Impressed £67.5 billion... nope... 263 billion, and rising.

[Gwadien]

Alternatives are being researched for non rare earth based materials in most areas, the actual problem with them is the a West did what it always does which is let China dig them up and thus control the market even though there are plenty of them in other places such as America.

It's more we neglected Africa for the past 50+ years and instead propped up monarchies in the middle East that belong in the medieval period in pretty much every regard.

One can criticize China for many things but their foreign economic empire building is straight out of our handbook, they just turned out to be fair better at it.

 

[Tom]

Base the "green" revolution on rare earth materials (clue is in the name) get burned.

It's not really that complicated, very lucrative though.

Rare-earth elements aren't rare. They're just not concentrated like iron or other substances.

 

[Raven]

Rare-earth elements aren't rare. They're just not concentrated like iron or other substances.

Well, no, not exactly. They are only found in small places and there is only a very limited source. Replace (however many billions of cars) with electric, and you are essentially in dream land. I mean, it works nicely for middle-upper class folk who want to pretend they are zero emission, because it said so in the pamphlet, but in reality, you might as well drive a V8.

The break even point is around 150k miles, where an electric car is better for the environment. My ICE car has done 15k in 5 years. (you do the math* American)

 

[Embattle]

Future Energy Scenarios (FES) | ESO

Future Energy Scenarios (FES) represent a range of different, credible ways to decarbonise our energy system as we strive towards the 2050 target. We’re less than 30 years away from the Net Zero deadline, which isn’t long when you consider investment cycles for gas networks, electricity...

www.nationalgrideso.com

.

 

[Embattle]

UK government gives go-ahead to Sizewell C nuclear power plant

Decision goes against advice of Planning Inspectorate, which rejected project owing to impact

www.theguardian.com

 

[Scouse]

Strike price £92.50/MWh. Ouch.

 

[Embattle]

Strike price £92.50/MWh. Ouch.

Yep it is very expensive compared to recent CFDs on offshore wind (£37.35/MWh) but in my opinion we need to to produce a stable base load.

 

[Embattle]

Asia goes nuclear as climate, Ukraine banish memory of Fukushima

China, Japan, South Korea, India and Pakistan are betting on nuclear power amid climate crisis, energy security fears.

www.aljazeera.com

 

[Scouse]

That's their targets fucked then - they can't bring them online fast enough to make the needed difference.

 

[Raven]

Asia goes nuclear as climate, Ukraine banish memory of Fukushima

China, Japan, South Korea, India and Pakistan are betting on nuclear power amid climate crisis, energy security fears.

www.aljazeera.com

Makes sense, current renewables can only do so much. Go nuclear aim to get off nuclear, we need to stop burning shit now, not in 25 years. China have got the message loud and clear, the climate is fucked and will be even more fucked unless we act now. If China are behind it, everyone will be behind it. I wouldn't put it past them to start building them in Africa too, to go with all the pretty little highways they are laying down. It could go aways to making life better in these countries, so they don't all want to risk their lives emigrating.

Clean, reliable power could transform the 3rd world.

 

[Bodhi]

If you want to decarbonise quickly, then nuclear is the only game in town I'm afraid. Renewables are great in theory, however the ultra-low strike price that's always mentioned in the glossy brochure never materialises, as wind alone cannot power a modern economy due to how intermittent it is, and always needs reliable backup - usually gas

For starters you'd need enough storage to power the country for a couple of weeks to account for all the weather systems we get in Europe, and frankly right now that is a complete and utter fairytale. Even that huge battery Musk bought for South Australia would only cover our needs for 5 minutes or so.

It is a great test however. If someone is keen to decarbonise as much as possible, but also disregard nuclear as the best way to do this - you know they aren't really a serious commentator and can be easily ignored.

 

[Scouse]

we need to stop burning shit now, not in 25 years

Nuclear cannot deliver that. It takes 15 years to bring a plant online.

If they go nuclear, they can't hit their targets. Period.

Bring it on - I don't really care if they pepper the landscape in them. But they need to massively ramp up renewables quickly.

I repeat: Nuclear cannot replace any coal, oil or gas in time.

 

[Scouse]

If you want to decarbonise quickly, then nuclear is the only game in town I'm afraid.

You can indeed decarbonise through nuclear.

However, it's impossible to do this quickly. We don't have the engineering capacity, resource or ability to make anything other than a handful in near 20-year timescales and horribly expensively.

 

[Bodhi]

Nuclear cannot deliver that. It takes 15 years to bring a plant online.

If they go nuclear, they can't hit their targets. Period.

Bring it on - I don't really care if they pepper the landscape in them. But they need to massively ramp up renewables quickly.

