Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Comments

top

Finland's Nuclear Plant Start Delayed Again

MrL0G1C Re:Indeed... (116 comments)

Let me put it another way.

On one side you have the intermittant supplies:
Wind, solar, wave, tidal.

On the other side you have matching supplies which you ramp up as necessary:
Geothermal, Solar thermal, Hydro, Biogas.

And for short term peaking demand, you also use storage such as Pumped Hydro, battery, compressed air, flywheel, etc.

I think pumped hydro is a hugely underused resource, all you need is a (small) lake next to a hill, the rest is engineering, see:
Dinorwig Power Station - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whilst some of these technologies are not cheap, this would change if we invested a fraction of what we have put into nuclear and fossil fuels

Solar PV has gone from $76 per w to $0.74 per watt of capacity and that price will continue to fall.

Some countries are already proving that 100% renewable is possible, it simply requires effort.

Uranium is finite, nuclear reprocessing is prohibitively expensive:
http://belfercenter.ksg.harvar...

So if Uranium is 10% of TCO and reprocessed Uranium costs over 10x as much then nuclear would end up costing well over 20c per kWh would it not.

Sooner or later we will have to go 100% renewable, why wait, why not invest in renewables whilst is easy to do, if we leave it until it's too late the shit will hit the fan.

Nuclear power is a short term solution which causes long term problems.

If humans were capable of handling nuclear power without cocking it up regularly then I would support it, but they are not.

4 hours ago
top

Finland's Nuclear Plant Start Delayed Again

MrL0G1C Re:Indeed... (116 comments)

Nearly all nuclear reactors are over 20 years old and about half are over 30.

Capital costs represent between 60 and 75 percent of the cost of a nuclear plant,

Re Nuclear capital costs, the simple fact is US nuclear plants capital costs are already paid. In 25 years the energy from Wind and solar being installed today will likely be a lot cheaper than 44 per MWh. (Turbines are expected to last over 40 years, solar PV loses about 12-20% of it's efficiency over 25 years.)

I should have known better than to quote the worldnuclear site, no doubt they are leaving costs out. Every other site states nuclear costs about 10c/kWh. In the UK the govt are offering EDF over 15c for every kWh. The Govt site states current wind energy here costs 5 to 6.6c per kWh.

How many more Hanfords, Fukushimas and Chernobyls are there going to be be we realise we are no good at managing nuclear power?

5 hours ago
top

Finland's Nuclear Plant Start Delayed Again

MrL0G1C Re:Indeed... (116 comments)

Such as what ways? Oh right, you mean like running fossil fuel plants and emitting CO2

No, like Hydro, pumped hydro, wave power, tidal schemes, solar thermal, solar PV, compressed air storage, biowaste energy, battery storage etc.

Cheap gas and oil won't be around for long, coal is the only real fossil fuel problem.

There is currently enough Uranium reserve to continue to power the nuclear industry at it 10% of global energy rate for 200 years. So if every country were to go nuclear like France, how long would that last?

Renewables are the only long term solution.

6 hours ago
top

Finland's Nuclear Plant Start Delayed Again

MrL0G1C Re:Indeed... (116 comments)

So I guess this never happened: http://cleantechnica.com/2014/...

Yea, that website doesn't have a dog in this hunt now does it.. The US Department of Energy's numbers are flat wrong then? In the USA, I don't think so."

Don't like the message so moan about the messenger eh. That 5c / kWh is a signed 20 year deal. Does it matter who is reporting that deal?

Did I say the sun shines at night? A lot of energy is used for air conditioning in the US, what better way to supply the energy needed with solar PV.

Like it or not, solar is a lot cheaper than you seem to think it is, the US DOE figures are clearly out of date.

"The DOE says that PV Solar is at least 4 times more expensive"

Where do they say that, take a look at the date the figure is referring to.

another 40% cost drop is not in the future

Perhaps you'd like to back that up with reasoning. I have solid reason to believe the price will drop - there are a lot of solar PV factories being built right now globally, when the investment for the factories is paid off, the price of solar will fall, that also goes for the factories built over the last decade. So, there is a lot of competition, constant improvements in solar PV manufacture and efficiency. That is why the price of solar panels will continue to fall - like it has over the last 3+ decades, from about $75 per KW to 0.75 per KW.

