Since California is trying to kill oil faster than I thought...I’m thinking of better in’s for energy. Especially with energy crisis on the rise. Although haven’t done much research on what’s available.
Do we think nuclear will make a come back in the next 10 years. It’s the cleanest most efficient form of energy. Its biggest negative is fear, and perhaps space, but there’s plenty of space in the US. Nuclear energy has grown substantially safer and I believe we might see more lobbying for it.
Sliding in on energy
Chase Smith
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
energy.gov
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtu.be
twitter.com
Noah Mitchell
>Do we think nuclear will make a come back in the next 10 years.
no. it would probably take 10 years to build one nuclear plant.
Thomas Cruz
Apparently takes less than 5 years to be up and functional. Can only imagine that time to decrease as our operational technology increases. Additionally-recommission decommissioned plants.
Gabriel Phillips
Nuclear energy has been outcompeted by Solar/wind in costs, ease of installation, flexibility, and optics. It'll only comeback with either government intervention or with depletion of resources required for solar/wind
Aiden Perez
>Apparently takes less than 5 years
lol, who the fuck told you that? Westinghouse went bankrupt trying to build just a handful of reactors in america recently
Nicholas Perry
Despite ease of installation for solar and wind a big caveat is that energy harvested is not 24/7, which has contributed to the energy crisis in California, particularly during forced power outages. And it might not meet energy demand in future.
Additionally, irregardless of presidential outcome. There has been a bipartisan push for nuclear power growth. Just a report released from current administration in August outlining an aggressive push for growing the nuclear sector.
Luke Garcia
Don’t know much just quick searches, I could be wrong.
Seems Westinghouse fucked something up on their own end with poorly managed planning/calculations.
Jason Perry
Sauce?
Sebastian Edwards
the 4th industrial revolution will be powered by chinese made thorium molten salt reactors. its not just electricity. with excess load they can power water desalination, smelting operations, production of synfuel from raw carbon pulled from either the air or ocean. MSRs provide a modular, globally distributed industrial base for the world. MSRs fullfil the promise of an energy rich future and there is no other path forward in the near term.
Lincoln Robinson
This is actually not true at all. Very few nuclear power plants have been built since the 1970s which means while technology has indeed advanced. What this means is that we have very little construction experience which actually leads to longer build times for new designs. The reason why we were able to build plants fast in the past was because we were simply doing copy paste to certain designs in France and in the US with type approval. To build plants fast something similar would need to happen.A type approval for specific plant and then copy paste them all over the country. Another alternative would be small modular reactors (SMRs) which have received a lot of hype but have not yet been built in large scale.
Also I don't know if you have heard of OL3 but it's a "new" Finnish power plant which construction started 15 years ago and is still not operational. The budget has blown up from 3 billion estimate to approximately 10 billion. This is what happens when you start building entirely new concepts with no prior experience. It's simply not economical.
Chase Davis
Think that’s what bill gates idea with terrapower is
Nathaniel Harris
actually it's going to be powered with cheap oil, since over the last decade it's been discovered that peak oil is actually a mid 22nd century problem.
Cameron Ramirez
Nuclear is too powerful. It can only be allowed to reach it's potential once a global war has cleansed to world of people unsuitable to wield such power.
Colton Hernandez
Let me rephrase: wind and solar INCLUDING storage outcompetes Nuclear in all those metrics. Pushing nuclear energy in government is a classic delay tactic for the fossil fuels sector to keep themselves alive for the decade it'll take for nuclear to catch up
Dominic Nelson
Hilariously, the original MSR was developed in the 50s in the US, and the tech was abandoned by Nixon.
Jaxon Carter
i believe terrawatt is a fast spectrum breeder. in that range thorium offers no benefits over uranium. thorium MSRs operate in the thermal spectrum. HIGH HEAT = INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES
Dylan Butler
is that why off shore oil rigs exist? setting aside the climate implications of lifting the 3rd world out of poverty. interesting thing about synfuel powered by nuclear is that its carbon neutral AND one can manufacture a synfuel with greater energy densisty than gasoline or kerosene if coal is used as feedstock.
Thomas Torres
abandoned right about the time of bretton-woods and USD reserve status and petrodollar...hmmm. everybody not the global hegemon has everything to gain from this. glad china is stepping up to the plate. if they do this well, i could forgive them for corona.
Jackson Russell
one word: SCALING. lol you just so conveniently externalize the costs of the rare earths underpinning solar,wind, and the batteries that go along with it.
James Scott
Noah Russell
everything thorium
youtube.com
Nolan James
the key here is to outrun any NEW coal plants being installed in 3rd world countries. as you suggested, its a big ask to decommision a running coal/nuclear plant and replace with MSR types.
Jayden Hall
Regulatory costs, insurance, and price uncertainty make nuclear uneconomical. It's a reliable, clean source of base load power, but it's not profitable and plants are being cancelled or shut down as allowable.
Photovoltaic solar output per dollar has been on an exponential curve similar to that seen in microprocessors, in part because PV production benefits from semiconductor manufacturing technology developed for computers. Power storage is an issue, but batteries are on a similar, but much slower trajectory, and eventually they become cheaper together than all other power sources. In some areas they already are.
Finally, if you want to gamble on PV solar in general, and the trustworthiness of an anonymous dev team in particular, you can buy or farm Pylon's offshoot token, Solarite. Proceeds from the token supply capital to install PV panels on some land in North Carolina, and the profits from selling it back to the power company are returned as dividends on the blockchain. I'm skeptical but if you're into crypto it's at least relevant to the conversation.
Alexander Allen
the problem with nuclear energy is some contracts are designed to last 100s of years. Some countries don't survive that long let alone Energy Companies
Daniel Smith
Slide yourself into looking at xBTC today unless you wanna lose it all.
Jacob Walker
what a bunch of horse shit
Dominic Richardson
>Regulatory costs, insurance, and price uncertainty make nuclear uneconomical
...1st world problems. many societies still burn wood for energy. but yes there have been many road blocks to innovation. it takes long term funding and competent leadership, as can be found in china, to take nucelar from where it is today to a similar path as PVs (also brought to you by china).
Adam White
>Regulatory costs, insurance, and price uncertainty make nuclear uneconomical.
see: youtube.com
Leo Allen
It would take a change in the regulatory environment for nuclear to gain traction in the US, and neither party wants nuclear. Republicans don't care about climate change and don't want to mess with the oil companies, while Democrats have to please their crystal hippies who think all nuclear power is a literal atom bomb planted inside every city.
China can develop a reactor that's meltdown-proof, maintenance free, totally sealed, and that fits into a shipping container, and it will be illegal or at least financially impractical in the US for the foreseeable future.
Sebastian Morgan
yes, cant fix stupid. so we'll just give up our leadership role in the world? so it seems. MSR coupled with CBDC WILL spell the end of the petrodollar.
Grayson Miller
Chinese reactors will be attached to Chinese debt, and lots of countries are looking at the Belt and Road projects and not liking the results. If the US-China trade war/soft cold war keeps escalating, I'd expect any Chinese reactors to see export interest only in Africa.
Human factors and politics tend to get in the way of technically superior solutions.
Landon Anderson
>only in Africa
lol africas a big, resouce rich, place desu. you can add the rest asia as well (including india). also the southern cone. these nations have labored under predatory IMF loans for 30 years. at least they get something in return - an industrial base and infrastructure. if USA hadnt weaponized the USD then maybe belt and road wouldnt have such traction.
Noah Morgan
also china cornered the rare earths value chain. USA unable to go to war ever. we'll rattle our saber but, as you can see...we've got enough to worry about.
Hudson Sullivan