According to studies, mini nuclear power plants are more expensive and dirtier than large nuclear power plants.
More nuclear waste
The mini-reactors are intended to contribute to the energy transition away from fossil fuels, but there are two main points of criticism. One concerns the production of nuclear waste. A study by researchers from Stanford University and the University of British Columbia, which was published this year in the scientific journal "PNAS", compared three different types of SMR reactors with outputs of less than 300 megawatts with nuclear power plants with outputs in the gigawatt range. This showed that the amount of nuclear waste caused by spent fuel alone would be five times higher in relation to the power generated.
Small reactors, such as those examined in the study, produce at least nine times more radioactively contaminated steel than large nuclear reactors, the research team reports in the study. This is reflected in the costs.
Economic viability questionable
The price is another point of criticism. Small reactors are advertised as cheap. However, a study published in the specialist journal "Energy Policy" in 2020 used the example of Canada to calculate that the costs of miniaturized nuclear power plants would be significantly higher than those of power plants with comparable output that use wind or solar energy. A study by the German Federal Office for the Safety of Nuclear Waste Management came to a similar conclusion. Overall, mini nuclear power plants are more expensive, and the report also doubts that they are easier to dismantle.
More nuclear waste
The mini-reactors are intended to contribute to the energy transition away from fossil fuels, but there are two main points of criticism. One concerns the production of nuclear waste. A study by researchers from Stanford University and the University of British Columbia, which was published this year in the scientific journal "PNAS", compared three different types of SMR reactors with outputs of less than 300 megawatts with nuclear power plants with outputs in the gigawatt range. This showed that the amount of nuclear waste caused by spent fuel alone would be five times higher in relation to the power generated.
Small reactors, such as those examined in the study, produce at least nine times more radioactively contaminated steel than large nuclear reactors, the research team reports in the study. This is reflected in the costs.
Economic viability questionable
The price is another point of criticism. Small reactors are advertised as cheap. However, a study published in the specialist journal "Energy Policy" in 2020 used the example of Canada to calculate that the costs of miniaturized nuclear power plants would be significantly higher than those of power plants with comparable output that use wind or solar energy. A study by the German Federal Office for the Safety of Nuclear Waste Management came to a similar conclusion. Overall, mini nuclear power plants are more expensive, and the report also doubts that they are easier to dismantle.
•
1010
•
@Tenbagger2024 Perhaps the salvation for clean energy ETFs.
•
11
•
@Tenbagger2024 These SMRs are available in different types and variants. As I work in this industry, I can confirm this. Take a look at the company ANF in Lingen. Also Urenco in Gronau and then there is the possibility of reusing fuel elements. These are often carefully reprocessed in nuclear power plants of the PWR (pressurized water), LWR (light water) and BWR (boiling water reactor) types. However, there are also power plant types such as molten salt reactors or DUalfluid reactors that have no fuel elements at all and can largely reuse the waste. And please take a close look at the study. It is more important to mention that the professional associations worldwide are working on finding an effective solution for further use, which, however, is being blocked by the German government through regulations and results-oriented studies by Greenpeace and the Greens. It is also important to mention that Germany is theoretically developing the technology further and that it is being used in other countries.
And anyone who compares nuclear energy with wind and solar power is also comparing apples with oranges.
Wind power and solar cannot be regulated and nuclear power can. At the end of the day, an efficient and effective electricity yield requires a mix of wind, solar and nuclear energy or the circulation of nuclear energy/ fusion/ dual-fluid/
And anyone who compares nuclear energy with wind and solar power is also comparing apples with oranges.
Wind power and solar cannot be regulated and nuclear power can. At the end of the day, an efficient and effective electricity yield requires a mix of wind, solar and nuclear energy or the circulation of nuclear energy/ fusion/ dual-fluid/
•
1010
•@MrMister
That's the great thing about the getquin community.
There is always new and interesting information on every topic and company.
Thanks for that and it's great how we are constantly exchanging ideas and learning here
😘😘
That's the great thing about the getquin community.
There is always new and interesting information on every topic and company.
Thanks for that and it's great how we are constantly exchanging ideas and learning here
😘😘
•
77
•
@MrMister How much of the waste can be recycled in advanced reactors? So of the fuel rods, the contaminated steel will have to be disposed of, I suppose. Suppose I have 100 old fuel rods. How many will remain after I have reused them in a modern reactor? And will the harmfulness be reduced even further?
••
@Investor_in_Jogginghose Let's take the example of a dual fluid reactor:
Only the stable nuclides remain. The unstable nuclides such as FE-55 or CO-60 are used completely. Certain special nuclides will certainly remain, but these will not be significant.
Spent fuel rods are regularly reprocessed. If they are defective, they currently end up in the waste and are no longer used.
Only the stable nuclides remain. The unstable nuclides such as FE-55 or CO-60 are used completely. Certain special nuclides will certainly remain, but these will not be significant.
Spent fuel rods are regularly reprocessed. If they are defective, they currently end up in the waste and are no longer used.
••
@MrMister Are these dual fluid reactors already in use? And can they be operated profitably?
•
11
•@Investor_in_Jogginghose No, they are not. The first two research reactors are being built. And we can expect the first real reactors of this type in 2035. As we do not yet have a final repository and this will not happen until 2047, we will then be able to reuse most of the waste. The contents of the KC containers in the dismantling process by encasing them in concrete will not. Unless we find a solution by then.
••
@Investor_in_Jogginghose The profitability of these reactor types is also very good, as they produce hydrogen as a waste product in addition to the regular energy.
••
@MrMister 2035 is a long time. Uncertainty increases with such long time frames. Where does the usa store its waste or China? I once read that the annual waste worldwide would be as much as 2x A380 airplanes.
•
11
•@Investor_in_Jogginghose Let's say the total mass that an A380 can carry is 320 tons. Let's round that up twice: 1000 tons.
The total mass of all 410 active nuclear power plants is around 200,000,000 tons. Plus the 128 nuclear power plants worldwide that are being dismantled. A fuel element weighs around 1 ton, of which the reactors have around 200.
What are we talking about here?
The waste produced by wind power is much higher. And, of course, the waste from a nuclear power plant is not negligible. But that's why I and many of my colleagues are on site to keep radiation and environmental contamination as low as possible. The dose I receive each year as a radiation protection officer is much lower than that of a flight from Dortmund to Munich.
The total mass of all 410 active nuclear power plants is around 200,000,000 tons. Plus the 128 nuclear power plants worldwide that are being dismantled. A fuel element weighs around 1 ton, of which the reactors have around 200.
What are we talking about here?
The waste produced by wind power is much higher. And, of course, the waste from a nuclear power plant is not negligible. But that's why I and many of my colleagues are on site to keep radiation and environmental contamination as low as possible. The dose I receive each year as a radiation protection officer is much lower than that of a flight from Dortmund to Munich.
••