, create Ngauranga Gorge road, drain the Newtown Valley etc

You see paralysis - I see robust assessment of options. And NZ's future energy needs are being assessed eg. https://www.mbie.govt.nz/building-and-energy/energy-and-natural-resources/energy-statistics-and-modelling/energy-modelling/new-zealands-energy-outlook/

And i will bet the house nuke wont be part of it - and for good reason IMO.

Your fire comments are just weird opinion - IMO :p - so I won't address these.

As for your closing paragraph - it is possible we wouldn't do some of that with the benefit of hindsight eg. historic rubbish tips in valleys and in coastal areas that cause issues to this day. So I am not quite sure what point you are trying to make with this parargraph?

gzt

17125 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2764294 21-Aug-2021 13:27

D1023319: I like to ask people how much of Wellington would be rebuilt if we went back in time to 1840 and started again.

Really? A quick look at any seismic map tells you with today's knowledge (a) Wellington would not be the captial city and the location of government and (b) The main state highway north south road link bisected by a giant fault line in a coastal area is a terrible idea.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2764306 21-Aug-2021 13:58

gzt:
D1023319: I like to ask people how much of Wellington would be rebuilt if we went back in time to 1840 and started again.

Really? A quick look at any seismic map tells you with today's knowledge (a) Wellington would not be the captial city and the location of government and (b) The main state highway north south road link bisected by a giant fault line in a coastal area is a terrible idea.

Yeah, but is fun to be here.

Handle9

11391 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2764624 22-Aug-2021 05:36

D1023319:

driller2000:

That said - I think nuke plants should be included in any options assessment of NZ's potential future energy sources - I just cannot see them getting past the 1st stage of a robust multi criteria analysis.

I see this as the problem with modern NZ of Analysis Paralysis while our comfortable lives are based on infrastructure decisions of the past but the excess capacity they prudently built then is rapidly being used up.

If we had of invented Fire in this country hundreds of thousands of year ago - we'd still be undertaking analysis to discuss the benefits and holding health and safety committee meetings to consider the risks of implementing fire and designing standards for its use while we freeze our butts off eating raw food.

I like to ask people how much of Wellington would be rebuilt if we went back in time to 1840 and started again.
Would they reclaim the harbour, build the Rongotai Airport, fill in Evans Bay to make Cobham Drive, fill in Valleys with rubbish tips that have made parks, create Ngauranga Gorge road, drain the Newtown Valley etc

Why do you think that nuclear power is the right solution? It's more expensive to build and run than renewables.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2764650 22-Aug-2021 09:34

D1023319:
driller2000:

That said - I think nuke plants should be included in any options assessment of NZ's potential future energy sources - I just cannot see them getting past the 1st stage of a robust multi criteria analysis.

I see this as the problem with modern NZ of Analysis Paralysis while our comfortable lives are based on infrastructure decisions of the past but the excess capacity they prudently built then is rapidly being used up.

If we had of invented Fire in this country hundreds of thousands of year ago - we'd still be undertaking analysis to discuss the benefits and holding health and safety committee meetings to consider the risks of implementing fire and designing standards for its use while we freeze our butts off eating raw food.

I like to ask people how much of Wellington would be rebuilt if we went back in time to 1840 and started again.
Would they reclaim the harbour, build the Rongotai Airport, fill in Evans Bay to make Cobham Drive, fill in Valleys with rubbish tips that have made parks, create Ngauranga Gorge road, drain the Newtown Valley etc

Agreed. There is far too much "consultation" and not enough leadership in the form of deciding what is best in the strategic public interest and telling people that's what's happening.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2764652 22-Aug-2021 09:36

gzt:
D1023319: I like to ask people how much of Wellington would be rebuilt if we went back in time to 1840 and started again.

Really? A quick look at any seismic map tells you with today's knowledge (a) Wellington would not be the captial city and the location of government and (b) The main state highway north south road link bisected by a giant fault line in a coastal area is a terrible idea.

I've said before that since Auckland is the de facto capital, they ought to just accept that and move Parliament there.

Dingbatt

6756 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2764658 22-Aug-2021 09:50

Geektastic:

I've said before that since Auckland is the de facto capital, they ought to just accept that and move Parliament there.

But that would remove Wellington’s reason to exist. Why else would you live in a place with a terrible climate built on a major fault line? (/s)

Edit: Actually I thought of a reason. The people who maintain the Cook Strait cable that carries electricity to Auckland from their hydro schemes in the South Island need somewhere to live….

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2764661 22-Aug-2021 09:53

Dingbatt:
Geektastic:

I've said before that since Auckland is the de facto capital, they ought to just accept that and move Parliament there.

But that would remove Wellington’s reason to exist. Why else would you live in a place with a terrible climate built on a major fault line? (/s)

And move to one of our largest volcanic fields.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6