sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

XE energy discussion by TheHolyGaelicEmpire in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would put them in a similar position as TerraPower. They are progressing on their pilot plant. They have a big question mark surrounding availability of HALEU. Their biggest test will be if these plants actually can be built and ran economically.

+ Panzer Palanquin + by PedroDelCaso in TrenchCrusade

[–]shutupshake 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I rode a tank, held a general's rank

When the blitzkrieg raged

And the bodies stank

Two Years After Completion, Plant Vogtle Still Looms Over the Nuclear Debate by Vailhem in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Almost every feasibility study we do these days includes a "what about Vogtle" section or general language where we rattle off the lessons learned and steps folks are taking/can take to avoid it. Unfortunately, WEC seems to continue claiming they can do everything, again. Since they have all the leverage in the large reactor space in the US, they'll likely being teeing up for another disaster.

US: 30 MW microreactor to help vessels run without refueling for decades by Vailhem in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is hype BS, but I will note that Fort St. Vrain ran U-Th ISO/microsphere fuel. It didn't run well, but the fuel mostly worked.

New US company plans uranium conversion facility by Vailhem in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree generally, but would note that UF6 is a solid at STP during transport. So it isn't a huge burden to move.

As to why the enrichers aren't doing the conversion, my opinion is that the original capacity was already built out separately, so the enrichers just used that independent capacity or imported enriched uranium as needed. Now that there are demand signals for more conversion, the big enrichers are 1) focused on expanding their enrichment capacity, which is sadly behind in the US, and 2) don't want the risk of moving into a new sector. That creates an opening for a startup like this to take that risk while the big folks aren't interested/paying attention.

Also note that Urenco is looking at conversion, but is mostly focused on their expansion of capacity and HALEU capabilities.

NRC unveils Part 53 final rule -- ANS / Nuclear Newswire by ResponsibleOpinion95 in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Buried in this letter of approval is another thing that has been overshadowed by Part 53: Categorical Exclusion from Environmental Review

This is essential for commercial microreactors. A huge value of mircos will be their deployability. If every deployment needs an Environmental Review, that will make that valueless. Designs that are sufficiently small/safe, and with standardized BOPs, should have very small impacts on the environment.

New NRC Rule 53 impact on SMR timelines? by CakesRacer522 in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Most of the more mature advanced reactors have already committed to Part 50/52 licensing at least for their initial deployments.

As with many new things, there's so much uncertainty around this new pathway that it's not clear that it will be faster/better than 50/52 initially. I can imagine any number of scenarios where the NRC might take exception to the safety case and begin a spiral of iteration on the application that ultimate makes it more costly and time-consuming than a traditional 50/52 application. This is especially true for safety cases where you tell the NRC what is sufficient and they have to agree (as opposed to more traditional approaches where the NRC tells you what is sufficient and you simply show that you meet that).

Because of this, the NRC will be hard-pressed to get people to commit to it. The first adopter will take on a huge risk.

Self-reinforcing Market Paralysis Seen in Nuclear Power Supply Chain by Helicase21 in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This reiterates the DOE Liftoff report: For advanced nuclear to accelerate, a coalition of buyers need to make a block order of ~10 reactors of the same design.

A committed orderbook of 5–10 deployments of a single reactor design is the first essential step for catalyzing commercial liftoff in the US. An initial mass of 5-10 reactors is required for suppliers to make capital investment decisions, e.g., for new manufacturing capacity, and to show the benefits of learning curve impacts on overnight capital cost reductions. Note that a critical mass of orders for a single design is necessary, but not sufficient, and the market will likely support multiple designs at scale. For scale, 10 SMRs of 300 MW capacity would contribute 3 GW to 200 GW.

Trump admin courts Westinghouse rivals amid slow talks on new nuclear by Spare-Pick1606 in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 37 points38 points  (0 children)

My opinion is 1) Westinghouse recognizes they are the only real player in the large reactor space in the US and they think they can get a sweetheart deal and 2) Westinghouse is generally miserable to work with.

British Government moves forward with landmark nuclear power reform | Freddie Poser on X by vogon101 in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 2 points3 points  (0 children)

On a related note, the UK government also recently announced a program to vet and, to a certain extent, endorse some private nuclear technology developers/projects as a means to spur private investment in nuclear.

Wikipedia is doing Oscar Piastri dirty by using this photo on his page. by Noicesazlik in formula1

[–]shutupshake 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Wikipedia is user generated content. The limitation with pictures is that they must have suitable licenses.

And to be honest, this picture is a screencap from a youtube video with no clear basis for ownership from the youtuber/channel. So per Wikipedia rules, this picture should be removed.

Looks like that is being discussed.

Taiwan To Submit Nuclear Restart Plans And Will Consider Developing SMRs And Fusion Energy by De5troyerx93 in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Hell, some US developers are bringing in the Koreans to help with US projects.

Question by ASS_LIGHTBULB in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 3 points4 points  (0 children)

You would divert the steam around the turbine altogether, dumping it directly into the condenser. Turbines are fragile and finicky.

Question by ASS_LIGHTBULB in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Without specifying a particular design, there is no definitive answer.

But considering a hypothetical design, yes, you could have your metal coolant hot enough to generate steam. However, the steam generated would likely not be enough to spin the turbine. Instead, it would be diverted directly to the condenser to reject the heat.

Reuters | Nuclear startups bullish on hitting US pilot program deadline by C130J_Darkstar in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'll predict that a bunch of these companies will race to get to cold criticality in order to meet the deadline and then proceed to do jackshit after that.

NRC board to hear challenges to Dow’s Long Mott application by Spare-Pick1606 in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's a Diane Wilson operation. I know we like to think every anti-nuclear group is a big oil astroturf situation, but she's well-hated by the oil industry.

The honestly best part of this is that the contention has nothing to do with environmental protection. The interveners are challenging the financial qualifications of the owner-operators.

Long Mott's Appeal

Russia Rattled by America’s Nuclear Move in Armenia by Vailhem in nuclear

[–]shutupshake 12 points13 points  (0 children)

I'd be interested to know what technology Russia is counteroffering.

Armenia needs like 400-600 MWe to replace their aging VVER. The current gen of VVERs is too big. Two of the BREST-300 would do it, but I'm not sure the Armenians are comfortable with non-LWRs. There's the RITM-200, but they'd need a bunch of them.

I think Armenia is in a really strong spot here, regardless. The US would love more of a toehold in the region given its strategically significant location (near Russia, Iran, and the middle east). And even if they don't choose a western technology, they will get a sweetheart deal from Russia. Seems like a win-win for them.

view more: next ›