Comment on Drowning in grid scale batteries
Nora@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
Wow that’s a lot of space! how much does a nuclear reactor take up?
Comment on Drowning in grid scale batteries
Nora@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
Wow that’s a lot of space! how much does a nuclear reactor take up?
Forester@pawb.social 2 days ago
A single SMR the size of one of those containers can produce 300mwh ideally you’d want a external containment pool as well to soak it in.
Nora@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
The technology thats basically still being tested by every major country across the world vs one that can and does exist with scalability and can be implemented today?
Yeah I can probably find a future battery that can do that too, let’s look at the reactors that are everywhere today that take up miles and miles of space first.
Forester@pawb.social 2 days ago
What has been tested and proven. It’s just it hasn’t seen large-scale deployment because nimbyism
Nora@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
well yes but also not really.
Nuclear reactors are incredibly expensive, take forever to build, test, and ensure they are safe, often require additional not-so-green/renewable secondary materials/processes that are conveniently ignored (mines, for example) and waste disposal is a semi-serious non-solved issue.
All of these factors combined are significantly more important than the land the power is generated on, as 99% of the world has space somewhere.
The reality of nuclear power is that it doesn’t make sense in 95% of scenarios anymore because battery + solar / wind is effectively free in comparison, can be built and scaled extremely fast, and is many times more renewable because basically everything is recyclable.