Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Small Modular Reactors

Discussion in 'Europe & Russia' started by BMD, Sep 16, 2017.

  1. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,206
    Likes Received:
    6,307
    The problem with solar is it is useless for over 12 hours a day. It requires large batteries. And getting rid of used batteries isn't easy. So solar's future is dependent on the advances made in battery technologies. The problem with nuclear is the high cost of initial investment.

    So we need to use both to complement each other.

    Everything else is dependent way too much on geography.
     
  2. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,789
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Li-ion batteries can be recycled, there's also flow batteries, which can be cycled as many times as you like, although Round Trip Efficiency is currently lower than for Li-ion (75% vs 90%).

    You can also use concentrated solar power and store the heat energy in molten salts.
     
  3. The enlightened

    The enlightened Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    512
    Likes Received:
    295
    One would think that but no

    [​IMG]

    http://www.theenergycollective.com/...ck-germany-does-not-get-half-its-energy-solar

    Nuclear may be costlier upfront but its very cheap to run and life-cycle costs are significantly cheaper than Renewables without backup. With backup.........may as well build the Mars Colony.

    [​IMG]


    http://www.spiegel.de/international...-transition-to-renewable-energy-a-920288.html

    [​IMG]

    The only reason solar is even talked about is because it is backed by massive government subsidies at every level along with tax-free operations. In fact in India, solar plants are allowed to claim 90% depreciation from the second year, while remaining tax free for 10 years. Basically being paid money to run and build them. Drop the direct subsidies (direct help, tax rebate, higher tariff for selling back to the utility), the indirect subsidies (net metering, priority access) and you will discover the true cost of PV.

    Discoms have to necessarily buy whatever output they generate at whatever time, which means you to shut other sources out for that period, a policy which is driving them to the point of bankruptcy in other countries where there is significant renewable penetration. India with NSM will soon see that.

    The biggest problem and reason why we shouldn't build renewables is that they are taking away the focus and resources from technology that can actually replace fossil fuels i.e nuclear. Nuclear industry has been given scraps in the name of orders, around the world, while solar and wind get billions in subsidies and tax breaks. When given the oppurtunity nuclear can easily fulfill all our energy needs as France shows where it meets 75% of energy since the 70's.
     
    Picdelamirand-oil likes this.
  4. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,789
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    Batteries are getting cheaper and uranium still has to be mined and processed, then reprocessed, waste processed, transported etc. Lot of hidden emissions there.
     
  5. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,206
    Likes Received:
    6,307
    You don't have to sell me on nukes. Nukes are good.

    But solar is being subsidized with the hope that one day it will sustain itself on its own. So it's a long run game plan. Particularly with advances in battery technology.
     
  6. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,206
    Likes Received:
    6,307
    In India's case, in the long run, the main source of nuclear energy will come from thorium.

    The hidden emissions are extremely small. It's nowhere near coal, gas etc. Solar will probably have more hidden emissions than nuclear.

    In the future, nuclear reactors will have become very small and extremely efficient compared to today's reactors. We may start building them inside cities one day. I don't think there is any other renewable source as efficient as nukes.
     
  7. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,789
    Likes Received:
    3,008
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    I would have thought fusion is the long term. At time now, thorium reactors don't look any closer to realisation than fusion and they still produce waste.

    Solar has nearly no day-to-day emissions, whereas nuclear requires pumps and also outputs H2O vapour, which is a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.

    It's no about efficiency, it's about how green they are. Overall, nuclear is less green than biomass.
     
  8. The enlightened

    The enlightened Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    512
    Likes Received:
    295
    That's exactly what I am trying to explain. Solar (with/without storage) never was and never will be any good. Its on permanent life support. Storage is way out of the question.
    https://bravenewclimate.com/2014/08/22/catch-22-of-energy-storage/

    Solar favoritism is killing nuclear in the West. And even if that doesn't directly affect us, it should be opposed because we too are embarking upon the fraudulent solar buildup and as Kundakullam and Jaitapur showed, we too are vulnerable to anti-nuke cultists (greenpiss, fiends of the earth etc.).
     
  9. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,206
    Likes Received:
    6,307
    No, I don't share your pessimism here. If you are talking about today, you are right. But in the near future, solar power will be cheaper than most other technologies. The subsidies will run until technology has caught up. But this could happen well after 2025. This is what they are pinning their hopes on.

