|
There is also the new condensed batteries from CATL which are described as semi solid state with over 500wh/kg, already in production. https://hiu-batteries.de/en/research/prof-fichtner-catl-condensed-battery/ Also, BYD is now the 2nd largest battery producer after overtaking LG chem earlier this year.
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2023 23:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 23:21 |
|
|
That is some wild and really cool stuff. Thanks for the effort post. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2023 03:30
|
|
|
The folks who say nuclear power costs too much or takes too long to build are the ones adding the red tape and delays to fulfill their own prophecy. Democrats with a super majority are not building nuclear power plants- they are paid off just as much as the other guys. It’s 100% a politics problem, where 10% is the NIMBY problem and 90% is corruption. They really don’t care about you. Did Al Gore teach you nothing? GHG wasn’t political until it was monetized. Energy doesn’t attract the talent, it’s all a good old boys club and bullying and corruption is their cup of tea. Every engineer I’ve ever met is pro nuclear. Including all the petro folks. If the industry shifted you’d have more than enough engineers to fill the gaps. It’s higher skill and higher paying blue collar operator work that still doesn’t require too much thinking, which is an increasingly shrinking part of the market folks want to aspire towards. Homer had his life set. Everyone is going to take a blueprint and copy it; it’s not like you need to train up new Oppenheimers Mid-Life Crisis fucked around with this message at 01:29 on Jul 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 01:16
|
|
|
IIRC Dems have put money to invest into nuclear, mainly to keep the current plants open, but the fact is Dems are a bit reluctant to engage in what seems like "state planning" I suppose and "picking winners"; removing subsidies from the fossil fuel industry and loosening some of the regulations around nuclear power plants would probably be fairly effective in getting new nuclear plants beginning to be built, not enough, but some. However part of the problem is that there's no one size fits all proven nuclear plant design that can be copy and pasted across the country; that doesn't exist and is why it costs so much and takes so long. Smaller more modular reactors are hoped to improve this because that's a design that presumably can be built more widely without as much need to carefully study the site and local environment to cater the design to the locality. You do need highly trained and specialized engineers who specifically need to know nuclear stuff to run nuclear plants, but in the short term the US Navy could lend technicians while the education system takes time to spool up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 02:40
|
|
|
Mid-Life Crisis posted:The folks who say nuclear power costs too much or takes too long to build are the ones adding the red tape and delays to fulfill their own prophecy. Democrats with a super majority are not building nuclear power plants- they are paid off just as much as the other guys. It’s 100% a politics problem, where 10% is the NIMBY problem and 90% is corruption. They really don’t care about you. Did Al Gore teach you nothing? GHG wasn’t political until it was monetized. Energy doesn’t attract the talent, it’s all a good old boys club and bullying and corruption is their cup of tea. Democrats don’t even control both houses now, let alone a super majority. The last time they were was like 13 years ago: https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/obama-administration-announces-loan-guarantees-construct-new-nuclear-power-reactors . You’ll note westinghouse finally got one built at Vogtle and none of those delays had anything to do with nimbys or fossil. W streamlined a lot of the fed process and every administration has put hundreds of millions per year into subsidized designs and support for the industry. Nuclear power plants are frequently described as the most complex machines ever built. Nucear engineers and techs are not fungible and the design criteria of sub nukes are not the same, as is always explained when someone proposes xeroxing naval designs as SMRs. Aside from the handful of naval, chucking untrained and inexperienced engineers on these projects are one of many reasons why vogtle and summer had order of magnitude budget overruns. Also, the number of human operators you need on nuke are much higher than coal/gas; let alone renewables. It’s not cheap to hire them, either. The fact is that the US nuclear power industry has been dead for forty years and no amount of dreaming about shoveling more perfectly spherical engineers into westinghouse’s infinite maw of incompetence and MBA brain that completely ate poo poo on all these projects. BTW, they’re now owned by private equity; lol, lmao. Other gen3+ manufacturers? You have GE Hitachi who had to pay a multimillion dollar fine for lying about the safety modeling of their design, CANDU, who is owned by SNC-Lavalin now (lol, again), AREVA, who have similar timelines and problems on their 2006-2007 plants as Westinghouse. BTW, Biden-subsidized prices for the first wave of SMRs are already higher than Vogtle, and are guaranteed to go even higher.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 03:57
|
|
|
