Energy: Wind Turbines v Small Modular Reactors
Other analysts have sought to clarify the argument
Robust, compact designs that operate 24-7 versus a monstrosity of construction that does nothing beneficial, aside from the debt (kickbacks?) and destruction at the behest of enormous, subsidized governmental investment incentives (that the population NEVER would allow, IF THEY ONLY KNEW).
Long-term risk of nuclear waste - can be solved. Dangers of meltdowns? One can hazard that most people can name only 3 such occurrences - 3 Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima. And again, what does one really know about these occurrences but The Narrative™? How much emphasis has been placed on educating the public to the cost benefit analysis and risk curve of all the energy choices.
Sources:
https://twitter.com/BernieSpofforth/status/1689173542351339520?s=20
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/us-company-signs-deals-europe-small-nuclear-reactors
From Oil Price.com:
…These are among the tiniest modular reactor designs we have seen to date, producing a mere 20 MWs of electricity. All of the 34 orders cited above collectively equal about one half of a gigawatt scale power plant regardless of type. By contrast the proposed NuScale reactors produce 77 MWs and the GE Hitachi BWRX 300 reactor under consideration by TVA for its Clinch River site is, as the name implies, 300 MWs. But size is not the only thing that differentiates Last Energy from its more conventional competitors. Last Energy is unusual in that its financial backing comes from libertarian, Silicon Valley funders who typically have been portrayed in the press as “disrupters”. Last’s CEO, Bret Kugelmass, started a Washington D.C. based think tank, the Energy Impact Center, “which sought to answer the ultimate question of our lifetime: how to reverse climate change. Nuclear is the answer.” They also sponsored a podcast, ”Titans of Nuclear”, featuring many experts and issues in the field…
Their offering is a compact 20 MW, single loop, pressurized water reactor that could sit on a site of ½ an acre. It would use conventional nuclear fuel, 4.95% enriched uranium and standard fuel rods in a 17 by 17 array. The build time is estimated to be just 30 months. But, given the full modularity of all plant structures the estimated actual on site construction time is estimated at just three months. The fuel cycle is a lengthy 72 months with a three month refueling interval. These plants would also be air cooled and the company touted its meager water usage of a mere 8 gallons per minute. This contrasts with the significant water demands of other even relatively small reactors. Like other smaller reactors the Last Energy design would feature a “subterranean nuclear island” and “low profile balance of plant”. Gone are the big reinforced domes or rectangles of previous designs that could withstand whatever hypothetical impact short of an asteroid. They describe their approach as “customer centric” and that “our innovation is simple; leverage only proven nuclear technology, create a replicable, manufacturable power plant, and size for private capital.” The first actual plant installations could occur as soon as 2025 or 2026. No other SMR builder is offering a new plant much before 2029.
Another climate activist that came around to nuclear power.
Another interesting analysis, across the “EV” market. I am not someone that ignores analysis just because it doesn’t fit my own personal thesis wholly. (Click image for article.)
for all who talk climate change, please take few minutes:
https://t.me/uncut_news/56856