China to build 6-8 reactors a year

Find an environmentalist anywhere advocating replacing nuclear with coal, or any other expansion of coal power.

The only one you might find is an "environmentalist" with vested connections to the coal industry.
Apparently you have been on a different planet the last 50 years, during which the fake environmentalists have been railing against nuclear power--resulting in coal fired plants continuing to pollute the atmosphere with radioactive particles. Some go so far as to say the anti-nuke hysteria of the last 50 years is the cause of global warming. You see, the anti nuke fake environmentalists have caused great harm, including filling the air we breathe with radiation. Read the links I posted and learn something.
 
Find an environmentalist anywhere advocating replacing nuclear with coal, or any other expansion of coal power.

The only one you might find is an "environmentalist" with vested connections to the coal industry.

Germany just brought a new coal plant online to help with their nuclear phaseout. Going forward, Nordstream, the natural gas umbilical cord from Russia will be their main support as coal is planned to be replaced by gas, which is still 490gCO2/kWh, so while cleaner than coal, it's still filthy when compared to 12gCO2/kWh nuclear.
 
China bought one ( 1 ) of the Westinghouse AP1000 reactors. I figured that that was the only one they would ever buy, and would copy it and make many of the copies. And in the end that may have been a safer way for them to go with nuclear power. Westinghouse spend a fortune on the design and development of that reactor, and if China had copied it and build more of them they would have been getting one heck of a deal, considering all the engineering they would have been stealing and using without paying royalties, and how much it cost to develop.

I guess for now the French design is cheaper to make. I just wonder if it has anywhere near the safety margin that the Westinghouse AP1000 has.
 
Details can be unbelievably ugly and retarded in D, but nuclear, nucular and coal at least we're leaving all three. Albeit coal will be with us for a little longer than nuclear (plans of course hadn't been the least bit ambitious) it actually means less and less of a fight right now as it's given up for being unprofitable:

The uglier facets are deliberate restraints for wind and sun and else: A small windpark comme il faut that instead of getting occasionally shut down as required now in addition heats the nearby village via thermal storage systems – but needs to fight when the exceptional permission expires. Silly distancing regulations to prevent erections between villages while for coal mining entire villages can get eradicated. Old photovoltaic installations to charge the vehicle that suddenly need new meters and more. Hindrance of grid expansion and decentralization.

So many decades lost to make Energiewende & Kohleausstieg sound as sexy as criminal Krümmel & TÜV.
 
China bought one ( 1 ) of the Westinghouse AP1000 reactors. I figured that that was the only one they would ever buy, and would copy it and make many of the copies. And in the end that may have been a safer way for them to go with nuclear power. Westinghouse spend a fortune on the design and development of that reactor, and if China had copied it and build more of them they would have been getting one heck of a deal, considering all the engineering they would have been stealing and using without paying royalties, and how much it cost to develop.

I guess for now the French design is cheaper to make. I just wonder if it has anywhere near the safety margin that the Westinghouse AP1000 has.

The EPR is just as safe as the AP1000, both being Gen III+ designs. The AP1000 has been a white elephant unfortunately, but then so has the EPR (see: Hinkley Point C).

There is a "Chinese version" of the AP1000, the CAP1400 that's upgraded to higher output (as the name suggests, 1,400MW) and that China holds the rights to. It was developed with Westinghouse.

China has FOUR AP1000's BTW:
2x @ Sanman
2x @ Haiyang

It's still a viable design for the Chinese, but I expect it won't be built with the Hualong One being cheaper and with there being that many more of them under construction, coming online and about to commence construction.
 
Details can be unbelievably ugly and retarded in D, but nuclear, nucular and coal at least we're leaving all three. Albeit coal will be with us for a little longer than nuclear (plans of course hadn't been the least bit ambitious) it actually means less and less of a fight right now as it's given up for being unprofitable:

The uglier facets are deliberate restraints for wind and sun and else: A small windpark comme il faut that instead of getting occasionally shut down as required now in addition heats the nearby village via thermal storage systems – but needs to fight when the exceptional permission expires. Silly distancing regulations to prevent erections between villages while for coal mining entire villages can get eradicated. Old photovoltaic installations to charge the vehicle that suddenly need new meters and more. Hindrance of grid expansion and decentralization.

So many decades lost to make Energiewende & Kohleausstieg sound as sexy as criminal Krümmel & TÜV.

Wind and solar aren't going to get you there, that's why you are investing so heavily in Russian gas, which is a whole other discussion. It's currently not windy in Germany, and this is the result:
Screen Shot 2020-12-02 at 6.58.15 PM.png


Now, compare to nuclear-heavy France:
Screen Shot 2020-12-02 at 6.58.32 PM.png
 
I don't expect it to remain much of a discussion, the pipeline's almost completed I guess, but we will see.