The endless red tape scares talent away. Nobody good at projects wants to work on projects that never materialize. Leaves ya with dunces who have never been proven and will overrun and fail to deliver as you should expect. Until someone seriously makes it a national priority it won’t change. I’ve chatted with a few fed inspectors and they know their job is just to delay projects to death cause the local politicians don’t actually want them built in their district. They could push coal plants to convert into nuclear and save a big chunk of change, instead feds followed the money pushing them convert to natural gas. Chasing sulfur long after it’s not a problem instead of GHG. And screwing over the entire coal industry overnight instead of staging things out like responsible adults (Germany did something right for a change). Feds have spent countless billions on renewables with fundamental flaws that’ll never really make a dent and create plenty of their own problems while barely giving a fig leaf to nuke. If GHG was actually something politicians cared about we’d have them all over. Instead they put all their capital into eyesores and heat reflectors that they end up placing on their political opponents land.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 05:14
|
|
|
in a well actually posted:You’ll note westinghouse finally got one built at Vogtle and none of those delays had anything to do with nimbys or fossil. I couldn't help myself. I know you think this sincerely, but I actually started openly laughing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 14:37
|
|
|
I think the fact that the navy has had no problems building reactors suggests to me that if the government stepped in and had navy administrators and subject matter experts take control that could help speed things up, the point about transferring navy engineers is that they're an already trained pool of specialists who should have an easier time familiarizing themselves and retraining to civilian nuclear plants while new specialists are being trained in the pipeline.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 14:57
|
|
|
I've been thinking of a way to put it. It's like the people who insist America isn't racist because the Constitution doesn't literally say, "The Nation Shall Be Racist," even though all the subtext under the commissioning of its power structures and--even some of the surface-level text itself--absolutely creates a systemic race issue. What would you consider obstruction, if the military was sent to block construction? Are you completely blind to the way in which generations of titanic fossil subsidies, blind eyes turned to the radiation and contamination unearthed by the fossil industry, and fear mongering from every corner of our government and media apparatuses have created the situation we're in? You even mention the site permitting and design approvals process, so you're presumably remotely familiar with just how difficult the insane prohibition on standard designs has deliberately cut the legs out from under the nuclear power generation industry for 60+ years. It's like the posts by people who insist weird, blind, naïve poo poo like "America isn't racist." You have to be ignorant or driven by motivated reasoning not to see the thousands of powerful hands that have pushed our nuclear industry into the dumpster over decades.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 15:05
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I think the fact that the navy has had no problems building reactors suggests to me that if the government stepped in and had navy administrators and subject matter experts take control that could help speed things up Why? How? Specifically.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 15:09
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:I couldn't help myself. I know you think this sincerely, but I actually started openly laughing. Please explain how a decade of design, production and project management fuckups (similar to those at overseas ap1000s and other gen3+ plants) are the fault of NIMBYs and the perfidious renewable/hydrocarbon cartel)
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 15:12
|
|
|
Even then -- even then -- Votgle is in full power testing right now. Units 3 and 4 entered construction in 2013 and are pretty much good to start delivering power in 2024 unless someone shoots up the transformers going in or some other weird circumstance transpires. Eleven years-- a little over 70% of the 15 year rule of thumb so often used in this thread and in research circles for the time it takes to bring new nuclear power online. Even in the massive clusterfuck our political, cultural, and industrial power structures have created around the creation of new nuclear generation, it's ahead of schedule for the metrics often used when we talk about fighting climate change.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 15:13
|
|
|
in a well actually posted:Please explain how a decade of design, production and project management fuckups (similar to those at overseas ap1000s and other gen3+ plants) are the fault of NIMBYs and the perfidious renewable/hydrocarbon cartel) You're asking this after I laid that out for you above? And I suppose that those who burn crosses are uhhh perfectly acceptable and good cops on forces too, yes?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 15:20
|
|
|