If you don't believe me, do your homework, google solar PV prices plummet.

http://costofsolar.com/managem...

7 hours ago
top

Finland's Nuclear Plant Start Delayed Again

MrL0G1C Re:Indeed... (116 comments)

If you removed the ITC (a federal tax credit for solar), the cost would probably be about 8c/kWh. Still, that's not bad. Austin Energy's 30-year LCOE estimate for natural gas was 7c/kWh, while the estimate for coal clocked in at 10c/kWh and the estimate for nuclear at 13c/kWh.
Only wind - 2.8c/kWh to 3.8c/kWh - was lower.

11 hours ago
top

Finland's Nuclear Plant Start Delayed Again

MrL0G1C Re:Indeed... (116 comments)

All so wrong, the cost of solar panels has dropped 80% since 2008, the Wikipedia page is irrelevant due to the numbers being completely out of date and hence wrong.

The cost of solar panels has been dropping by about 40% per annum, that is set to continue.

Solar is cheaper than nuclear RIGHT NOW, any increase in the cost of uranium puts nuclear power further out of reach.

Just the generating cost of nuclear is 4.4c per kWh, the construction and decommissioning costs are a huge amount on top of that. There is also the storage cost of nuclear waste that has been spiraling upwards.

And the cost of nuclear reprocessing? Very expensive:
http://belfercenter.ksg.harvar...

11 hours ago
top

Kernel Developer Dmitry Monakhov Arrested For Protesting Ukraine Invasion

MrL0G1C Solution. (184 comments)

Obvious solution nuke Russia, it's the only way.

11 hours ago
top

Finland's Nuclear Plant Start Delayed Again

MrL0G1C Re:Indeed... (116 comments)

So I guess this never happened:
http://cleantechnica.com/2014/...

Why would I want to read information that is many years out of date when the cost of solar PV has been dropping by 40% per annum and has every reason to continue dropping. The EIA predictions are absurd to say the least. That page is pretty bad.

Even if all technological advances in solar panels stopped, the price of solar PV would drop further because most of the solar PV factories are being built right now, once the investment that put those factories in place is paid off, the price of solar PV will fall further.

11 hours ago
top

Finland's Nuclear Plant Start Delayed Again

MrL0G1C Re:Indeed... (116 comments)

Costs for renewables went down because of scientific and industrial/technological advances and yes political foresight helped. As for the subsidies, those won't be needed any longer, both wind and solar and viable without subsidy now.

As for "Why did the costs go up? I think it was political interference and artificial price inflation."

I don't feel the need to debate baseless assertions / guesses.

Why am I 'anti-nuke'? See 2nd half #47805367

13 hours ago
top

Finland's Nuclear Plant Start Delayed Again

MrL0G1C Re:Indeed... (116 comments)

Ah, don't like the message, attack the messenger. (note the number of sources).

I did the math on the amount of subsidies the UK govt idiots are offering EDF, it amounted to a stinking £36 billion just for the kWh price subsidy.

Le prix fixe - billions of pounds in subsidies on UK consumer energy bills

At £16bn and a decade to build, Hinkleyâ(TM)s up-front costs are too high to be viable without government support. The main subsidy is the 'contract for differenceâ(TM), guaranteeing EDFâ(TM)s revenues at a 'strike priceâ(TM) of £92.50 for every megawatt hour of power Hinkley generates over a 35-year contract.

When the market price is lower, EDF receives a âoetop-upâ paid for on all UK consumer energy bills. If the market price is higher, EDF pays back the difference. The certainty should help reduce EDFâ(TM)s borrowing costs; CF Partners say EDF can now bank on £83bn of revenue, in 'real termsâ(TM), undiscounted.

How much is subsidy depends on the power price but CF Partners estimates in 2023 the âoetop-upâ will be £700m or £7 a household.

Mr Davey says the impact on bills will be âoenegligibleâ but officials estimate the âoetop-upsâ could have a total 'net present valueâ(TM) of £3.5bn to £9bn, using a 3.5pc discount rate. If EDF builds Sizewell too, the Hinkley subsidy will fall to £89.50 as some of the initial design costs will be paid for through the Sizewell subsidy instead.

The contract guarantees the Hinkley price will be raised to protect EDF from windfall taxes or other law changes. EDF says it will bear the risk of cost over-runs but if Hinkley is cheaper than expected it will share the gain with consumers. The price can also be adjusted if operating costs rise or fall.