Regarding the mix we're not there yet of course. We'd already be there if we hadn't lost decades, is what I say. In all diversity.
Overcome nuclear and coal plants may be regarded as great sites for some bigger centralized energy storage solutions with their grid connections.
 
I don't expect it to remain much of a discussion, the pipeline's almost completed I guess, but we will see.

Regarding the mix we're not there yet of course. We'd already be there if we hadn't lost decades, is what I say. In all diversity.
Overcome nuclear and coal plants may be regarded as great sites for some bigger centralized energy storage solutions with their grid connections.

You'll never store enough power to firm wind and solar, you'll be married to Russian gas while places who chose to keep and expand their nuclear fleets achieve deep decarbonization. The German plan is utterly insane, they've spent enough on the wind and solar madness that they could have completely decarbonized their grid with a new fleet of nukes already. Complete madness.
 
I don't expect it to remain much of a discussion, the pipeline's almost completed I guess, but we will see.

Regarding the mix we're not there yet of course. We'd already be there if we hadn't lost decades, is what I say. In all diversity.
Overcome nuclear and coal plants may be regarded as great sites for some bigger centralized energy storage solutions with their grid connections.
Back in the early 1990s the utilities in Pennsylvania tried to install long-distance very high Voltage power lies and ran into way too much opposition from all the NIMBY and other environmentalist and after years of putting money into trying to get it approved they had to give up on the idea.
 
The european combine of course is part of the solution. In the long run ot because of foreign "nukes" but it's helping flexible distribution and will help connection to sites further abroad. We don't fear causing the next global ice age from no longer heating the landscapes ;-)
 
The european combine of course is part of the solution. In the long run ot because of foreign "nukes" but it's helping flexible distribution and will help connection to sites further abroad. We don't fear causing the next global ice age from no longer heating the landscapes ;-)

I'd hardly call being parasites on French nuclear assets a "solution". They've made the necessary investment, so are many other nations, including Russia, who is partnering with many others now to deploy VVER's. China (the topic of this thread) is going balls-in on nuclear now, the complete opposite direction of Germany.

Ontario completely phased out coal. We've done what Germany was unable to do, and we did it with existing nuclear assets and a touch of gas, which will be eliminated with new nuclear (SMR's) in the not so distant future if things go as planned.

This is what Ontario power generation looks like:
Screen Shot 2020-11-27 at 7.36.32 PM.png


We unfortunately did a bit of the wind and solar sideshow which drove up rates. Had we not made that detour we'd have Darlington B right now and basically zero gas.
 
Jim, we experienced the same jamboree, in Bavaria especially. But had nothing to do with "environmentalists", had been more of a vehicle of the former fossil and nuclear troops actually that to this day aren't completely shut down of course. The pure and innocent hydrogen with and even because of its problems is mainly their vehicle in all sorts of debate...
But be it as it may: All of us need to correct all sorts of nonsense now, many of these troops even got somewhat converted rather quickly and civic participation in general and especially in case of windmills to get erected proves enormously helpful.

Overkill, I see no sense in "discussing" nuclear whatever with you, I regret. I spontaneously reacted as the insinuation regarding new german coal was that far off. On the other hand the difficulties are clear and even my understanding became clear I guess. So what? You may see enough potentials and direction of efforts and achievements or choose to not see such. Understandable either way :) China may also be going Nezzy² et al. where you're not watching – why would I want to watch you watching? Enjoy yourself, in my eyes even wax would be more interesting on here than this hobby horse of yours and else that I'll just leave without a problem. The "Asse" alone is more urgent over here than your approvals...

I shall leave it at that. Baba and good night.
 
Last edited:
You'll never store enough power to firm wind and solar, you'll be married to Russian gas while places who chose to keep and expand their nuclear fleets achieve deep decarbonization. The German plan is utterly insane, they've spent enough on the wind and solar madness that they could have completely decarbonized their grid with a new fleet of nukes already. Complete madness.
German plan has indeed been half baked and bizarre. $olar panels along sides of Autobahn, and $iemens windmills everywhere. They invested huge amounts of money and nearly bankrupted the Country. After they built everything it turned out the critics were correct. Electricity prices skyrocketed as it had to be rationed when the clean nuke plants went offline. Then the early failures of the massive $iemens windmills spelled doom. Only escape was a crash building program for coal plants. The crash program to build coal plants plugged the gap, but as pointed out, it appears that they knew the entire time they would end up hopelessly dependent on Russian gas. Bizarre. No wonder Britain wanted out of the EU with crazy stuff like that all around.
 
