There are other design concepts kicking around out there. A small enough, modular enough, self-contained enough reactor running off material so low-grade it’s not a viable terrorist target, plus a healthy dose of government subsidization and willingness to keep giant private utilities from gaining a monopoly. The political stars would have to align but it’s not impossible.
I don’t see it happening in the US unless it somehow attracts the libertarian/rugged individual streak and ppl want to run their own local reactors so they can stay independent of The Man.
How long from “design concept” till enough are tested, certified and built to help combat climate change? We have about 20 years left to transform our energy sector if you’re optimistic. Building one with the old proven design takes about 15 years.
The technical design was done in 2020. It took two years for the design to be approved by the US department responsible for approving such things and it will take until 2029 to get an actual plant approved and built. That’s why I said probably not in the US and only with a lot of political will.
There’s no climate change solution that won’t take significant political will.
Oh. Well, those also have resource constraints (hazardous and rare materials used in solar panels, batteries for both if that is method of storage), storage constraints (saving energy for when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing), economic constraints (still more expensive than burning coal and oil) and political constraints (people don’t want solar panels or wind turbines in their backyard + political will to stand up against oil and to offer incentives that make solar/wind financially viable).
Nuclear plants as we have them today won’t help solve climate change. Nuclear plants don’t have to look that way though.
https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/nrc-certifies-first-us-small-modular-reactor-design
There are other design concepts kicking around out there. A small enough, modular enough, self-contained enough reactor running off material so low-grade it’s not a viable terrorist target, plus a healthy dose of government subsidization and willingness to keep giant private utilities from gaining a monopoly. The political stars would have to align but it’s not impossible.
I don’t see it happening in the US unless it somehow attracts the libertarian/rugged individual streak and ppl want to run their own local reactors so they can stay independent of The Man.
How long from “design concept” till enough are tested, certified and built to help combat climate change? We have about 20 years left to transform our energy sector if you’re optimistic. Building one with the old proven design takes about 15 years.
Source? I’d say the median is closer to 8, 15 years is more like the worst 5-15% percentile.
The technical design was done in 2020. It took two years for the design to be approved by the US department responsible for approving such things and it will take until 2029 to get an actual plant approved and built. That’s why I said probably not in the US and only with a lot of political will.
There’s no climate change solution that won’t take significant political will.
But there are solutions that simply require building more small units of something that’s been built in large numbers for the past decade.
Are you talking about nuclear or other as these “simply build smaller” solutions?
I’m talking about solar panels and wind turbines.
Oh. Well, those also have resource constraints (hazardous and rare materials used in solar panels, batteries for both if that is method of storage), storage constraints (saving energy for when the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing), economic constraints (still more expensive than burning coal and oil) and political constraints (people don’t want solar panels or wind turbines in their backyard + political will to stand up against oil and to offer incentives that make solar/wind financially viable).
Same themes as the challenges to nuclear.