So, the govt has offered at least 15.35c per kWh for 35 years on top of other subsidies. You tell me, is that cheap?

13 hours ago
top

Finland's Nuclear Plant Start Delayed Again

MrL0G1C Re:Indeed... (116 comments)

operating costs for 61 nuclear sites in 2012. The average came to $44/MWh

Add to that construction costs, decommissioning costs and nuclear fuel reprocessing / storage costs and you've got one very expensive method of producing electricity.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/i...

Why aren't there more nuclear fuel reprocessing plants? Because it's horrendously expensive.
http://belfercenter.ksg.harvar...

Cost of building maintaining, removing new Wind farms?
Less than $36.5 per MWh
Wind Technologies Market Report

With the numerous ways of matching and storing wind energy,nuclear can not compete

Wind power is continuously getting cheaper, solar power is continuously getting cheaper and there is good reason for that to continue. Storage technologies are also getting cheaper. Solar is set to become the 2nd cheapest form of energy, after Wind.
http://cleantechnica.com/2014/...

http://i1.wp.com/cleantechnica...

13 hours ago
top

Finland's Nuclear Plant Start Delayed Again

MrL0G1C Re:Indeed... (116 comments)

Cost dude cost. Nuclear is very expensive these days, decommissioning costs are far far higher than initial estimates.

yesterday
top

Deputy Who Fatally Struck Cyclist While Answering Email Will Face No Charges

MrL0G1C Re:From the linked article... (440 comments)

Radios are public. People can listen in.

Hand your nerd card in please. Radios can be encrypted.

yesterday
top

Finland's Nuclear Plant Start Delayed Again

MrL0G1C Re:Indeed... (116 comments)

In 2013, investment advisers Morningstar, Inc. concluded that, in developed countries, "reactors are not a viable source of new power".[12] Even in developed nations where they make economic sense, they are not feasible because of nuclear's "enormous costs, political and popular opposition, and regulatory uncertainty".[12] This view echoes the statement of former Exelon CEO John Rowe, who said in 2012 that new nuclear plants in the US "don't make any sense right now" and won't be economically viable in the foreseeable future, because of low natural gas prices in the American market.[13] John Quiggin, an economics professor, says that the main problem with the nuclear option is that it is not economically viable. Former NRC member Peter Bradford and Professor Ian Lowe have recently made similar statements.[14][15] However, nuclear supporters continue to champion reactors, often with proposed new but largely untested designs, as a source of new power.[12][14][16][17][18][19][20]

Economics of nuclear power plants - Wikipedia

yesterday
top

Finland's Nuclear Plant Start Delayed Again

MrL0G1C Re:Indeed... (116 comments)

Nuclear generated electricity is expensive.
Thorium nuclear generated electricity is even more expensive due to the reactor design needing to be more robust.

Uranium recoverable at only $300-$400/kg.

Citation needed, the articles I've read claimed $1000 to $2000 per kilo.
http://www.technologyreview.co...

If these new designs are so great then why does the nuclear industry keep going with the old designs?

yesterday
top

Finland's Nuclear Plant Start Delayed Again

MrL0G1C Re:Indeed... (116 comments)

be cost effective to extract uranium from seawater,

Two things about that. #1 It is horribly expensive at over 15 to 30x the cost of current uranium. #2 The extraction process requires absurd amounts of oil based 'net' to extract the atoms of uranium.

Nuclear is already an expensive method of electricity production. Saying that this method of extraction is 'cost effective' is highly misleading. in 2010 Uranium prices spiked, the ocean extraction process would still have been over 7 times more expensive, not to mention there are only prototypes and estimates of cost at this point. Some of the estimates have put the cost of extraction at well over 100x current uranium cost.

The most advanced materials, which can be reused several times, can draw between three and four milligrams of uranium per gram of plastic each time theyâ(TM)re used, says Costas Tsouris, a researcher at Oak Ridge National Laboratory who is working on that system.

http://www.technologyreview.co...

Uranium obtained using the traditional process today would cost between $1,000 and $2,000 per kilogramâ"about 10 to 20 times the current market price, says Schneider. (The price of uranium did rise to around $300 per kilogram as recently as 2007, however.) The new process could cut that cost significantly.

