The Petawatt-hour

OVERKILL

$100 Site Donor 2021
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Messages
58,088
Location
Ontario, Canada
1PWh
1,000TWh
1,000,000GWh
1,000,000,000MWh
1,000,000,000,000kWh

A single unit plant in Germany, the Grohnde Nuclear Power Plant:

Just set a single unit record of 400TWh produced over its lifetime.

Construction started in 1975 and the plant was declared in service in 1984. It houses a single 1,430MWe PWR that averages ~11TWh/year. It is slated to be shutdown next year at only 38 years old, so this is its final year of operation. Quite a tragedy, as it clearly has significant life left in it and US PWR's are being extended to 60, some even 80 years.

So, what was the first plant to hit 1,000TWh? (1 Petawatt-hour). That title belongs to Bruce Nuclear here in Ontario. From 2001 through to 2020 Bruce produced 750TWh. The A units were declared in service between 1977 and 1979 (3GW) and the B units between 1984 and 1987 (~3.2GW). Until 1995 through 1998 when the A units were laid-up, starting with Unit 1, the plant had been operating as a full 8 unit site with the A units alone producing ~460TWh. Sometime in 2008 Bruce passed the 1,000TWh mark, an interesting achievement, at least to the folks that concern themselves with such things, like myself.

What may be more notable is that Bruce will likely be the first, and perhaps only nuclear power plant to produce 2PWh. Its current operating life is 2064+ and uprates to the units in pursuit of 7,000MWe nameplate mean year-over output of north of 50TWh once the refurbs are done.

The Gravelines nuclear power plant in France also passed the 1PWh mark, doing so in 2010. With its 60 year lifespan, it may potentially hit 2PWh as well, but Bruce is far more certain.

As of 2019:
Bruce A&B: 1,522.27TWh
Gravelines: 1,401TWh
 
Last edited:
So, the waste disposal problem has been solved?

If you aren't going to use the used fuel in a breeder then sock it away in a DGR, that's the permanent solution. We are close to selecting a site up here finally. Cask storage (what is currently being employed) is fine for the interim, and means that what's currently stored isn't a pressing concern, but having a place to put final waste products, even if we go the breeder/burner route to burn up most of the longer lived actinides, is still practical, if not necessary.
 
So, the waste disposal problem has been solved?
The US had a breeder reactor to recycle nuclear fuel, but it was outlawed for a short period of time. The damage was done and now nobody will spend the billions to build another breeder, so we now stockpile used fuel awaiting burial.

The argument for outlawing our breeder and recycling was that the plutonium could be used to make bombs. Our breeder made a significant amount of Pu-240, which makes the plutonium worthless for bomb building.

The whole fiasco was complete silliness with real consequences for present day.
 
Last edited:
The US had an MSR Thorium plant from 1950-1975

Could reduce the amount of waste by 99% and what remained was potent enough to drive passive nuclear appliances meaning you could market the waste and use it for hundreds of years passively

Too bad oak ridge was ignored.

 
The US had an MSR Thorium plant from 1950-1975

Could reduce the amount of waste by 99% and what remained was potent enough to drive passive nuclear appliances meaning you could market the waste and use it for hundreds of years passively

Too bad oak ridge was ignored.


There have been a few different thorium-capable designs over the years. Indian Point 1 was apparently one of them, which was something I was unaware of until the other day when I looked up the plant. The CANDU is capable of running on MOX, Thorium and used LWR fuel. The US also had a heavy water reactor program which would have been similarly flexible.
 
The US had a breeder reactor to recycle nuclear fuel, but it was outlawed for a short period of time. The damage was done and now nobody will spend the billions to build another breeder, so we now stockpile used fuel awaiting burial.

The augment for outlawing our breeder was that the plutonium could be used to make bombs. Our breeder made a significant amount of Pu-240, which makes the plutonium worthless for bomb building.

The whole fiasco was complete silliness with real consequences for present day.

Amusingly, the Russians continue to build breeders while France reprocesses used LWR fuel using PUREX from all over Europe and even Japan.
 
If you see how some Victorian houses in San Francisco are being "remodeled" you will likely see how the nuclear plants in the future will look like:

1) You want to avoid public hearing and legal lawsuits at all cost
2) You want to use upgrades instead of brand new
3) You don't need to keep all the old parts or old designs, you just need to upgrade the essential parts to "bring up to code" and overall efficiency.
4) You do not want to draw too much attention when you are remodeling.

