Where to get energy for the future

IT Minion said:
Nuclear submarines have something like 50MW plants that are supervised 24x7 by a highly trained crew.

It's easy to say that they can just scale them up and add some better safety features, but that is exactly how the first generation of civilian PWR designs was made.
Click to expand...
I would hope a civil reactor would be supervised by a suitably trained crew
 
crystal ball said:
I would hope a civil reactor would be supervised by a suitably trained crew
Click to expand...
Not to the same level as far as I know.

And not when the plan is to install three or for times as many of them as the larger plants. Keeping the same size and skill level of staff per reactor would damage profitability.
 
IT Minion said:
Not to the same level as far as I know.

And not when the plan is to install three or for times as many of them as the larger plants. Keeping the same size and skill level of staff per reactor would damage profitability.
Click to expand...
Why do you think that?
 
IT Minion said:
A History of Atomic accidents by Jim Mahaffey. There was a premium for Navy trained operators because of their superior training. I doubt that's changed.
Click to expand...
I don't doubt it, there are plenty of ex navy working on current submarine builds and are highly regarded, don't forget the sub reactors are designed and built by civilians and in some cases operated by RR - Vulcan a case in point
 
Do you mean a 65 year old design?

Remind me, how many of the old, decommissioned nuclear subs have been successfully cleaned up and made safe?

It's none, isn't it?

Zero out of 21.

We just have the rusting hulks super contaminated lying around. And have done for many years.

The suggested reactor is not the same as the one in the subs, and RR have never built the proposal.

That's why I said any order would have been placed in blind faith and optimism
 
Last edited:
Given the history of nuclear power, assuming any prediction on timing or cost will even be close to right would be madness.

Any new Nuclear, SMR or conventional, will take at least a decade to come online. The only slower infrastructure to build would be the Severn Tidal barrage.
 
JohnD said:
Do you mean a 65 year old design?

Remind me, how many of the old, decommissioned nuclear subs have been successfully cleaned up and made safe?

It's none, isn't it?

Zero out of 21.

We just have the rusting hulks super contaminated lying around. And have done for many years.

The suggested reactor is not the same as the one in the subs, and RR have never built the proposal.

That's why I said any order would have been placed in blind faith and optimism
Click to expand...
Current reactors are a tad different to the original design, my point being that RR are vey experienced in reactor design, disposal is a whole new kettle of fish
 
it seems that substations classed on size are sub 1mw and then up to 12mw. There supply voltages range up to 400kv. Lowest I think are 11 and 6.6kv.

The standard sizes of distribution transformer for underground networks are 315/500/800/1000kVA. The smallest transformer approved for connection to UK Power Networks LPN network and for town centre loads on all networks is 500kVA.

I'd assume there are far more those than bigger ones.

Transformers are lossy. ;) Maybe loads of small nuke stations remotely monitored via Chinese 5g might be able to offer something.

All via wind has it's interesting aspects. 400kv is used for long distance transmission. The idea is simple. Power lost is I^2*R watts so the higher the voltage the lower the current for some power level and the lower the power loss in the transmission network. Makes me wonder how wind power will be distributed. I wonder if what we have is relatively short haul.

The same paper that mentions underground assumes a max electric boiler size of 9kw. May not relate but most houses have at least 16kw available assuming 60amp supply.

https://www.ukpowernetworks.co.uk/i...1_Design_Planning_Appendix_v1.0_kk_040711.pdf

A gov green energy person mention what we may be getting into. Electric and add the usual CH when it's too cold for that to cope. One thing for sure there is no intention to upgrade street and house circuits to higher power levels such as Sweden appear to have. The sensible way would be to 2 or 3 phase.

Then one network man reckons each electric car is equivalent to adding a house to the network. Given current use on fuel that wouldn't surprise me at all.
 
crystal ball said:
Current reactors are a tad different to the original design, my point being that RR are vey experienced in reactor design, disposal is a whole new kettle of fish
Click to expand...

But they've never built the one being talked about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top