I repeat: Nuclear cannot replace any coal, oil or gas in time.

Unless you solve the storage question - which is clearly an awkward one given how determined you are not to answer it - renewables cannot replace coal oil or gas at all.

This is unless you only want to run your fridge or heat your house when it's windy.

 

[Scouse]

Unless you solve the storage question

I've solved my storage question. In 24 months time I'll be completely energy independent.

You solve the "we can't build nuclear in time" question first and I'll put a bit more effort in if you like.

 

[Embattle]

15 MW Rare-Earth-Free Offshore Wind Turbine Seeks Path to Market

GreenSpur Wind, the UK-based company that has developed a new generator for the global offshore wind market, and Niron Magnetics, the US company pioneering the world’s first high-performance, rare earth-free permanent magnets, have announced a milestone in developing a new, lighter...

www.offshorewind.biz

 

[Raven]

Do the same with batteries, and I won't consider the whole enterprise a dead-end.

 

[Embattle]

@Raven We accept you've a bad case of the Bodhi when it comes to green beliefs.

The myth and reality of alternatives for rare minerals in EV batteries | GreenBiz

Greener, friendlier alternatives exist.

www.greenbiz.com

 

[Embattle]

Hinkley B: UK's most productive nuclear power plant closes

Hinkley Point B has shut down permanently, after 46 years generating electricity.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Embattle]

Germany’s nuclear opposition wavers as energy crunch fears rise

Green politicians are softening their stance but the party remains divided.

www.politico.eu

 

[Scouse]

EDF cuts output at nuclear power plants as French rivers get too warm

Company says it is reducing production for few hours where possible as ability to cool plants is restricted

www.theguardian.com

 

[Wij]

EDF cuts output at nuclear power plants as French rivers get too warm

Company says it is reducing production for few hours where possible as ability to cool plants is restricted

www.theguardian.com

Designed for a different age. Even data centres designed a few years ago have been failing.

 

[Embattle]

50MW solar farm going to start it's installation in North Devon this week.

 

[Scouse]

Designed for a different age. Even data centres designed a few years ago have been failing.

Ultimately, you need water to cool the things down. It's a function of how they work - more powerful = more heat.

 

[Wij]

Ultimately, you need water to cool the things down. It's a function of how they work - more powerful = more heat.

Sure but if the ambient temperature that the water is expected to cool down to when not near the reactor is much higher because the temperature outside is much higher then you might design it with a larger amount of water circulating so that it will be taking away the heat less often instead of coming round hotter each time.

 

[Scouse]

Sure but if the ambient temperature that the water is expected to cool down to when not near the reactor is much higher because the temperature outside is much higher then you might design it with a larger amount of water circulating so that it will be taking away the heat less often instead of coming round hotter each time.

They take cool water from upstream, use it, dump it downstream. One of the problems is river volume - they can't pump more water through faster (limited amounts they can abstract) - to keep the effluent temperatures down as they can only take so much and discharge so much.

Meh.

 

[Wij]

They take cool water from upstream, use it, dump it downstream. One of the problems is river volume - they can't pump more water through faster (limited amounts they can abstract) - to keep the effluent temperatures down as they can only take so much and discharge so much.

Meh.

Cooling systems will need redesigning across the board for all kinds of things.

 

[Scouse]

Cooling systems will need redesigning across the board for all kinds of things.

Yes. But you can't redesign your way out of a lack of water.

If we want new shit - seaside. (And in 20 years)

 

[Wij]

Yes. But you can't redesign your way out of a lack of water.

If we want new shit - seaside. (And in 20 years)

There's plenty of water. Just not in the same way there used to be. There's less river flow and the temperature is warmer. It just needs a design to accommodate the temperatures we will have over the next few decades. At the end of the day whatever temperature of water we have it will be a lot less than the reactor and therefore be capable of cooling it. It will need ferrying about in a different manner. A redesign.

As will data centres and even gamers' liquid-cooled PCs.

 

[Scouse]

There's plenty of water. Just not in the same way there used to be. There's less river flow and the temperature is warmer. It just needs a design to accommodate the temperatures we will have over the next few decades. At the end of the day whatever temperature of water we have it will be a lot less than the reactor and therefore be capable of cooling it. It will need ferrying about in a different manner. A redesign.

Hard disagree.

You've got X amount to extract, and you can only discharge it at Y temperature. The X to extract will be the maximum designed extraction limit for the river. Water has a set capacity to transfer heat - therefore given limited in, you've got limited out - and limited cooling capacity.

"Ferrying [water] about in a different manner" isn't going to make fuck all of a difference. They'll need to put the reactors where there's more water.