Energy prices.

[mike os]

well lets clear up a few points about fusion

fist of all there is 2 ideas for different power stations, first of would be self sustaining plasma, the second is a pulse type (so loads of small pulses, sub second)

the first type would be completed in a tokamak or a stellerator this is what JET, ITER and STEP are.
ITER is linked above and is a massive project with most of the world funding it.
STEP is the UK prototype power station that will be on the grid. it is expected to have power output in the 2040's
we currently run JET for 50-70s and produce fusion for just under 5 seconds where the 1980's magnets start to over heat
there has been a tokamak in china that has ran for over 17mins

then the second type would be completed in a mechanical or laser confinement system such as NIF, first light fusion etc
these use large pistons or lasers to compress a target to get it in implode and cause the atoms to fuse.
i am not following these are much, but apparently NIF has produced more energy than it used, but not by much.

and it is much about funding for the reason we have not cracked fusion, there is a lot of private companies now joining in and this has caused a lot more development to be completed in the last few years.

ohh and the waste - well most of the waste fuel will be reused as the waste will be put through a system that will remove the tritium as it is soooo expensive it is worth saving every gram. but due to using small atoms the half life is short (about 12years) means it will be at a safe level with in a short time compared to a fission plant. as well the radiation that comes from the reaction could be used to manufacture fuel for itself, so using most of the energy as possible.

So still at least 20 years away…

 

[Kayos]

As one of the "can't say as much as I like" due to my position I wish I could get excited about fusion but in terms of even a long term energy strategy it's just too theoretical to feature

The one I've heard is its 10 years away, for the last 50 years

 

[DAPPH]

So still at least 20 years away…

Who can tell these days with so many different mindsets around the world working at such things ,it only takes one person to do something slightly different in one of the early stages of the discovery to get a totally different workable solution in a matter of months then it has to be scaled up to see if it viable .
Our Astra Zeneca covid vaccine shows how quickly such things can happen .............. all because someone had a hunch .

It used to be in the 1950's 100 years or so before new technology became a global main stream product , 25 years ago that had dropped down to 10 or so years , these days it's dropping down to 5 year s or less .

 

[Blobber]

Indeed so

Have you been spying on me again?!!

 

[fizzy]

well lets clear up a few points about fusion

fist of all there is 2 ideas for different power stations, first of would be self sustaining plasma, the second is a pulse type (so loads of small pulses, sub second)

the first type would be completed in a tokamak or a stellerator this is what JET, ITER and STEP are.
ITER is linked above and is a massive project with most of the world funding it.
STEP is the UK prototype power station that will be on the grid. it is expected to have power output in the 2040's
we currently run JET for 50-70s and produce fusion for just under 5 seconds where the 1980's magnets start to over heat
there has been a tokamak in china that has ran for over 17mins

then the second type would be completed in a mechanical or laser confinement system such as NIF, first light fusion etc
these use large pistons or lasers to compress a target to get it in implode and cause the atoms to fuse.
i am not following these are much, but apparently NIF has produced more energy than it used, but not by much.

and it is much about funding for the reason we have not cracked fusion, there is a lot of private companies now joining in and this has caused a lot more development to be completed in the last few years.

ohh and the waste - well most of the waste fuel will be reused as the waste will be put through a system that will remove the tritium as it is soooo expensive it is worth saving every gram. but due to using small atoms the half life is short (about 12years) means it will be at a safe level with in a short time compared to a fission plant. as well the radiation that comes from the reaction could be used to manufacture fuel for itself, so using most of the energy as possible.

There has been a huge advance in magnet technology recently - using magnet tape wound into coils. These are higher temp super conductors. The result is a much much stronger magnetic field using far less energy. I think it could be a game changer. Yanks and Brits working on them.