    Piss and fiends cannot affect us anymore, particularly after Kundakulam protests. Future protesters will get slapped with sedition charges. Let them fight it out in the courts for the rest of their life. We will go full nuclear with the 3 stage program.

    Nuclear power is evergreen. Anybody saying otherwise doesn't know what he's talking about.
     
  10. Flyboy!

    Flyboy! Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    793
    Likes Received:
    522
    Country Flag:
    India
    I have done projects in rural maharashtra. They use solar dryers to dry produce for pickles/jams (Small to medium scale establishments). Some installations have been running for years without any issues almost eliminating the need for electric heating. ROI in some cases have been achieved in a single year. Many of these farmers own a few acres of land and their solar installations are not even documented. Some of them who are well-off invest in thermal systems backed up with PV-battery systems.
     
    proud_indian likes this.
  11. Ghanta

    Ghanta 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2016
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    149
    Country Flag:
    India
    Wind power tariff falls to new low of Rs 2.64 per unit; Renew, Inox, Adani among winning firms, Energy News, ET EnergyWorld
    www.ETEnergyworld.com
    3-4 minutes
    [​IMG]
    New Delhi:

    Wind energy
    tariffs quoted by bidders in India fell to a new low of Rs 2.64 per unit in the latest and second round of auction for 1,000 Megawatt capacity projects conducted by the government. Five firms were selected as winners including Renew Power, Inox Wind, Green Infra, Adani Green and Orange Sironj.

    “The wind tariff in India touched lowest level of Rs 2.64 per kWh in the second wind auction conducted by Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI) on behalf of the Ministry of New & Renewable Energy (MNRE) on 4 October 2017,” an official statement said. It added that with improving technology and reducing tariffs the ministry is not only confident of achieving the target of 175 GW by 2022 but exceeding it.

    The tariff discovered is much lower than the first wind power auction concluded at Rs 3.46 per kWh in February this year. Against the 1000 MW capacity SECI received 12 number of bids totalling to 2892 MW capacity of which 9 bids with a cumulative capacity of 2142 were shortlisted for e-reverse auction.

    The auction started at 3 pm on 4 October and continued for over 13 hours. The five winners selected for total 1,000 MW capacity wind power projects include ReNew Power for 250 MW projects quoting Rs 2.64 per kWh, Orange Sironj for 200 MW projects quoting Rs 2.64 per kWh, Inox Wind for 250 MW projects quoting Rs 2.65 per kWh, Green Infra for 250 MW projects quoting Rs 2.65 per kWh and Adani Green for 50 MW projects quoting Rs 2.65 per kWh.

    The ministry said these wind projects are to be commissioned within 18 months from the date of issue of Letter of Award by SECI to successful bidders. As per the provisions of the scheme, additional 100 MW capacity can be allotted to Central Public Sector Enterprises (CPSEs) willing to undertake development of inter-state transmission system (ISTS)-connected wind power projects at the lowest bid tariff of Rs 2.64 per kWh, for which they have to submit their proposal within 30 days from the declaration of results of e-reverse auction.

    The power from these projects will be supplied to obligated entities for fulfilment of their non-solar RPO obligation at pooled price of capacity selected.

    After the success of first wind auction resulted in discovery of record low wind tariff of Rs 3.46 per kWh in February 2017, MNRE had sanctioned second wind auction Scheme for setting up 1,000 MW wind power projects on 4 May 2017. SECI issued bids on 30 May and bids were closed on 14 July. The auction was earlier scheduled for 19 September but was deferred to 4 October as a CERC order on the issue of grid connectivity being faced by the successful bidders in the first wind auction was awaited.


    http://energy.economictimes.indiati...renew-inox-adani-among-winning-firms/60950586
     
  12. Ghanta

    Ghanta 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2016
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    149
    Country Flag:
    India
    It is nice to see the price of renewable's dropping. While nuclear is cheaper in the long run, the ROI will have difficulty in matching the renewable's due to high initial cost.
     
  13. randomradio

    randomradio Colonel Technical Analyst

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2013
    Messages:
    11,206
    Likes Received:
    6,307
    He's talking about large scale power generation. PV is the only real option for off the grid power supply, so there is no debate on that.