Current price is around $31 per pound ($68 a kilo).
http://www.mining.com/chart-ur...

A sharp spike in uranium prices in 2007 had many people scared in terms of the sustainability of the nuclear industry, [at $100 per lb]

So if the nuclear industry is unsustainable with mined uranium then it is completely unsustainable with ocean extracted uranium, which realistically costs around 20 times as much.

How's that nuclear waste problem coming along? Perhaps the mafia can help.

Just make sure that nuclear waste doesn't leak. Oops.
Radiation leaks force transfer of nuclear waste from New ...
Nuclear waste leaking at Hanford site in Washington, again ...
After $40 Billion , America's Biggest Nuclear Dump Is Still ...
Radiation leak at nuclear waste dump raises questions ...
Ocean disposal of radioactive waste - Wikipedia, the free ...
Thousands of radioactive waste barrels rusting ...
Japan Times: Now 400 tons a day of toxic water is estimated ...

Because nuclear accidents stopped happening after Chernobyl right? Nope. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...

But hey, todays new breed of super-human won't make the same mistakes as those past humans / sarc

yesterday
top

Power Grids: The Huge Battery Market You Never Knew Existed

MrL0G1C Re:Yes, we know that. (217 comments)

Gas peakers use jet engines for quick starts, the electricity generated cost $0.19 per kWh, quite expensive.

With all of the new electric cars hitting the market lithium-ion batteries have finally dropped in cost Tesla + Panasonic are currently building a mega-factory to build cheap Li-ion batteries, cost is expected to drop below $100 per kwh of storage capacity.

I don't see why compressed air storage couldn't be cheap with sufficient investment. Geothermal can also be used for peak demand, it's another hugely under-used and under-invested in resource.

Electrical energy storage and its place in a low carbon future.

How Tesla's battery 'Gigafactory' could change everything ...

yesterday
top

Grand Ayatollah Says High Speed Internet Is "Against Moral Standards"

MrL0G1C Re:Temptation (513 comments)

And that's why we had crusades, to help people 'choose'.

yesterday
top

Deputy Who Fatally Struck Cyclist While Answering Email Will Face No Charges

MrL0G1C Re:yet if we did it (440 comments)

Nope.

" Because state law apparently exempts law enforcement officers from the anti-texting or typing ban, "it's up to law enforcement agencies to set proper protocols, which it looks like the Sheriff's Department failed to do,"

http://www.whittierdailynews.c...

yesterday
top

Deputy Who Fatally Struck Cyclist While Answering Email Will Face No Charges

MrL0G1C Re:From the linked article... (440 comments)

The officer also lied, he stated that the cyclist swerved in front of him. Evidence showed that was not the case.

Police committing perjury should be made an example of, how many over times in his career did the police officer lie?

yesterday

Submissions

top

ORG Steps in to Fight Piracy Settlement Letters

MrL0G1C MrL0G1C writes  |  about 2 years ago

anne on E. mouse cow (867445) writes "The Open Rights Group (ORG) has applied for permission to intervene in a court case between Golden Eye International, which holds the copyrights for various adult films (Ben Dover), and O2 UK. The move could potentially help to stop up to 6,000 of the ISPs customers receiving dubious internet piracy claim letters.

ORG are currently trying to raise £5000 to pay court fees, Donations Page"

Link to Original Source

Journals

top

Google has completely fucked itself RANT ALERT

MrL0G1C MrL0G1C writes  |  about a year ago

Unbelievable, google have lost all control of their senses, why:

1) "searches in quotes" no longer does an exact search.
2) Search-for-words-together also does not work.
3) Only 6 results on the first page.
4) Only 5 results out of 527,000 shown and then I get completely irrelevant "Results for similar searches".
5) Google.com redirects to wrong country.
6) Google.com/ncr search not working.
7) + operator does nothing.
8) And while I'm at it, image search options GUI is shit, badly laid out, confusing headings etc.

Simple search: 'frostwire set seed ratio'
Relevant results, BIG FAT NADA ZERO NONE

Did I get volunteered into google shit version testing without being asked or something, I've noticed how sites like to do that, different users getting different versions of a site, my response to this is:

I DON'T FUCKING LIKE IT GOOGLE, FUCK OFF YOU FUCKING MONEY WORSHIPING ADVERTISING WHORES.

Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>