The Nuclear debate

Remove this Banner Ad

There was a discussion back a bit that talked about the French.
So they do in fact have a nuclear reactor.
The French were going to build a pilot of a smaller one, but costs were looking like blowing out so they cancelled it.
They aren't sci fi.
Lucas Heights is a small reactor and Submarines run small reactors. ( I watched widowmaker, scary stuff ).

Battery has a pretty big cost , so your stored sustainable electricity won't be cheap, but i agree that a nuclear plant is so expensive you don't want to run it "part time" because at that cost you want to be paying it off by selling electricity.

The best interim measure is probably gas, a good gas plant can be 1/3 or 1/4 the CO2/KWh than a brown coal power plant.

But those with the eyes on profit prefer to export our gas and run our coal Stations.
Batteries have already been factored in when referring to the cost of renewables. It’s called Firm renewables.
Batteries are getting cheaper and cheaper… except when countries put tariffs on them.

There will ALWAYS be excess solar.. I think the plan is 200% above what’s needed.
Solar still works when it’s cloudy..
You are best to size a system for winter.
There will be plenty of days when batteries and lakes are full and solar is still producing.
Thats why there is no room for nuclear in the mix. It’s dumb.
 
Batteries have already been factored in when referring to the cost of renewables. It’s called Firm renewables.
Batteries are getting cheaper and cheaper… except when countries put tariffs on them.

There will ALWAYS be excess solar.. I think the plan is 200% above what’s needed.
Solar still works when it’s cloudy..
You are best to size a system for winter.
There will be plenty of days when batteries and lakes are full and solar is still producing.
Thats why there is no room for nuclear in the mix. It’s dumb.

They aren't really. Unless you are comparing to a decade ago.
 
They aren't really. Unless you are comparing to a decade ago.

An article from November 2023? Seriously? It’s close $100/kwh now. Down 30% since your article.

 

Log in to remove this ad.

The prices of lithium Batteries will continue to drop and now sodium batteries are starting to be mass produced which will be 30% cheaper again.


 
There was a discussion back a bit that talked about the French.
So they do in fact have a nuclear reactor.
The French were going to build a pilot of a smaller one, but costs were looking like blowing out so they cancelled it.
They aren't sci fi.
Lucas Heights is a small reactor and Submarines run small reactors. ( I watched widowmaker, scary stuff ).

Battery has a pretty big cost , so your stored sustainable electricity won't be cheap, but i agree that a nuclear plant is so expensive you don't want to run it "part time" because at that cost you want to be paying it off by selling electricity.

The best interim measure is probably gas, a good gas plant can be 1/3 or 1/4 the CO2/KWh than a brown coal power plant.

But those with the eyes on profit prefer to export our gas and run our coal Stations.
SMR's are 200Mw or smaller. Australia has (over) 20Gw of coal - that is a lot of SMR's - 100 to be exact :oops:
 
Imagine thinking Nuclear would be a good fit in the Australia energy market…..

This is the wholesale sell price that’s in NSW today…



IMG_3293.jpeg
 
I read they are planning a connection from NT to Singapore to supply power. Surely that means east west links round the globe to extend daylight hours connected to large consumer locations
I thought this was abandoned, maybe not

4,300km of high voltage undersea cable, I'll believe it when they start laying it. Longest one is in china; above ground, 3,300km, took three years to build, 10 billion plus

This is the longest submarine power connector, about 1/6th of the length of the proposed Singapore-NT
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Sea_Link
Proposed in 2003, construction from 2015-2020, 4 billion ish

I wouldn't hold your breath on this
 
Last edited:
I read they are planning a connection from NT to Singapore to supply power. Surely that means east west links round the globe to extend daylight hours connected to large consumer locations

The proposed link to Singapore actually runs the wrong way.
( East - West) It makes more sense to go West-East. ( So that afternoon sun can supply the early evening peak period).
Someone in Asia has also proposed a network of Asian countries with long links , but it probably won't happen.

Sun-Cable had a bust up between Forrest and Cannon-Brooks, and it went into admin, with Cannon-Brooks now controlling it. Supposedly will power Darwin with Solar by 2030 and Singapore "some time" later.
Its pretty ambitions , needing a 4500KM DC connection to Singapore.

Here is a similar ( but probably more lucrative ) plan to get power 4000km from Morocco to the UK.
Its driven by the British, not the Moroccans. ( Singapore have been non-committal regarding the Australian link ).
It runs from West to East, though not a lot.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I read they are planning a connection from NT to Singapore to supply power. Surely that means east west links round the globe to extend daylight hours connected to large consumer locations

Seems like a monster project
 
I thought this was abandoned, maybe not

4,300km of high voltage undersea cable, I'll believe it when they start laying it. Longest one is in china; above ground, 3,300km, took three years to build, 10 billion plus

This is the longest submarine power connector, about 1/6th of the length of the proposed Singapore-NT
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Sea_Link
Proposed in 2003, construction from 2015-2020, 4 billion ish

I wouldn't hold your breath on this
The fish farmers would be up in arms about a cable in their back yard (pond) 😡😡
 
Does any want my free electricity?
Negative prices in almost every state…
Imagine thinking adding Nuclear is a good idea.



IMG_3385.jpeg
 

Remove this Banner Ad

The Nuclear debate

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top