Re: navy reactors, those designs go through just as long a development process and arguably never leave the intense and expensive research and improvement lifecycle. The navy also don't have the bizarre and purely political prohibition on approved templates and can actually take advantage of some degree of economics of scale. More, their pressure vessels are comparatively tiny. Lastly, those reactors are used to launch cruise missiles and send masked psychopaths in dive gear to kill brown people, so politically and culturally we're much more okay with them. It is not really comparable. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 15:27 on Jul 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 15:23
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I think the fact that the navy has had no problems building reactors suggests to me that if the government stepped in and had navy administrators and subject matter experts take control that could help speed things up, the point about transferring navy engineers is that they're an already trained pool of specialists who should have an easier time familiarizing themselves and retraining to civilian nuclear plants while new specialists are being trained in the pipeline. I know they are smaller reactors but they can pump out several per year, there is also a pretty good safety record there. What would they cost per unit if the requirements like being able to run silently were removed?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 15:25
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:You're asking this after I laid that out for you above? Just put a lid on the well and let him stew in it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 15:29
|
|
|
in a well actually posted:Please explain how a decade of design, production and project management fuckups (similar to those at overseas ap1000s and other gen3+ plants) are the fault of NIMBYs and the perfidious renewable/hydrocarbon cartel) bolded the part I think you need to have a good  about and also research what exactly those fuckups were
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 15:33
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:You're asking this after I laid that out for you above? Timestamps? It’s entirely possible to post something without seeing the reply, but you didn’t answer in that anyway. Potato Salad posted:bolded the part I think you need to have a good “Whoops! Completely hosed up our containment building design. Whoops! Used the wrong steel. Whoops! Had to do some redesign we lied about using unqualified engineers. Whoops! Our contractor couldn’t stop loving up and we weren’t tracking them.” Again, explain how nimbys are responsible for any of this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 16:13
|
|
|
SpeedFreek posted:I know they are smaller reactors but they can pump out several per year, there is also a pretty good safety record there. What would they cost per unit if the requirements like being able to run silently were removed? Naval reactors run on HEU so using those designs commercially would present a serious proliferation risk. It also raises fuel costs significantly - the fuel cores for a Nimitz carriers alone ran $660 mil in 2007 dollars, for a pair of reactors which could produce around 250MW if refitted solely for power generation. The cores do last longer (~25 years), but that assumes they’re not running at full output the entire time (which naval reactors generally do not do - they probably average around 30% output); that level of fuel cost starts to approach the wholesale power generation cost of a commercial nuclear reactor before you even start talking capital costs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 16:21
|
|
|
There seems to be some sort of unstated assumption that this can't possibly be improved. We've been able to turn around a plant in like 6 years without massive overruns with 70s technology, then haven't built any new ones in decades and let the industry atrophy, and now of course the first few plants are a bit of a clusterfuck. Imagine if nobody built a large bridge or tunnel in decades, there's be all sorts of issues on top of the ones we're seeing now anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 16:32
|
|
|
The types of project managers who are happy to be involved with a 15 year job are the ones who have no ounce of urgency and probably don’t really care if it ever happens. I don’t need to be preached about urgency and safety-they aren’t linked unless management/government refuses to allow slippage when real problems arise. And what dictates that is a business case imploding if there’s a delay and perverse incentives when layers of middle management only exist because they never said no. Or election cycles. If the government wanted some things built they could resolve those pitfalls quite easily. You ensure the funding is sound and the project will complete without a bunch of red flags and now different types of folks will come to work on it. And these are the skilled folks, not the unsafe scam artists. You just need enough red tape to not let the latter in. I’ve seen projects take 5 years that others did in 6 months and the 6 month project was vastly superior work in all aspects and 2 years faster than any consultant ever thought was feasible. It’s not feasible if you get the wrong people. The state of the red tape makes good people stay away. Safety can be assured without undermining the cause.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 16:58
|
|
