Prediction: Coal has fallen. Nuclear is next then Oil.

[nwdiver]

I understood him to be talking about national source energy per capita per time. That is OK so far as it goes, although it does ignore the inefficiencies involved in burning fossils to make electricity or the inefficiencies of using electricity in resistance heating. These two inefficiencies together matter a LOT.

264kWh/day per person for the US is ~29k TWh... which is close to the TOTAL US primary energy consumption (~100 quads). But that's a really silly way of looking at it. For 2 reasons.

• Who expresses energy as power??? It would be ridiculous to say my PV system generates on average 2HP.... saying Americans use on average 11kW is no different.
• Primary energy is not a good metric for expressing energy use since it includes inefficiencies of thermal generation. If you want to transition to solar or wind and you use 1TWh of primary energy you don't need to generate 1TWh from solar or wind... only ~350MWh... because that's what you're ACTUALLY using.

That is insane. I've never considered that ~100 quads is ~264kWh/day per person... that's a ridiculous amount of energy. Good thing using solar and wind cut that number by ~70% before you even do anything else...

 

[mspohr]

Wow... this dudes supposed to be a physicist??? I think I figured out where the enthusiasm for nuclear is coming from. They have no clue what they're talking about...

... pretty sure he means 11kWh/day because 11kW on average would be 264kWh/day which is insane. And 11kWh/day is not 11 1kW toasters running 24/7. It's less than half a toaster. This guy was off by over a factor of 20. Sounds about right for someone pitching nuclear. This 1GW plant will cost $5B.... and take 4 years to build.... 15 years later oops ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

He just pointed out the the entire world will need more energy. (Along with many basic errors of fact and math.)
No reason that couldn't be done with renewables. In fact, it is being done with renewables and it will be completed a long time before any nuclear plant will be completed.

 

[SageBrush]

That is insane. I've never considered that ~100 quads is ~264kWh/day per person... that's a ridiculous amount of energy. Good thing using solar and wind cut that number by ~70% before you even do anything else...

I agree -- it is an insane number. A transition away from fossils to make electricity is an important first step but a large fraction of fossils are combusted for heat unrelated to electricity generation. That is a more difficult nut to crack although I'm hopeful that EV will replace ICE and electric heat pumps will replace oil and NG combustion for those purposes. After all that there still remains an outsized fossil use to address -- I'll guess at least 25% of the present amount.

 

[SageBrush]

I bought a very nice Whirlpool fridge a few years ago from a chain dept store. At the time it was the lowest energy use device in the class I wanted at ~ 400 kWh a year. Fast forward to today and a couple casual checks show no model below ~ 600 kWh a year. It is possible that the testing changed but it seems more likely that manufacturers are still prioritizing features and size over energy consumption. Until that changes our ability to reduce CO2 emissions is a game of two steps forward and one step back.

 

[mspohr]

I bought a very nice Whirlpool fridge a few years ago from a chain dept store. At the time it was the lowest energy use device in the class I wanted at ~ 400 kWh a year. Fast forward to today and a couple casual checks show no model below ~ 600 kWh a year. It is possible that the testing changed but it seems more likely that manufacturers are still prioritizing features and size over energy consumption. Until that changes our ability to reduce CO2 emissions is a game of two steps forward and one step back.

Just install more renewables.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

I bought a very nice Whirlpool fridge a few years ago from a chain dept store. At the time it was the lowest energy use device in the class I wanted at ~ 400 kWh a year. Fast forward to today and a couple casual checks show no model below ~ 600 kWh a year. It is possible that the testing changed but it seems more likely that consumers are still prioritizing features and size over energy consumption. Until that changes our ability to reduce CO2 emissions is a game of two steps forward and one step back.

Fixed that for you. Efficiency almost always requires government intervention.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

I agree -- it is an insane number. A transition away from fossils to make electricity is an important first step but a large fraction of fossils are combusted for heat unrelated to electricity generation. That is a more difficult nut to crack although I'm hopeful that EV will replace ICE and electric heat pumps will replace oil and NG combustion for those purposes. After all that there still remains an outsized fossil use to address -- I'll guess at least 25% of the present amount.

I think it's 2 simultaneous processes: electrification and improving electricity generation.
If renewables+storage continues it's downward cost path, it'll have a radical and accelerating impact on energy sources and use.

 

[mspohr]

I think it's 2 simultaneous processes: electrification and improving electricity generation.
If renewables+storage continues it's downward cost path, it'll have a radical and accelerating impact on energy sources and use.

I think we need to get used to the concept of and plan for abundant cheap electricity. Solar and wind with battery storage keep driving down the cost of electricity. Now it's well below 5 cents kWh and new installations are about half that.
Here's an example, Switch (a cloud computing provider which lives next to the Gigafactory 1) announced a project to offer its customers 5 cent kWh electricity. It calls its project "Gigawatt 1".
Switch announces big Gigawatt 1 joint solar project
The weekend read: Hand in hand

 

[SageBrush]

Here's an example, Switch (a cloud computing provider which lives next to the Gigafactory 1) announced a project to offer its customers 5 cent kWh electricity. It calls its project "Gigawatt 1".
Switch announces big Gigawatt 1 joint solar project
The weekend read: Hand in hand

I was skeptical that the 4.9 cents per kWh charge includes G&T fees but this article says it does, AND covers the cost of leaving NV energy as the monopoly provider . AWESOME

 

[mspohr]

Good description of the problem of dealing with nuclear waste at San Onofre nuclear plant.

