Nuclear: As long as you don’t care about the magic rocks once the magic has decayed to a level where they’re not boiling water anymore
Comment on Anon questions our energy sector
iii@mander.xyz 4 weeks agoAs long as you don’t care when the electricity is produced
marx2k@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
uis@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
90% of magic rocks that no longer boil wsater is magic rocks that can boil water.
marx2k@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
If you’re talking breeder reactors, do we have any in the US?
uis@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
If you’re talking breeder reactors
I was talking about reusing uranium from “spent” fuel, not about using plutonium. Found source that says “spent” fuel is 95-98% is mix of uranium isotopes that were there. Sadly, source doesn’t say how much of each isopote, I expect very low amount of U-235. Yes, you can also use plutonium in MOX fuel, but only Russia, France and China do that, as far as I know.
do we have any in the US?
Dunno. Do you? If you don’t, you can buy them from mentioned above countries.
Teppichbrand@feddit.org 4 weeks ago
uniquethrowagay@feddit.org 4 weeks ago
Storage is a solvable problem. Whereas we don’t have the resources to power the world with nuclear plants.
iii@mander.xyz 4 weeks ago
I’m not convinced it is. Storage technologies exist for sure, but the general public seems to grossly underestimate the scale of storage required to match grid demand and renewables only production.
Natanox@discuss.tchncs.de 4 weeks ago
I think you underestimate how much storage power is currently being build and how many different technologies are available. In Germany alone there currently are 61 projects planed and in the approval phase boasting a combined 180 Gigawatts of potential power until 2030. Those of them that are meant to be build at old nuclear power plants (the grid connection is already available there) are expected to deliver 25% of the necessary storage capacity. In addition all electric vehicles that are assumed to be on the road until 2030 add another potential 100GW of power.
Of course these numbers are theoretical as not every EV will be connected to a bidirectional charger and surely some projects will fail or delay, however given the massive development in this sector and new, innovative tech (not just batteries but f.e. a concrete ball placed 800m below sea level, expected to store energy extremely well at 5.8ct / kilowatt) there’s very much reason for optimism here.
It’s also a funny sidenote that France, a country with a strong nuclear strategy, frequently buys power from Germany because it’s so much cheaper.
Ooops@feddit.org 4 weeks ago
Another important note about France: They are the second country alongside Germany heavily pushing for an upscaled green hydrogen market in the EU. Because -just like renewables- nuclear production doesn’t match the demand pattern at all. Thus it’s completely uneconomical without long-term storage.
The fact that we seem to constantly discuss nuclear vs. renewables is proof that it’s mostly lobbying bullshit. Because in reality they don’t compete. It’s either renewables+short-term storage+long-term-term storage or renewables+nuclear+long-term storage. Those are the only two viable models.
iii@mander.xyz 4 weeks ago
It’s not just power that’s needed (MW), also stored energy (MWh).
Germany consumes on average 1.4TWh of electricity a day (1). Imagine bridging even a short dunkelflaute of 2 days.
Worldwide lithium ion battery production is 4TWh a year (2).
Teppichbrand@feddit.org 4 weeks ago
I’ll post this here again. This is just the beginning, we’re like five years into a every revolution and you are drumming against it because you’re not convinced. Get out of the way, boomer!
iii@mander.xyz 4 weeks ago
Exactly, after working on it for over 30.
It seems like theyre not even planning on going fossil free.
That quote, again, not mentioning stored energy. How do they not understand that storage needs to be specified in both power and energy?
jaemo@sh.itjust.works 4 weeks ago
Ok but maybe a counterpoint is we are overestimating the ability of the atmosphere and ocean to absorb CO2 and maintain a habitable planet. I’d rather store isotopes in the earth (where they came from anyway) than carbon in the air.
TheFriar@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
The second half if most important. It doesn’t produce enough electricity. Renewables are getting cheaper and cheaper and are taking up the mantle to take over majority of power production in some nations. But it is harder to monetize and can be democratized and made pretty easily. It’s like weed. It can be taken away from bigger producers and therefore there is significant push back/lobbying against it.
uis@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
Not in this economy. We need change in consumption too. More opportunistic loads.