|
in a well actually posted:“Whoops! Completely hosed up our containment building design. Whoops! Used the wrong steel. Whoops! Had to do some redesign we lied about using unqualified engineers. Whoops! Our contractor couldn’t stop loving up and we weren’t tracking them.” Nice deflection from fossil interests in industry and politics to NIMBYs. Tell me, who runs Southern Power? What is its relationship with lawmakers via lobbying and other contacts, and which industry is most closely wedded to the executives at Southern Power? What country does Southern Power operate in? What cultural forces would be prevailing in that country? Something that gets me about climateposting is where people see little conspiracies that make no sense in bizarre places all the time, but the second you try to point out gigantic, open-air, generations-long unhidden agendas pushed by thousands of powerful hands, people pretend like they can't see anything. mobby_6kl posted:There seems to be some sort of unstated assumption that this can't possibly be improved. We've been able to turn around a plant in like 6 years without massive overruns with 70s technology, then haven't built any new ones in decades and let the industry atrophy, and now of course the first few plants are a bit of a clusterfuck. YOU actually get much of it. The next step along the line here would be to ask (and you're probably already there) -Why didn't we build bridges for so long -Why would, say, the multi-trillion-dollar zip line industry not like bridges to succeed? -Why would the zip line industry gently caress up design and planning work for ZipLine™ Inc. Bridges 3 and 4? What were the nature of the fuckups, when did they transpire, under whose watch, and where ultimately in value optimization did Zipline Inc management sow the seeds of bridge fuckups? Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 17:18 on Jul 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 17:07
|
|
|
Apparently nuclear skepticism is just like racism. Cool. Really cool.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 17:26
|
|
|
Family Values posted:Apparently nuclear skepticism is just like racism. Cool. Really cool. "I can't believe power structures exist!" -You
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 17:44
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Nice deflection from fossil interests in industry and politics to NIMBYs. Ok. Let’s assume corporate Southern Power cut their own throats intentionally. Same for state owned Santee Cooper in SC. And the same cabal sabotaged the Chinese nuclear power companies that built AP1000s. And the same for the handful of long delayed EPRs in France, UK, and Finland. How do you build reactors if no one can be trusted to build them?
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 17:45
|
|
|
C'mon, how much of a child do you want to be about deliberately misinterpreting an example about American power structures. You're like Joe Rogan and Elon last week pretending the left was equating "fitness=nazis"
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 17:47
|
|
|
in a well actually posted:How do you build reactors if no one can be trusted to build them? What are Votgle reactors 3 and 4 doing right now? Are we ahead of or behind that 15 year rule of thumb that climate researchers and, oddly, nuclear skeptics alike toss around for nuclear groundbreaking to generation? Not going to lie, I just had to check to make sure this was still in D&D. I'm not happy with how incapable of anticipating reactions some of this back and forth is revealing some posters to be. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 17:52 on Jul 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 17:48
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:C'mon, how much of a child do you want to be about deliberately misinterpreting an example about American power structures. You're like Joe Rogan and Elon last week pretending the left was equating "fitness=nazis" You literally accused me of being in favor of racist cops a few posts ago.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 17:56
|
|
|
in a well actually posted:You literally accused me of being in favor of racist cops a few posts ago. this is kind of telling me that you're not actually reading You're sitting here pretending not to be capable of seeing a throughline between the denial of fossil power structures in American politics/culture and denial of other power structures in American politics/culture Your best defense is to try to claim that talking about power structures means I'm calling you racist. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 18:11 on Jul 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 18:00
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:What are Votgle reactors 3 and 4 doing right now? Are we ahead of or behind that 15 year rule of thumb that climate researchers and, oddly, nuclear skeptics alike toss around for nuclear groundbreaking to generation? It was over 17 years from the start of the Vogtle 3/4 project to generation. No project today is where you’re counting the start of Vogtle. There have been long delays and cost overruns at every nuclear project in the last twenty years. Regardless of manufacturer, builder, country, government type, or utility type.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 18:04
|
|
|
