Nuclear power continues in the world

[Bardal]

No discussion to remain in banalities; there is always a gap between the theoretical and the application of the principle; for that as for all the physical phenomena (the others also besides).

We do not heat in summer (except the DHW), but the power plants run much more in winter than in summer; incidentally, hoping to cover 100% of needs is a matter of unconsciousness. Incidentally, if nuclear electricity production is capped at 50% of French electricity, lowering the thermodynamic efficiency of the power plants a little to provide water at 100 ° costs nothing; the CEA calculation was based on water at 120 ° C ... This covers most of the heating and other needs (but also greenhouses or aquaculture ponds) ...

Without going into technical details (which, perhaps, the engineers of the CEA, in their offices, control a little, even without your advice), it is obvious that this kind of realization requires a study specific to each situation; she will be able to benefit from your precious advice ... The main thing, in my opinion, is that we have a colossal amount of energy immediately available, and that it is possible to use it. The rest is just technical adaptation, more or less difficult, on which you are perfectly free to practice your teeth.

As for St Laurent des Eaux, I think you understood very well what I am saying, and that taking a style formula literally is certainly bad faith; I do not care...

[sicetaitsimple]

..... The rest is just technical adaptation, more or less difficult, .....

And this is where it usually gets complicated compared to a "macro" technical-economic study based on more or less unrealistic assumptions.
But hey, not very serious all that ...

[Bardal]

The assumptions are not unrealistic, they are real. As for the "complications", they are simple enough to solve that a dozen countries have already practiced this cogeneration, sometimes for more than 20 years ... No need to invent impossibilities where there are none.

[Obamot]

I have always said to myself that it was stupid all this waste heat that could heat greenhouses producing citrus fruits, avocados or other plants that are impossible to produce easily in metropolitan France. From an ecological point of view this would however be relevant. We have to believe that the import cost is still far too low ...
With a deep floor heating system, you could even store heat in the basement in summer.

So let's build new plants to take advantage of it to produce avocados and other “off-season” edibles, whose nutritional benefits are quite dubious?

[Paul72]

Decidedly, nuclear was better before (man)

https://reporterre.net/Fragilise-par-la ... du-charbon

We must hope not to have a big cold snap in the fall.

[izentrop]

Decidedly, nuclear was better before (man) https://reporterre.net/Fragilise-par-la ... du-charbon We must hope not to have a big cold snap in the fall.

drought, which makes it impossible to cool the installations.

It is quite Reporterre that. Coal does not need water perhaps?

And then if we had not arrested Fessenheim for exclusively political reasons, we would not be there

[Flytox]

Decidedly, nuclear was better before (man) https://reporterre.net/Fragilise-par-la ... du-charbon We must hope not to have a big cold snap in the fall.

drought, which makes it impossible to cool the installations.

It is quite Reporterre that. Coal does not need water perhaps?

And then if we had not arrested Fessenheim for exclusively political reasons, we wouldn't be there

Izentrop, first you can at least read the article you're quoting, and then you can come to the conclusion that you just wrote something stupid ...

The stake is however elsewhere. “Fessenheim is a drop in the bucket which cannot sum up, on its own, the real problem of managing the nuclear fleet,” said Charlotte Mijeon. RTE had also admitted in a document that the closure of Fessenheim did not threaten the security of electricity supply. For Cécile Marchand, the current situation rather has the merit of showing that “nuclear energy involves considerable maintenance costs that are difficult to anticipate”.

[sicetaitsimple]

The stake is however elsewhere. “Fessenheim is a drop in the bucket which cannot sum up, on its own, the real problem of managing the nuclear fleet,” said Charlotte Mijeon. RTE had also admitted in a document that the closure of Fessenheim did not threaten the security of electricity supply. For Cécile Marchand, the current situation rather has the merit of showing that “nuclear energy involves considerable maintenance costs that are difficult to anticipate”.

RTE's reports are generally very "measured", and extracts can be taken from them that support their point of view. That "Sortir du nuclear" (Charlotte Migeon) extracts this one is therefore not surprising.
But factually the shutdown of Fessenheim (whether for, neutral or against) is a loss of 1800MW of margin compared to the risks of production / consumption imbalance at the winter peak.
There is little doubt that our neighbors are ready to cover this margin deficit, it is another reading of the RTE reports.

[moinsdewatt]

continuation of this post of June 13, 2020 http://www.oleocene.org/phpBB3/viewtopi ... 6#p2305176

Romania: US replaces China to finance construction of two new nuclear reactors

AFP published on Oct 09, 2020

The United States will initial a contract on Friday to finance the construction of two new units of Romania's only nuclear power plant in place of China, the American ambassador in Bucharest announced.

An "inter-governmental cooperation agreement aimed at modernizing a nuclear reactor and building two new reactors at the Cernavoda site" (south-east) will be signed in Washington by the Romanian Minister of Energy Virgil Popescu and his American counterpart Dan Brouillette, Adrian Zuckerman said in a video message.

According to him, "this project of a total amount of eight billion dollars will be a paradigm" for future economic cooperation between the two countries. A financing agreement covering Cernavoda and other projects, "the most substantial financial package ever received by Romania", will be signed subsequently with Exim Bank, Zuckerman said.

Asked by AFP, the Romanian Ministry of Energy said the details of this cooperation would be made public after the signing of the two documents. Bucharest broke an agreement with the China General Nuclear Power Corporation (CGN) group in June to build two new reactors, amid growing mistrust of Chinese investment in Europe.

CGN was the only candidate for the construction of units 3 and 4 of Cernavoda during a call for tenders launched by Bucharest in 2014. But the Chinese group has since been placed on a "black list" of companies by the United States who accuse him of having sought to steal American technologies for military use.

The company Nuclearelectrica, majority owned by the Romanian state, had undertaken to seek other investors, the government affirming to privilege "a partner within the EU or NATO". The CGN group is a partner of the French EDF on two nuclear sites, in China and in England with the Hinkley Point C power plant project.

Romania has struggled for ten years to start the Cernavoda project, its only nuclear site. Six European companies - GDF Suez, Iberdrola, CEZ, RWE, Enel and ArcelorMittal - which had signed an agreement with Nuclearelectrica in 2008 withdrew from it one after the other because of the uncertainties surrounding the plant's future.

The two reactors in operation at Cernavoda together supply around 17% of Romania's electricity needs.

https://www.connaissancedesenergies.org ... ire-201009

[jean.caissepas]

The French are joining forces with the Ricans to develop SMR reactors by 2030 - 2035:

https://www.usinenouvelle.com/editorial ... s.N1016484

Phew, we will still have a controllable solution that produces little GHG, in addition to renewable energies.

Our EPR plants must still last 10 years maximum (see less) for the oldest (a large part of the park built in the years 70-80), it is urgent!