MIT-designed project achieves major advance toward fusion energy

For the first time, a large high-temperature superconducting electromagnet was ramped to a field strength of 20 tesla, the most powerful magnetic field of its kind ever created. The demonstration helps resolve the greatest uncertainty in the quest to build the first fusion power plant that can...

news.mit.edu

HTS magnet development for fusion energy is accelerating

Tokamak Energy has optimised the design of a full spherical tokamak HTS magnet system demonstrator “Demo4”.

www.tokamakenergy.co.uk

 

[Kayos]

Sizewll C approved

£20 billion, paid by the French and then we pay over the odds for many, many years

How much did they find behind the sofa for Covid? Surely the better option is for us to pay then not pay for extortionate electricity?

BBC News - Sizewell C granted development consent by government

Sizewell C nuclear plant gets go-ahead from government

The Sizewell C plant is expected to cost £20bn and could provide the UK with 7% of its electricity.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[James1979]

Sizewll C approved

£20 billion, paid by the French and then we pay over the odds for many, many years

How much did they find behind the sofa for Covid? Surely the better option is for us to pay then not pay for extortionate electricity?

BBC News - Sizewell C granted development consent by government

Sizewell C nuclear plant gets go-ahead from government

The Sizewell C plant is expected to cost £20bn and could provide the UK with 7% of its electricity.

www.bbc.co.uk

At least it’s not the Chinese.

That was on the cards a few years back I seem to remember

 

[Kayos]

At least it’s not the Chinese.

That was on the cards a few years back I seem to remember

Nuclear reactor on AliExpress for £11 billion, bet they sting you on the postage though and it doesn't quite look like the one in the picture

 

[R Kraft]

well lets clear up a few points about fusion

fist of all there is 2 ideas for different power stations, first of would be self sustaining plasma, the second is a pulse type (so loads of small pulses, sub second)

the first type would be completed in a tokamak or a stellerator this is what JET, ITER and STEP are.
ITER is linked above and is a massive project with most of the world funding it.
STEP is the UK prototype power station that will be on the grid. it is expected to have power output in the 2040's
we currently run JET for 50-70s and produce fusion for just under 5 seconds where the 1980's magnets start to over heat
there has been a tokamak in china that has ran for over 17mins

then the second type would be completed in a mechanical or laser confinement system such as NIF, first light fusion etc
these use large pistons or lasers to compress a target to get it in implode and cause the atoms to fuse.
i am not following these are much, but apparently NIF has produced more energy than it used, but not by much.

and it is much about funding for the reason we have not cracked fusion, there is a lot of private companies now joining in and this has caused a lot more development to be completed in the last few years.

ohh and the waste - well most of the waste fuel will be reused as the waste will be put through a system that will remove the tritium as it is soooo expensive it is worth saving every gram. but due to using small atoms the half life is short (about 12years) means it will be at a safe level with in a short time compared to a fission plant. as well the radiation that comes from the reaction could be used to manufacture fuel for itself, so using most of the energy as possible.

Science | AAAS

www.science.org

 

[fizzy]

Science | AAAS

www.science.org

They have other options to get the Tritium. Produce some older design heavy water moderated reactors when the Canadian ones shut down.
Or use the Deuterium/Boron reaction.

 

[fizzy]

Sizewll C approved

£20 billion, paid by the French and then we pay over the odds for many, many years

How much did they find behind the sofa for Covid? Surely the better option is for us to pay then not pay for extortionate electricity?

BBC News - Sizewell C granted development consent by government

Sizewell C nuclear plant gets go-ahead from government

The Sizewell C plant is expected to cost £20bn and could provide the UK with 7% of its electricity.

www.bbc.co.uk

The Severn bridge was built in the same way. Finally it is toll free. It is often better to do it this way than have the tax payers fund the whole cost upfront.

 

[Kayos]

The Severn bridge was built in the same way. Finally it is toll free. It is often better to do it this way than have the tax payers fund the whole cost upfront.

But the guaranteed rates will shaft us for many years

I might trust the French to build a bridge but they are having huge issues with their own reactors

 

[fizzy]

But the guaranteed rates will shaft us for many years

I might trust the French to build a bridge but they are having huge issues with their own reactors

They are having problems because of a lack of investment. They started thinking perhaps they should get wind and solar. Now they have seen the light - mainly because of Ukraine of course.