*notices your deflection from groundbreaking to wherever Southern Fossil decided to start tossing the ball in the air* You also didn't answer what Votgle 3 and 4 are in the middle of doing right now
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 18:07
|
|
|
I'm not mad at anyone. I think you're a good poster, actually. I'm just getting a bit frustrated each time the same horses come back to life for beating.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 18:10
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:*notices your deflection from groundbreaking to wherever Southern Fossil decided to start tossing the ball in the air* You mean where I literally said generation? And 4 still isn’t done? Again, please tell me how you would build nuclear given the widespread, entrenched opposition you have identified.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 18:12
|
|
|
in a well actually posted:You mean where I literally said generation? And 4 still isn’t done? In fairness, you have me in a corner here that is typified more by desperation rather than practicable solutions. it's sort of like the same corner that climate scientists are encountering where they're discovering that they really need to start communicating about effective forms of political activism and direct action rather than science itself. I know only that, without the smart grid uplifts that I was talking about a few pages ago, region locking renewables largely prevents them from serving as base load or peaking sources, necessitating storage/peak-shifting infrastructure buildout whose expense at the scale of replacing fossil base load and peaking eclipses anything that we may actually be able to spend on this fight. To answer your question directly, I would build 500 more reactors like those at Votgle, cost overruns included, comfortable in the notion that I will be remembered as a hero for debt spending to create enough baseload to actually bring the sequestration technologies of 2040/2050 recommended under the IPCC'S AR6 online on time. I would continue to install every windmill and every solar panel that we possibly can as well. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 18:24 on Jul 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 18:19
|
|
|
Bear in mind what I have stumped here many times before: I am solely consumed by making the deadline for the excess terawatts of installed capacity necessary to meet our drop dead dates for carbon sequestration in the middle of this century, under the auspices of the remaining remotely-non-catastrophic RPCs in the IPCC's reports. If we do not restrict ourselves to conversations where that is the fundamental bar for entry for any hypotheticals, this conversation will remain a purely academic exercise in shuffling imaginary numbers between balance sheets and whinging about costs and timelines, while the world continues to slide to destruction. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 18:27 on Jul 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 18:23
|
|
|
The Ozymandias poem, but the inscription reads something about the falling price of renewables. Nothing baseload remains. Round the decay Of that colossal Wreck, forgotten and flooded The waves lap shores risen far inland. Potato Salad fucked around with this message at 18:37 on Jul 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 18:28
|
|
|
For what it's worth, I am praying desperately that anything discussed in the last few pages about battery revolutions pans out and does so big time, because we seem doggedly determined to pursue renewables+batteries to offset fossil peaking and baseload reduction that's totally going to happen without proportional investment in other green baseload and peaking technologies other than the grinning reaper that is the poison pill of CCS.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 18:43
|
|
|
Just to be clear I'm not suggesting we copy and paste Navy reactors; but that the Navy is generally very successful at producing nukes that in the event that the government was to put in a trillion dollars into the mass production of nuclear power plants, that the problems of how to effectively administer such a program should heavily involve the Navy because they're good at their jobs; and if any manpower crunch is encountered navy personnel can be transferred to assist the Civilian sector until the crunch is resolved.Family Values posted:Apparently nuclear skepticism is just like racism. Cool. Really cool. Pointing out that systemic issues exist in the pan-power generation industry is not making a comparison to other kinds of power structures. Raenir Salazar fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Jul 17, 2023 |
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 19:53
|
|
|
The Navy has enough problems retaining nuke qualified personnel as it is, I would not count on any "transfers" from the Navy beyond people getting the gently caress out after 6 years.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 19:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 23:21 |
|
|
Wibla posted:The Navy has enough problems retaining nuke qualified personnel as it is, I would not count on any "transfers" from the Navy beyond people getting the gently caress out after 6 years. I think the massive funding would probably find its way to the Navy to help with said retainment issues, but 6 years seems like a pretty sufficient amount of time to help overcome a temporary short term manpower crunch.
|
|
#
?
Jul 17, 2023 20:00
|
|