Conventional Nuclear (AKA Nuclear Fission) a thread for discussion of the pros / cons.

Quote from JedRothwell

First, demand is highest during the day, so the electricity is needed elsewhere. Batteries are seldom recharged during peak hours. Perhaps cars could be charged in the morning with remote control chargers. Peak hours in Georgia are 2 to 6 pm.

That's why all cars have hard wired accumulators.... As said "exchange accumulators" should be forced and with Sodium costs are much lower. The technology is ready:: https://news.yahoo.com/sodium-…g-traction-150000318.html

Or :: https://www.energytrend.com/research/20230926-37730.html

USA will loose again if just the usual brainless companies define their market... Same for Germany...

Hydrogen Electrolysis Can Give Nuclear Power a Boost - IEEE Spectrum

Hydrogen Electrolysis Can Give Nuclear Power a Boost

Machine learning shows ways to make nuclear more profitable and reliable

TAMMY XU
19 OCT 2023
3 MIN READ

ISTOCK

NUCLEAR POWERHYDROGEN FUEL CELLHYDROGEN PRODUCTIONJOURNAL WATCHCLIMATE CHANGE

This article is part of our exclusive IEEE Journal Watch series in partnership with IEEE Xplore.

Nuclear power plants produced 18 percent of the electricity generated in the United States in 2022—but even after decades, the technology still has drawbacks in terms of efficiency. Nuclear power plants are expensive to build. Even more importantly, they have trouble quickly ramping up and down electricity production in response to fluctuations in the grid’s energy prices. Combined, these factors make it difficult for nuclear power to achieve profitability.

Raghav Khanna, an associate professor of power systems at the University of Toledo, in Ohio, was motivated to “salvage” nuclear power plants that are operational but not price competitive. “When the demand on the grid is low, selling nuclear-derived power to the grid is not very economical,” Khanna said. “So the energy providers for the nuclear power plant are not going to make a lot of bang for their buck.”

Khanna and other researchers from the University of Toledo created a machine-learning model to study the profitability of combined nuclear and hydrogen energy-generation systems, known as nuclear-renewable integrated energy systems. The study, which was done in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Energy’s Idaho National Laboratory, is part of a larger push from the U.S. government to expand the market for green hydrogen and increase interest in sources of renewable energy in the grid.

One approach to making nuclear power more profitable—and therefore more attractive—may be to integrate nuclear power plants with hydrogen-electrolyzer and fuel-cell systems to generate and store hydrogen gas. When demand on the grid is low and the sale price of electricity is lower than nuclear power operational costs, the electricity generated from nuclear power can instead be used to produce hydrogen. When demand on the grid rises again, any hydrogen that was stored can be fed through the fuel cell and turned back into electricity to sell on the grid. This idea of “various players trading and receiving and distributing energy, based on dynamic grid pricing” is known as transactive energy, Khanna said. Excess hydrogen gas could also be sold to chemical manufacturers as a feedstock for sustained reactions.

Transactive energy has the potential to increase revenues for energy providers and reduce costs for energy consumers by making complex decisions around energy generation, exchange, and sales. But the complexity can also be a downside: In order to increase profits, the system must optimize for the right moments to switch between different modes of operation, which can be challenging with dynamic pricing.

That’s where modeling with a type of machine learning called deep-reinforcement learning can help. In their study, the researchers built on their previous work modeling transactive energy systems, but added more granular details to the hydrogen electrolyzer and fuel cell models.

The electrolyzer and fuel-cell models were based on solid oxide hydrogen technology, a promising new design for hydrogen electrolysis and fuel cells that can make the processes more efficient and cost effective.

The study took into account the nuclear power plant, electrolyzer, and fuel-cell operations to model the system’s voltage and current. Deep reinforcement-learning models determined the right times to switch between operations by comparing the power generated against the demand on the grid.

Machine learning is needed to make those decisions because the grid price is a “moving target,” Khanna said, that is affected by variables like the weather, the availability of other renewable energy sources like solar and wind, location, and the time of day.

It boils down to “where is the demand, where is the supply,” Khanna said. “If it was a fixed number, then you wouldn’t need deep-reinforcement learning—you’d just use a simple controller.”

The model predicted that integrating hydrogen production with nuclear power results in a 27 percent increase in revenue over a period of 120 days. In their future work, the University of Toledo researchers want to add more detail into the model, such as the effect of including power converters and a more granular representation of nuclear power plants.

Despite existing clean-energy investments and initiatives, there is still a lack of energy projects built that take advantage of hydrogen technology to increase energy producers’ efficiency and profitability. The researchers hope this model can be a blueprint for building such a system in the physical world

Quote from Shane D.

The model predicted that integrating hydrogen production with nuclear power results in a 27 percent increase in revenue over a period of 120 days.

