The Return Of Nuclear Power !?!

[Scalarocco]

People said that about computers back when they filled an entire room. Now everyone has a reasonably powerful one in their pocket. I'm not saying SMRs will be tiny but they may be able to shrink them more than expected. In Greenfield in Saddleworth there is a substation disguised as a house. Doesn't look out of place.
Spot the substation...

 

[Munkul]

All this talk about 'small modular reactors' completely ignores that fact that the reactor is only a small part of the overall workings of a power station, and while you can shrink the kettle you can't really make a steam-turbine alternator complete with building, services and support infrastructure, car park, substation etc. etc. SMALL.

Absolutely, but those parts don't need to be nuclear quality level 1 like a reactor does the cost and time implications of that level of quality makes the cost of a large complex reactor exponentially higher than that of a smaller simpler one.
The turbines and alternators etc don't need to be much different to that of coal or gas powered ones.

Exhibit A for my cost example: hinckley C.
Thats the whole reason for the desire for SMRs as it's the antithesis to the huge complex mess of C.

 

[daleyd]

Absolutely, but those parts don't need to be nuclear quality level 1 like a reactor does the cost and time implications of that level of quality makes the cost of a large complex reactor exponentially higher than that of a smaller simpler one.
The turbines and alternators etc don't need to be much different to that of coal or gas powered ones.

Exhibit A for my cost example: hinckley C.
Thats the whole reason for the desire for SMRs as it's the antithesis to the huge complex mess of C.

On the contrary most opinions I’ve read agree that larger sites benefit most from economies of scale. SMR promises a lot - the timescale to build and footprint for an example are an obvious benefit, but cost (at least in terms of absolute £/MWh) will almost certainly not be lower than conventional nuclear and likely be quite a bit higher.

Initial build cost of course should be much lower, but your getting a much smaller station.

 

[Munkul]

On the contrary most opinions I’ve read agree that larger sites benefit most from economies of scale.

not with Hinkley point C it doesn't!

I agree in general terms, most things can make economy of scale work, but nuclear isn't one of them IMHO. Everyone involved from the biggest tier 1 contractor down to the lowest tier 2, they all see a job, no matter how big or small, and instantly think in terms of millions. It's absolutely crazy.

The bigger the nuclear job, the more people wanting a slice of the pie. The costs and complexity then spirals out of control of either the client or tier 1 contractor...

 

[daleyd]

not with Hinkley point C it doesn't!

I agree in general terms, most things can make economy of scale work, but nuclear isn't one of them IMHO. Everyone involved from the biggest tier 1 contractor down to the lowest tier 2, they all see a job, no matter how big or small, and instantly think in terms of millions. It's absolutely crazy.

The bigger the nuclear job, the more people wanting a slice of the pie. The costs and complexity then spirals out of control of either the client or tier 1 contractor...

And I’m sure the same won’t happen with SMR

Some estimates of capital costs are about even with larger reactors, others up to 50% more - only time will tell once they get the first few built. I think operating costs are generally expected to be higher, but again estimates vary by how much.

So if you’re finally expecting the promise of electricity too cheap to meter you might be disappointed.

That’s not to say they won’t serve a very useful purpose, but most estimates suggest they aren’t going to be particularly cheap.

 

[Ross365]

That’s not to say they won’t serve a very useful purpose, but most estimates suggest they aren’t going to be particularly cheap.

Yep, making them safe from hi-jacked airliners (and similar) won't come cheap.

We've been discussing the 'Return of Nuclear Power'; did anyone see that the BBC was showing the old drama series, "Edge of Darkness" a couple of nights back? the whole nuclear industry, right from mining the ore to refining it, using it for energy or weapons, and then accommodating the waste, is very, very dark in deed. Anyone like to guess how many tonnes (or should that be mega-tonnes) of depleted uranium fluoride the UK has (that's the useless stuff (a liquid) that's left after the tiny fraction of fissile uranium has been taken out) ? It sits in numerous "stainless steel" vessels, but after 40-60 years, you have to think those vessels will be "well stained" by now! I don't think you'd want to live downwind of that... but somebody does. This is all in the public domain.

 

[Erie Fred]

The U.S. Army developed at "portable nuclear plant"....and then melted it down into the ground...

Army Nuclear Power Program - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Ross365]

The U.S. Army developed at "portable nuclear plant"....and then melted it down into the ground...

Army Nuclear Power Program - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I don't think the army of any country (in the present day) is a good place to develop complex technologies. NASA had lots of Navy and Airforce guys, but fewer army folks. I think John Glenn and Flight Director Gene Kranz had been in the Marines.

I understand that there was quite a bad accident in the USA involving depleted uranium fluoride (DUF). I believe that DUF is a very volatile liquid, so if it leaks out it very happily forms huge clouds. But then it reacts with water vapour to form hydrofluoric acid , which shows really poor "compatibility" with any living thing. And there vast quatities of it, here...and there... around the UK and around the world.

I think the stuff that Homer drinks is DUFF.

 

[Wedg1e]

A few years back I was designing an x-ray scanning facility that would be used to identify and categorise the contents of thousands of sealed storage containers containing low-level radioactive waste. The containers are 50-gallon oil drums, etched in several places with a serial number in case of corrosion or fire. Anything and everything that ever came out of a hazardous area - gloves, batteries, instruments, you name it - is sealed into them.
The drums are sorted by radioactivity level so that as they decay they can be opened and the contents 'disposed of'... bearing in mind that even the lowest doserates are at a level that will be hazardous for generations to come. The higher doses are stored 'at the back' metaphorically - they'll be there a while yet.
Somewhere there's a database created by someone x-raying the drums in real time: raising, lowering, tilting and rotating them so they can identify the contents on a monitor.

 

[My Old Landy]

A few years back I was designing an x-ray scanning facility that would be used to identify and categorise the contents of thousands of sealed storage containers containing low-level radioactive waste. The containers are 50-gallon oil drums, etched in several places with a serial number in case of corrosion or fire. Anything and everything that ever came out of a hazardous area - gloves, batteries, instruments, you name it - is sealed into them.
The drums are sorted by radioactivity level so that as they decay they can be opened and the contents 'disposed of'... bearing in mind that even the lowest doserates are at a level that will be hazardous for generations to come. The higher doses are stored 'at the back' metaphorically - they'll be there a while yet.
Somewhere there's a database created by someone x-raying the drums in real time: raising, lowering, tilting and rotating them so they can identify the contents on a monitor.

Did your machine use Harting Yellock connectors? We may have met if it did as I worked at Harting and we supplied a load for just such a machine. Small world if it was!

 

[Wedg1e]

Did your machine use Harting Yellock connectors? We may have met if it did as I worked at Harting and we supplied a load for just such a machine. Small world if it was!

No, we never got as far as building it, the design was reworked that many times as the goalposts kept moving that we bowed out (or the client got fed up, not sure which)... it would have been sited at 'WN' if that means anything
Among the design constraints were that it had to be able to be picked up by a forklift and positioned under a mezzanine floor without hitting any of the uprights, which made the design tricky as it needed several tonnes of lead shielding in it and also a specific internal headroom, which was then compromised by the outside height as it had to fit under the mezzanine while being carried on a forklift big enough to carry several tonnes which had to be able to fit under the mezzanine... and so on.
Every now and again I come across the CAD folder for it and a nervous twitch sets in...