I spontaneously reacted as the insinuation regarding new german coal was that far off.
Datteln 4 came online May 30th of this year:

Yes, there are claims that other plants will be shuttered, but so far that's yet to materialize.
 
It's okay, nucular Empire would probably know what you two need to know, so you're easily three to keep an eye on everything ;-)
 
German plan has indeed been half baked and bizarre. $olar panels along sides of Autobahn, and $iemens windmills everywhere. They invested huge amounts of money and nearly bankrupted the Country. After they built everything it turned out the critics were correct. Electricity prices skyrocketed as it had to be rationed when the clean nuke plants went offline. Then the early failures of the massive $iemens windmills spelled doom. Only escape was a crash building program for coal plants. The crash program to build coal plants plugged the gap, but as pointed out, it appears that they knew the entire time they would end up hopelessly dependent on Russian gas. Bizarre. No wonder Britain wanted out of the EU with crazy stuff like that all around.

I believe the price tag thus far has been >$500 billion Euros, which is ~600 billion US dollars, so more than half a trillion for a grid that is still completely filthy.

A good, but extremely long, read on the subject:

And a valuable quote:

Despite the operation of thermal power plants being increasingly uneconomic, and many closing, this capacity is still needed. The Uniper CEO said in March 2017: “This winter has proved that supply from wind and solar alone does not work. In peak hours on January 24 renewable energy delivered just 1% of overall German demand. Conventional plants carried almost the entire load.”
 
I am neither here nor there on nuclear, we have 2 reactors (Plant Vogtle) under perpetual construction a few hours southeast of Atlanta to feed the Southern Company network (Alabama Power, Gulf Power, Georgia Power, etc.), a few invested utility partners and Co-Ops in South Carolina and North Carolina and some invested Co-Op and some non-Southern Company utility areas in Georgia.

Problem is this thing has been under construction since 2013, still years away from completion and massively over budget to the tune of ~1 billion (no I didn't mistake the b for an m). How many local Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, Florida panhandle solar farms could this 1 billion cost overrun have built over the course of 7 years if they found interested land buyers?

So I am not opposed to nuclear if we can work on a good waste solution and a way to get these things online slightly faster. My opposition is because this perpetual fee for construction, its been almost 8 years and your still years away from plugging it in.

*Edit*

I will say the State of Georgia has slapped Southern Company on the wrist a few times and we get little refunds here and there. I need to build a spreadsheet and see how it balances.
 
I am neither here nor there on nuclear, we have 2 reactors (Plant Vogtle) under perpetual construction a few hours southeast of Atlanta to feed the Southern Company network (Alabama Power, Gulf Power, Georgia Power, etc.), a few invested utility partners and Co-Ops in South Carolina and North Carolina and some invested Co-Op and some non-Southern Company utility areas in Georgia.

Problem is this thing has been under construction since 2013, still years away from completion and massively over budget to the tune of ~1 billion (no I didn't mistake the b for an m). How many local Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, Florida panhandle solar farms could this 1 billion cost overrun have built over the course of 7 years if they found interested land buyers?

So I am not opposed to nuclear if we can work on a good waste solution and a way to get these things online slightly faster. My opposition is because this perpetual fee for construction, its been almost 8 years and your still years away from plugging it in.

*Edit*

I will say the State of Georgia has slapped Southern Company on the wrist a few times and we get little refunds here and there. I need to build a spreadsheet and see how it balances.

Yes, that's the White Elephant of the AP1000 I mentioned earlier unfortunately. I follow Tim Echols on twitter so I am kept apprised of the progress at that plant. It's going, but it is SLOW. China did not have that problem with their 4x, so the issue isn't really the design but rather the loss of expertise/experience on executing projects of this size and nature in the West since Chernobyl, which is really when everything came apart and all the momentum that carried through from the 60's through the 80's was lost.

The two CANDU 6's at Qinshan were built in less than four years and at a cost of $4 billion. That's crazy fast and cheap.

Of course on the solar farm comparison, Vogtle should last 4x longer than a solar farm (80 vs 20 years) and will thus produce more power over its lifetime and won't require storage, or, as is the case presently, standby gas capacity to replace its output every night.

On prices, the Georgia Power Authority is building a 125MW solar farm for $249 million, so that's $2,000,000/MW.

Vogtle is at what, $25 billion for 3 & 4? That's 2,200MWe of capacity, so $11,364,000/MW

$25 billion would have constructed 12,500MW of solar, which, at 19% CF would produce ~21TWh/year. Over 20 years that is ~420TWh.
Vogtle 3 & 4 at 93% CF (actual may be higher, that's US average) will produce 18TWh/year for ~80 years, so 1,440TWh over their lifespan.
 
Back
Top