SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the safe-like-ms-windows-and-real-estate-doing-fission-together dept.
Wyoming has selected billionaire Bill Gates's company TerraPower LLC and Warren Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway's owned power company PacifiCorp to build the nation's first Natrium reactor. As reported by Reuters:
TerraPower, founded by Gates about 15 years ago, and power company PacifiCorp, owned by Warren Buffet's Berkshire Hathaway (BRKa.N), said the exact site of the Natrium reactor demonstration plant is expected to be announced by the end of the year. Small advanced reactors, which run on different fuels than traditional reactors, are regarded by some as a critical carbon-free technology than can supplement intermittent power sources like wind and solar as states strive to cut emissions that cause climate change.
"This is our fastest and clearest course to becoming carbon negative," Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon said. "Nuclear power is clearly a part of my all-of-the-above strategy for energy" in Wyoming, the country's top coal-producing state.
The project features a 345 megawatt sodium-cooled fast reactor with molten salt-based energy storage that could boost the system's power output to 500 MW during peak power demand. TerraPower said last year that the plants would cost about $1 billion.
[...] Chris Levesque, TerraPower's president and CEO, said the demonstration plant would take about seven years to build.
"We need this kind of clean energy on the grid in the 2030s," he told reporters.
Also seen over at ZeroHedge.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Rich on Thursday June 03 2021, @11:30PM (5 children)
$1bn maybe gets you VVER, and only if the Russians have one left over on the production line because some third world country dropped out, and they want to get into a new market. The latest Wiki number of the cost of Olkiluoto 3 is around $12bn for "safe" Western European technology. The British economy will get a decent blow from Hinkley Point C, which (for two reactors) stands at around $22bn now.
The last German attempt to build a sodium cooled reactor was cancelled, after about $8bn in today's money were sunk. Now these jokers come along and want to build one, with technology never tried at scale, for one lousy billion? If your "scam" alarm doesn't go off, I don't know. The offer is probably "cost-plus", and can't be held up once started; think of the jobs...
What's extra weird is that Warren Buffett is behind it, that guy stated he doesn't invest in technology, because he doesn't understand it. (And if he would, it would already have to be long-term profitable).
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Friday June 04 2021, @03:14AM
Now I'm wondering if Buffet sees it as a way to suck free money out of Bill Gates.
And I'm wondering where they plan to locate this miracle wonder of budget efficiency. Logically, the closer to Denver the better. (Also further from unstable geological features and fragile landscapes. But I've never seen any of these "clean energy" types give two shits about destroying an ecology that isn't "scenic" by their lights.)
And "demonstration project" -- does that mean if it fails, taxpayers get stuck with yet another Superfund cleanup?
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Saturday June 05 2021, @09:43AM (1 child)
Yes, we didn't just read the official report - we were part of the pipeline in its production.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Rich on Sunday June 06 2021, @11:14AM
That's why I put the "safe" in quotes. "They" keep telling us that this EPR tech is the most safe on the planet, but after seeing the arte documentary, I had some suspicions. Actually I'm more worried about the permanent waste storage facility nearby, where apparently water was already leaking in before it was commissioned, while it should be safe for a few thousand years.
For the two other replies, Dounreay was (and still is) a big mess and its demonstration result mostly was that the UK is unable to sustainably operate breeders. (Kalkar was laid out to only 300MWe by the way, too). Monju can neither be called a success story. Only the Russians run them more or less sustainably. Probably not at cost, I assume they keep the tech mostly to hedge against fuel shortage and for weapons production once all the RBMK are down.
An ordinary NPP is mostly a big water kettle with some magic rods put in that heat it up, and that is not really competitive even without factoring in permanent waste storage. Managing a big molten metal kettle with a metal that turns radioactive, burns like hell, blows up when it touches water (but has to exchange its heat to water), and may never ever cool down is somewhat more difficult, which will reflect in the price. On the SpaceX comparison, they have Elon, who with his multi-Bond-supervillain powers, built up the premier payment service just to cash out starting capital for his real plans. All the other private space contenders are hardly past Germany '44. Unless the people involved have already shown their ability to do the impossible and bring their own money, the bet is firmly on "no go".
(Score: 2) by turgid on Saturday June 05 2021, @09:55AM
We built and operated two sodium reactors [wikipedia.org] in the UK, the last being shut down in 1994. The second one achieved its design output of 250MW electrical. That's quite small for a nuclear power station (they're usually about four times that) but this was only a prototype, so it did quite well.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 05 2021, @11:38AM
I know, like when SpaceX comes along and starts charging cheaper seats than costs of a rocket, like if they planned on reusing it, those fucking scammers. We all know that space is unreachable without trillion budgets and it always loses money.
When someone never did something before, it's because it's impossible!! DUH!!!