Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
 

Alexander Of Assyria

(7,839 posts)
1. Average American nuclear reactor produces 1 GW, total around 100GW in America.
Mon Apr 10, 2023, 08:39 PM
Apr 2023

Nuclear still needs to be in the equation, but this kind of very very large scaling is what is needed to compare and compete with a single reactor.

https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/infographic-how-much-power-does-nuclear-reactor-produce

Finishline42

(1,091 posts)
2. Agreed
Mon Apr 10, 2023, 09:44 PM
Apr 2023
Nuclear still needs to be in the equation

There was an idea about converting closed coal plants into nuclear. Using the existing turbine. I doubt that would be very efficient. But the site would already be approved as a power plant. Doubt very many new sites would be approved.

This is the current state:

At the end of 2021, the United States had 93 operating commercial nuclear reactors at 55 nuclear power plants in 28 states.

Those 93 reactors produce just under 20% of our electricity. The fact is we aren't building another 93 reactors to double what nuclear produces.

It's clear we will double what wind and solar produces in the next 10 years if not more.
 

Alexander Of Assyria

(7,839 posts)
4. Fossil industry has outlobbyed, meaning outcorrupted, politicians far more than nuclear industry.
Tue Apr 11, 2023, 05:28 AM
Apr 2023

And ofc has spent on mass media advertising by a factor of infinity to none.

Who would mass media support more? Even now mass media is not on the conservation train because the gravy train of fossil fuel money is still chugging down the tracks.

Same with politicians, sweet fossil fuel cash powers their campaigns.

NNadir

(33,542 posts)
3. Wow! Let's celebrate the trivial!!!!!!!
Mon Apr 10, 2023, 11:57 PM
Apr 2023

A MW is a unit of power, not energy.

Adding "1,582 MW" of solar power, at roughly 20% to 25% capacity utilization is like building a small gas plant, worse if the solar power is used to power a battery which can, at best be returning less power to the grid than it took to charge it for a fraction of the time it exists in the form of future electronic waste.

It's like a 300 MW power plant, less, if energy is wasted to charge batteries, really nothing to celebrate. Since it will all be electronic waste 25 years from now, there's much to cause a decent person to be appalled.

Moreover, someone will have to build an equivalent dangerous fossil fuel powerplant to back this crap up. So what's being celebrated is more dangerous natural gas, until the gas runs out, after its waste is dumped into the planetary atmosphere, whereupon, as in Germany, they'll be a switch to coal.

Personally, I don't cheer for fossil fuel dependence.

As for batteries: Cobalt Red, not that I expect antinukes to give a rat's ass.

Here's what half a century of these delusional circus announcements using the lie of conflating peak power with energy has brought us:

April 09: 421.70 ppm
April 08: 421.64 ppm
April 07: 422.37 ppm
April 06: 423.01 ppm
April 05: 422.75 ppm
Last Updated: April 10, 2023

Recent Daily Average Mauna Loa CO2

We're seeing numbers like this and still we hear this cheering for the solar/wind/gas/coal scam.

No. Sense. Of. Decency,

None.



 

Alexander Of Assyria

(7,839 posts)
5. What would the readings of co2 have been without the replacement by cleaner energy?
Tue Apr 11, 2023, 05:35 AM
Apr 2023

Fact is the solar and electricity generation, by not burning decayed forests, is out of the station and it’s not going back in.

At some point hydrogen will join the herd, and here’s hoping ramped up small scale nuclear power generation becomes more of a thing in the West, as is coming in the East.

20% can easily become 40% or more if on,y the science is buried by irrational fear.

A bit of harmless heavily diluted heavy water spills into a river and all manner of misinformation leading to irrational fear breaks out, no thanks to an ignorant media. Hard to overcome mass irrational fear.

Heavy water is…water!…it dilutes just like, well, water!

Finishline42

(1,091 posts)
6. Again, DQIIIIIIIII conflates rising CO2 to using wind and solar
Tue Apr 11, 2023, 06:05 AM
Apr 2023

As stated above, where would we be without the 14% that wind and solar contributed to our grid in 2022?

What was the CO2 in 2010? 390? What is the biggest change to the World since? Yep, we added a BILLION PEOPLE. That obviously had played a significant part in the increase in CO2.