    I would love to have a 10KW rooftop system. So I can sell power to the power company instead of buying from them. But I will have to wait for the cost to decrease significantly and energy efficiency to increase by a decent margin. 1L per KW is not good enough for this right now.

    But large scale, it cannot survive today without subsidies. After 10 years or so, even with increased efficiency, it will have other problems, like the special daytime only feature.

    I believe nuclear power will get even more efficient. The real estate requirements will be extremely less to the point where you can fit in 20GW worth of reactors in the same space you need for 1GW of solar and LCC will be lower than solar. Even if PV achieves 100% efficiency, nuclear will still be better.
     
    Gessler likes this.
  14. The enlightened

    The enlightened Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    512
    Likes Received:
    295
    The Myth Of Wind And Solar 'Capacity'

    Last week, our Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration released an announcement and a graph that appeared to show wind as the leading new source of electricity.


    “Wind, natural gas, and solar made up almost all new electric generation capacity in 2015, accounting for 41%, 30%, and 26% of total additions, respectively, according to preliminary data. The data also show a record amount of distributed solar photovoltaic (PV) capacity was added on rooftops throughout the country in 2015.”

    [​IMG]
    Source: Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration

    Such statistics are cited in the U.S. and around the world, particularly by anti-fossil/anti-nuclear/anti-hydro green groups to argue that their policies won’t lead to energy poverty but rather a future full of cheap, plentiful, reliable solar and wind energy.



    But extravagant claims always use a misleading word that, if you spot, you know something is going on. That word is capacity--as in wind being the leading new source of “electrical generation capacity.”

    When you hear that wind has the most increased capacity, you are supposed to think that it has the most increased ability to provide electricity in the way we need it--affordably and reliably.

    But in energy, “capacity” is actually a technical term meaning the maximum momentary ability to produce electricity--not the consistent, long-term ability to produce electricity, which is what matters to human life.


    For the kinds of energy I call “reliables”--coal, oil, gas, hydro, nuclear, capacity is roughly equal to ability because their fuel sources are stored, always available, and therefore controllable. A nuclear power plant, for example, might have the ability to run at 90% of “capacity” month after month.

    But for the kinds of energy I call “unreliables”--solar and wind, whose fuel sources are intermittent, unpredictable, and most of the time unavailable, the term “capacity” is inherently misleading. A wind farm may operate near maximum capacity at brief, unpredictable moments and produce little to nothing the rest of the time. Those unreliable bursts might add up to 20-30% its supposed capacity. A set of solar panels may operate near capacity in the middle of the summer in the middle of the day when there are no clouds, but most of the time it has far less ability, when clouds (or non-summer seasons) come that ability can disappear, and at night the panels obviously have no electrical generation ability. For the purposes of providing individuals the cheap, plentiful, on-demand electricity they need, this is useless.

    The actual ability of wind and solar is essentially zero. Witness the celebrated electric grid of Germany.

    [​IMG]
    Sources: European Energy Exchange Transparency Platform; Federal Statistical Office of Germany

    Since solar and wind can always dip to zero, it has to purchase enough real capacity from reliables to give everyone the electricity they need. Thus, the solar and wind are unnecessary and indeed problematic since they add unpredictable, destabilizing electricity to the grid. Such wastefulness helps explain why Germans pay 3-4 times for electricity what we do in the U.S.

    Every time you hear some claim about wind and solar capacity remember that since their reliable capacity is zero, more “capacity” means more dead weight and higher prices--until and unless someone can create independent solar or wind power plants with affordable mass storage. The lack of one single such plant in the world illustrates how inefficient and convoluted such an arrangement would be.

    Energy professionals: When we discuss energy in public, let’s stop using the misleading word capacity, certainly when it comes to unreliables. Or we can start labeling unreliables with their real, meaningful, reliable capacity: zero.


    https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexep...myth-of-wind-and-solar-capacity/#66047bc12eb6
     
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2017
  15. The enlightened

    The enlightened Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    512
    Likes Received:
    295
    Whenever you listen to the shiny brochure specs of renewables, your first question should be what is backing this up.

    Sadly for the Earth the answer will inevitably be gas.
     

Share This Page