Nuclear Power in France - World Nuclear Association

France derives about 70% of its electricity from nuclear energy. This is due to a long-standing policy based on energy security. France is the world's largest net exporter of electricity due to its very low cost of nuclear generation.

world-nuclear.org

• France derives about 70% of its electricity from nuclear energy, due to a long-standing policy based on energy security.
• Government policy, set under a former administration in 2014, aimed to reduce nuclear's share of electricity generation to 50% by 2025. This target was delayed in 2019 to 2035.
• In February 2022 France announced plans to build six new reactors and to consider building a further eight.
• France is the world's largest net exporter of electricity due to its very low cost of generation, and gains over €3 billion per year from this.
• The country has been very active in developing nuclear technology. Reactors and especially fuel products and services have been a significant export.
• About 17% of France's electricity is from recycled nuclear fuel.

Notice the comment about France being the World's largest exporter of electricity due to low costs of generation! Nuclear can't be all bad can it?

 

[Wozzaaah]

Well with all this wonderful wind and solar we should have lovely cheap electricity shouldn't we?

Wasn't nuclear energy supposed to be....... ahem...... "Too cheap to meter"?

 

[Kayos]

They are having problems because of a lack of investment. They started thinking perhaps they should get wind and solar. Now they have seen the light - mainly because of Ukraine of course.

Nuclear Power in France - World Nuclear Association

France derives about 70% of its electricity from nuclear energy. This is due to a long-standing policy based on energy security. France is the world's largest net exporter of electricity due to its very low cost of nuclear generation.

world-nuclear.org

• France derives about 70% of its electricity from nuclear energy, due to a long-standing policy based on energy security.
• Government policy, set under a former administration in 2014, aimed to reduce nuclear's share of electricity generation to 50% by 2025. This target was delayed in 2019 to 2035.
• In February 2022 France announced plans to build six new reactors and to consider building a further eight.
• France is the world's largest net exporter of electricity due to its very low cost of generation, and gains over €3 billion per year from this.
• The country has been very active in developing nuclear technology. Reactors and especially fuel products and services have been a significant export.
• About 17% of France's electricity is from recycled nuclear fuel.

Notice the comment about France being the World's largest exporter of electricity due to low costs of generation! Nuclear can't be all bad can it?

Never said it was bad, just not the answer to everything

The planned UK reactors will be mired in pointless political nonsense and cost far more than currently estimated

 

[daleyd]

French Nuclear Power Crisis Frustrates Europe’s Push to Quit Russian Energy (Published 2022)

France typically exports electricity, but now it risks blackouts and a need for imported power because of problems at the state nuclear operator.

www.nytimes.com

 

[fizzy]

French Nuclear Power Crisis Frustrates Europe’s Push to Quit Russian Energy (Published 2022)

France typically exports electricity, but now it risks blackouts and a need for imported power because of problems at the state nuclear operator.

www.nytimes.com

Yes because back in 2014 France decided to cut back on its number of reactors and focus on renewables hence slashing funding. This has now changed but they have years of maintenance and investment to catch up on.
They should leave it to the engineers not the flipping politicians.

 

[fizzy]

Wasn't nuclear energy supposed to be....... ahem...... "Too cheap to meter"?

France does very well out of it. As did we back in the 50s and 60s. Decades of lack investment means we hardly have any nuclear left!

 

[daleyd]

Yes because back in 2014 France decided to cut back on its number of reactors and focus on renewables hence slashing funding. This has now changed but they have years of maintenance to catch up on.

Not really - they made a decision in 2014 that would reduce the nuclear fleet in the future, but that didn't affect anything to do with maintenance/upkeep of current plants - if you think that then you need to do some more research on how nuclear plants are run and what the current problems in France are. You can try and spin it as anti renewables whichever way you like but this is not really anything to do with that.

 

[DAPPH]

Never said it was bad, just not the answer to everything

The planned UK reactors will be mired in pointless political nonsense and cost far more than currently estimated

Only if the " Useless Plastic Bollards " get in the way ? ( " PMQ's today " )