 

[nwdiver]

Good description of the problem of dealing with nuclear waste at San Onofre nuclear plant.

Arguing a weak point only serves to weaken the argument. The dangers of dry cask storage are even more overblown than the cost effectiveness of nuclear generation. Not an easy feat. Before being 'entombed' the fuel rods are cooled for several years so the primary danger when there's a fuel element failure is gone. All that's left is long-lived isotopes. The casks are extremely well designed. The risk of a leak is infinitesimal and the consequences of a leak are marginal.

2 feet of reinforced concrete sealed with ~3" of high grade welded steel.... even then the fuel bundles are inherently stable. I'd let them bury one under my house so the decay heat can help warm it in the winter. 'Help' because it really wouldn't be much.

88,000 tons sounds scary. But only a small fraction is actually dangerous. If I dissolve 1g of poison in 100kg of water I don't really have 100kg of poison.

There are really only 3 arguments against nuclear generation. Cost. Cost and Cost.

 

[EVie'sDad]

Oil and gas are already beginning to see the effect of Electric vehicles.

Gas prices plummet amid 'bewildering' decline for oil as Thanksgiving travel approaches

Oil Demand for Cars Is Already Falling
Electric vehicles are displacing hundreds of thousands of barrels a day, exceeding expectations.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

 

[mspohr]

Arguing a weak point only serves to weaken the argument. The dangers of dry cask storage are even more overblown than the cost effectiveness of nuclear generation. Not an easy feat. Before being 'entombed' the fuel rods are cooled for several years so the primary danger when there's a fuel element failure is gone. All that's left is long-lived isotopes. The casks are extremely well designed. The risk of a leak is infinitesimal and the consequences of a leak are marginal.

2 feet of reinforced concrete sealed with ~3" of high grade welded steel.... even then the fuel bundles are inherently stable. I'd let them bury one under my house so the decay heat can help warm it in the winter. 'Help' because it really wouldn't be much.

88,000 tons sounds scary. But only a small fraction is actually dangerous. If I dissolve 1g of poison in 100kg of water I don't really have 100kg of poison.

There are really only 3 arguments against nuclear generation. Cost. Cost and Cost.

I agree there is a lot of hype about nuclear waste storage. The message I got from this was that the plant has been shut down for 5 years but still using vulnerable temporary storage at the edge of the ocean. None of this waste is in proper casks.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Oil and gas are already beginning to see the effect of Electric vehicles.

Gas prices plummet amid 'bewildering' decline for oil as Thanksgiving travel approaches

Oil Demand for Cars Is Already Falling
Electric vehicles are displacing hundreds of thousands of barrels a day, exceeding expectations.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

My god, that Bloomberg Opinion (note, not a proper article) piece is a load of cherry-picking bullside. Should you read it, make a note of the author's name so you can ignore them in the future.

EV is barely noticeable. It's just a combination of increasd production and slowed demand in developing countries.
EV will have an impact, but it's not big enough yet.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

I agree there is a lot of hype about nuclear waste storage. The message I got from this was that the plant has been shut down for 5 years but still using vulnerable temporary storage at the edge of the ocean. None of this waste is in proper casks.

If anything, that's a problem with funding for decommissioning. It's expensive, always costs far more than estimated, and it's unrecoverable cost, so they always try to avoid doing it.

 

[nwdiver]

$500M more 'invested' in nuclear with absolutely nothing to show for it...

Another Nuclear Megaproject Bites The Dust

 

[Brando]

Seems a tipping point (except for poor Japan.
- side note: US wants them in the atomic bomb making group and to buy many more US weapons.
- AND the UK continues to put taxpayer money into atomic reactors - hint: atomic bombs
(see @nwdiver posted article above)

Solar & Onshore Now Cheapest Source Of New Bulk Power | CleanTechnica

 

[mspohr]

Is Exxon Conning Its Investors? Opinion | Is Exxon Conning Its Investors?

 

[Brando]

France Announces Cuts To Nuclear & Coal, Boost For Wind & Solar | CleanTechnica

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

EIA Electric Power Monthly day. Data to September 2018.

Coal generation:

(GWh): 2018 v 2017
September: 96,743 v 98,203
YTD: 869,110 v 918,528
12mo: 1,156,417 v 1,223,409

Share: 2018 v 2017
September: 26.47% v 28.64%
YTD: 26.58% v 29.55%
12mo: 27.08% v 30.02%

Coal capacity factor up in August and September, presumably as a result of continuing capacity reductions.

A reduction of -242.7MW of capacity in September. Another 209.9MW capacity reduction expected next month.
(Less than 0.2% of total coal capacity.)