So basically the old Victorians are being lifted up, gutted to the frame, replaced with new foundation and ground floor garage, then the old frame with roof dropped back on the new garage / foundation, then put back together with new foundation, new wood frame reinforcement, new garage, new plumbing, new electrical, new walls, etc. It is legally still an old house, old layout, but now no way for neighbors to protest and derail your progress.

Nuclear plants in the Western world will follow the same thing to work around NIMBY. Gradually new upgrade will bring it up to new life and parts replaced, instead of new plants build, so people cannot protest.
 
The US had an MSR Thorium plant from 1950-1975

Could reduce the amount of waste by 99% and what remained was potent enough to drive passive nuclear appliances meaning you could market the waste and use it for hundreds of years passively

Too bad oak ridge was ignored.


It is a risk, mainly a political one. For the leaders with vision they can see that one day the political tide may turn and we end up selling some of the waste to a friendly nation to be spent as fuel, and then a few decades later our relationship turn sour and then the waste got converted to weapon (it doesn't have to detonate, all it take is a dirty bomb and it can potentially turn anywhere into Fukushima).

The biggest risk is the technology of Thorium reactor exist and mature. If US don't research it then it will in theory slow the progress down, I think that's the thinking.

France is a different situation, they do not want their energy security to be held hostage so they need to have some reprocessing capability, and to make it capable and have allies in this industry they need to help process other nations' waste as well (as long as they take the trash out too).

Nuke has its place, the problem is we in the West are now too well off to want to risk dealing with the perception of the risk. For us we would rather pay more and let someone else do the nuke business (China, India, Eastern Europe, Russia, etc). We would rather do batteries and solar and wind and EV instead.
 
And in other news, the great and sunny state of Pennsylvania is going to get 50% of govt power from the sun by 2023. I wish them well....

I do have a home in Milford, PA, and the gloom is rather depressing, but what do I know.
 
And in other news, the great and sunny state of Pennsylvania is going to get 50% of govt power from the sun by 2023. I wish them well....

I do have a home in Milford, PA, and the gloom is rather depressing, but what do I know.

I had a guy this afternoon tell me in the comments on a facebook post that I needed to educate myself on energy. I posted one of the Ontario wind output graphs (we were talking about Ontario) and he said that was proof we needed more wind and solar. I kindly suggested he might take a break from watching youtube videos and instead take a few minutes and do a bit of math. He replied by telling me I needed to "get with the future" and linked me to yet another crackpot youtube video.

If only I was as confident about my powergen knowledge as this guy who apparently has watched a few youtube videos and now knows everything 🤷‍♂️
 
Thanks for the post. I first ran into Petawatt hrs when I posted a chart showing Chinese coal plant output. At first I compared Petawatt to Gigawatt and then realized they were talking petawatt hours, not just petawatts. Those are “hooge” numbers.
 
Last edited:
I had a guy this afternoon tell me in the comments on a facebook post that I needed to educate myself on energy. I posted one of the Ontario wind output graphs (we were talking about Ontario) and he said that was proof we needed more wind and solar. I kindly suggested he might take a break from watching youtube videos and instead take a few minutes and do a bit of math. He replied by telling me I needed to "get with the future" and linked me to yet another crackpot youtube video.

If only I was as confident about my powergen knowledge as this guy who apparently has watched a few youtube videos and now knows everything 🤷‍♂️
I saw the release about the Pennsylvania solar project and it seemed to me they were planning to cover what looked like productive farm land. I wonder how much money will be wasted by purchasing it.
 
I saw the release about the Pennsylvania solar project and it seemed to me they were planning to cover what looked like productive farm land. I wonder how much money will be wasted by purchasing it.
That solar farm is 3,500 acres and will produce roughly 1/3rd the output of the tiny single unit nuke that it is claiming to "replace". The virtue signalling is strong.
 
I saw the release about the Pennsylvania solar project and it seemed to me they were planning to cover what looked like productive farm land. I wonder how much money will be wasted by purchasing it.
To be fair, we have been subsidizing farmland for years because of productivity gain, consolidations, trade wars, etc etc. So someone wanting to convert farmland to non farmland is always welcome. It doesn't matter if it is a PPA, lease, or purchase.

I'm sure they will winterize the grid in PA, and most homes are natural gas heated instead of HVAC or electric resistance heated.
 
Back
Top