Just as we didn't see a noticeable drop in CO2 during the pandemic (World-wide economic slow down) tells us what we are up against.

So 1,582 MW came online in March.

1,758MW of solar & 782 MW of storage is coming before June.

And there will be more by August

And there will be more by October

BTW, storage works for both wind and solar. Better to charge batteries than flooding the Texas grid with cheap electricity.

NNadir

(33,542 posts)
7. This "where would we be," nonsense is very, very, very, very weak sauce.
Tue Apr 11, 2023, 07:06 AM
Apr 2023

Last edited Tue Apr 11, 2023, 09:22 AM - Edit history (1)

No amount of insipid appeal to it will move me from my consideration of how pernicious this stupid solar/wind/gas/coal fantasy is.

"Where would we be if antinukes hadn't worked so hard to demolish nuclear infrastructure for the last 50 years?" is the question whose answer matters to me.

The fucking Germans shut over 23,000 MWe of reliable continuously operated nuclear power plants, plants capable of running without redundant fossil fuel systems because they thought that solar and wind weren't the garbage they proved to be.

That adds up to 0.7 Exajoules per year at 95% capacity utilization, the typical capacity utilization of nuclear plants.

There are no fucking places on this planet where solar and wind energy have provided enough power to shut all of the dangerous fossil fuel plants on a grid for a period of hours, never mind days, and thus every fucking battery on this planet on any grid that isn't French is being charged by wasting energy, energy provided by dangerous fossil fuels, to charge batteries, all of which will be electronic waste in less than 25 years.

No amount of soothsaying will change the 2nd law of thermodynamics? OK? Got it finally? No?

Where would we be if we hadn't squandered over three trillion dollars on solar and wind garbage in this century, but rather had used that money to maintain and expand nuclear manufacturing infrastructure rather than destroying it?

In 25 years, from 1960 to 1985, using primitive technology developed by engineers using slide rules primarily in the 1950s and 1960, the world built more than 400 nuclear reactors.

All the stupid, illiterate references to "MW" units of peak power for unreliable systems that operate, at best, at 25% capacity utilization, all requiring redundancy, will not change the fact that the unit of energy is the Joule, on a planetary scale, the Exajoule (EJ), 10^18 J.

In an atmosphere of obscene stupidity, those more than 400 reactors, many of which still operate, are providing, and have been providing in an atmosphere of screaming hostility, around 30 EJ, continuously reliably, and have been doing so since the early 1990s.

Solar and wind garbage has never not once, provided half as much energy. The unit, again, to repeat for the billionth time, is the Joule, not the Watt.

Let me say that again: The solar and wind garbage - all of which is lipstick on the fossil fuel pig, especially when fossil fuel electricity is being wasted to charge batteries promoted by functional idiots who deny the 2nd law of thermodynamics, don't produce half of that.

Antinukes shouldn't really try to do math, by the way. It makes them look even worse.

Again.

No. Sense. Of. Decency.

None.

GregariousGroundhog

(7,526 posts)
8. Oh look. Another Twitter user who doesn't know the difference between power and energy
Tue Apr 11, 2023, 12:05 PM
Apr 2023

How long can the storage maintain that 205MW for? One second? One minute? One hour? One day?

Finishline42

(1,091 posts)
9. Good question but my guess is it's impossible to answer
Tue Apr 11, 2023, 04:18 PM
Apr 2023

If all the storage was from one manufacturer and in one spec, that they could answer.

From Megapack datasheet>>>

2-hour: Up to 1264.5 kW / 2529 kWh
(Scalable in increments of 84.3 kW / 168.6 kWh)
4-hour: Up to 741.2 kW / 2964.8 kWh
(Scalable in increments of 43.6 kW / 174.4 kWh)


https://impulsoragdl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Ficha-Tecnica-Mega-Pack.pdf

edited to add>>>

AC Power / Energy Available per Megapack | Round-Trip System Efficiency


2-Hour Standard 1264.5 kW / 2529 kWh | 87%

2-Hour Light 1011.6 kW / 2023.2 kWh | 87%

4-Hour Standard 741.2 kW / 2964.8 kWh | 90%

4-Hour Light 523.2 kW / 2092.8 kWh | 90%

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Texas added 1,582MW of so...