Same for wind/solar. But Methanol is much preferable. Simple transport as a liquide and fully compatible with fuel cells.

Quote from Lenora

The so-called "Nuclear Waste" of SNF/HLW/Pu is actually valuable fuel and one special FC-MSR(e) design can theoretically TRANSMUTE long-lived high-level radiation persistence to low-level ~ 100 years decay!

Correct - theoretically.

The only fuel you can reuse is Pu what is already done in MOX rods -e-g used in Fukushima now diluted in Pacific ocean...

The mass you can reuse is tiny and thus you always need mining and new fuel. The mining overhead currently is 15% of energy produced and is CO2 intensiv. Same for the construction of the nuke that also costs about 15% of all energy produced (live time 40 years).

So be aware that CF/LENR will solve these problems and really nobody will need new nukes as also the military has enough Pu to destroy the planet 10X

Quote from Lenora

Soon countries will be interested in how little land space fission reactors

I doubt if Japan is really interested in fission reactors.anymore

800 sq km of Fukushima are "exclusion" zones for a few centuries.

one disaster cost $500 billion US

https://psr.org/resources/cost…kushima-daiichi-disaster/
https://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu…es-abandoned-school-close

Quote from Lenora

Japan is very "Pro Nuclear Fission"!

You mix up the bribed Japanese politics mafia (includes tepco) with Japan and its people.

Quote from Lenora

Our loyalties must be aligned with energy technologies currently able to save millions of lives,

Greeting from Tschernobyl - still killing some 10'000 a year.

Quote from Lenora

Our loyalties must be aligned with energy technologies currently able to save millions of lives,

I guess you loyalty is paid by the nuclear folks...

Quote from Lenora

] Currently ....... Nuclear Fission is the known proven technology, and all countries participating in new builds contributes to solving global energy impoverishment.

In this way, the French nuclear lobby, in cooperation with the International Commission on Radiological Protection, the IAEA-UNSCEAR (United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation) and others, can assure us that we can overcome a serious nuclear accident, by simply adapting to radiation exposure. The phrase “let’s hope people have the strength to bounce back” is repeated. The word “resilience” has become a key word in this milieu.

A strategy of concealment

Powerful minority makes nuclear decisions

beyondnuclearinternational.org

Quote from Lenora

Japan is very "Pro Nuclear Fission"!

when support reaches 50%.. please tell us

Quote from Lenora

Japan has several new nuclear projects in development

when?? 2050? like ITER?

"Japan adopted a plan on Thursday to extend the lifespan of nuclear reactors, replace the old and even build new ones,

Japan adopts plan to maximize nuclear energy, in major shift

Japan has adopted a plan to extend the lifespan of nuclear reactors, replace the old and even build new ones.

apnews.com

Most people I know in Japan are concerned about radiation. Shortly after Fukushima I swapped my usual Scotch whiskey gifts when visiting Japan for pocket Geiger counters. They were very delighted.

Quote from Alan Smith

Shortly after Fukushima I swapped my usual Scotch whiskey gifts when visiting Japan for pocket Geiger counters. They were very delighted.

After Fukushima the first Japanese grass root movement stood up and founded safecast.

https://map.safecast.org/

They within weeks had a fine grid mesh of online (self made receipt online) Geiger counters that still covers whole Japan...

But they also used their Geiger's when doing travels to Germany/UK etc... and found many hidden dumps you better know...

A "nuclear energy coop" has started in the Netherlands. Although they admit that they won't be able to afford their own reactor.

Nuclear energy co-op launches in the Netherlands - Co-operative News

Over the next 12 months, the Atomic Cooperative will focus on growing a large community of supporters

www.thenews.coop

Revealed: Sellafield nuclear site has leak that could pose risk to public

Safety concerns at Europe’s most hazardous plant have caused diplomatic tensions with US, Norway and Ireland

www.theguardian.com

One caveat: When the Guardian did a technical "exposé" on some UK nuclear submarines, some years ago, they got almost every technical detail wrong.

It's true that the Sellafield, Calder Hall, and WNL sites (they are not all "Sellafield", despite being together) are a bit of a mess - like most old nuclear fuel reprocessing facilities around the world - but some of the "long distance threats" are a bit fanciful.

Sabine gives her opinion on building nuclear power plants:

Is nuclear power really that slow and expensive as they say? - YouTube

Considering that the UK hasn't been able to complete a new fission powerplant since 1995, and the only one they have started since then may never be finished (due to technical problems and spiraling costs), this sounds rather optimistic.

UK government sets out plans for ‘biggest nuclear power expansion in 70 years’

Ministers hope to build fleet of reactors to meet quarter of electricity demand by 2050 but critics highlight long delays and rising costs

www.theguardian.com