Comment on Texas Needs Equivalent of 30 Reactors to Meet Data Center Power Demand

• humanspiral@lemmy.ca ⁨23⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  It’s lower initial cost, sure, but what about longer term? Surely battery costs add up long term as they need to be expanded and replaced, making nuclear more attractive after 10-20 years.

  No. Nuclear also has fairly high operations/staff costs, and fuel is highly variable and more expensive the more other nuclear plants there are. You mentioned the possibility of charging batteries (Hydrogen also possible) from nuclear, to handle peak day use/transmission, but batteries pair better with solar, and as a total package can serve same “baseload” purpose as nuclear but cheaper. There are no long term benefits to nuclear… economic ones ignoring weapons motivations.

  source

  • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨22⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Hydrogen also possible

    Yeah, I just think of hydrogen as a battery, and it can totally be a closed loop system.

    batteries… cheaper

    Is that actually true though? As in, if we add up initial installation cost + running cost + replacement cost long term (say, 50 years), are batteries generally cheaper?

    If so, then I’d agree. But my understanding is that nuclear gets really competitive the longer it runs.

    source

    • humanspiral@lemmy.ca ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      if we add up initial installation cost + running cost + replacement cost long term (say, 50 years), are batteries generally cheaper?

      LFP batteries are the cheapest and also last the longest. Race car EVs want the more energy dense NMC chemistry that was the original lithium formula. With 4 hour storage/discharge instead of smaller 1 or 2 hours, LFP batteries can last 10000 cycles which is 30 years on a daily charge/discharge cycle. A couple of years ago, this battery chemistry was $300/kwh and still cheaper than nuclear. They are now below $100/kwh, with some Chinese EVs having a free car at $300/kwh price for just the battery pack component. EVs permit a private investment to provide grid service that helps pay for EV, but at no rate payer passed down capital cost.

      Batteries don’t really have operating costs. Nuclear has a lot of maintenance costs especially when its time to push plants past 60 years. Diablo Canyon is spending $5B for 5 year extension. That could buy 5 times the solar power (at least more total power output over 5 years) for 30+ years instead.

      source

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Diablo Canyon is spending $5B for 5 year extension. That could buy 5 times the solar power (at least more total power output over 5 years) for 30+ years instead.

        Is that 5x including battery storage? And is that 5x including degradation over 30 years?

        I’m down for whatever is the cheapest way to get us off of fossil fuels over the long term. My understanding is that generally means a mix of baseload supply (nuclear, geothermal, hydro), “bursty” reveals renewables (solar, wind), and storage.

        source

        • -> View More Comments