Who Killed the Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor (LFTR)?

[Bob Wallace]

113. Right now...

We have about 80,000 existing dams. We use about 2,500 for electricity production. Based on a study of existing dams on federal lands another several thousand should be usable for electricity.

At the moment several existing dams are being converted to production facilities.

--

Our geothermal resources are massive. Check the new maps which show, among other places, very large geothermal resources in West Virginia.

--

The DOE price of wind is already adjusted for capacity.

--

Biomass is largely getting used in existing coal plants in order to reduce the amount of coal burned. Siting is not an issue.

--

I'm glad to see you admit that nuclear is not cheaper than all other renewable energy sources. That's an improvement over your previous incorrect claims.

--

"Solar has cost differentials of a dollar or two, and that's with the subsidies that are going to be going away. "

Solar is currently more expensive than what new nuclear is projected to be, but those prices do not include subsidies. Advanced nuclear 113.9/MHw and industrial level solar 153.4/MWh - those are non-subsidized numbers.

Solar prices are going to drop with our without US subsidies. The rest of the world is driving the price of solar now.

Will solar continue to drop over the next decade and be as cheap or cheaper than new nuclear? Many people in the business believe so.

Can nuclear compete on a mixed grid where part of the 24 hour cycle input will be very cheap electricity from wind? Don't think so.

Nuclear, using the DOE number, would have to sell its power 24/365 for $0.114/kWh to break even. Wind can sell for $0.097/kWh. Who is going to purchase nuclear at a higher price? Nuclear, since it can't shut down or turn off its loan payments will have to sell at a loss and then crank its price up higher during the time when wind is not on line.

Let's assume wind will capture 50% of the market (remember, capacity does not mean the percent of the time the wind is blowing, only the average output compared to maximum potential). That would mean that nuclear would have to raise its break-even price to $0.13/kWh. Now we're only a couple of pennies of further price drop before solar takes away another 20% of the 24 hour cycle making nuclear even more expensive.

And then there's natural gas. Not what we should be using from a climate change/environmental position, but what the energy industry will use.

That's why the utility companies which have to compete in the free market are telling us that nuclear is priced off the table.