Nuclear power continues in the world

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Nuclear continues in the world




by Obamot » 19/03/23, 17:12

??

Someone? maybe Ahmed? : Idea:
0 x
sicetaitsimple
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9773
Registration: 31/10/16, 18:51
Location: Lower Normandy
x 2638

Re: Nuclear continues in the world




by sicetaitsimple » 19/03/23, 17:35

Christophe wrote:Do you have an answer to my question about reservations? I suspect it's a bit of a state secret to get a precise answer...but I'm sure you have an idea!


Sometimes I have ideas, sometimes I express them, but here you are asking for facts that are a "state secret."
So let's get to the facts. They are unfortunately a bit old since the end of 2014, but I don't think (my ideas!) that the strategy has changed profoundly.
So according to this state secret published on the Internet, the reserves at the end of 2014 were:
-20600t of natural U, i.e. approximately 3 years of consumption.
-2360t of enriched U, i.e. approximately 2,5 years of consumption.
See page 28 of https://www.irsn.fr/sites/default/files ... 012020.pdf
It should be noted that in the event of a long crisis, it would still be possible to type in the stock of around 350.000t of depleted uranium at around 0,3% U235 to deplete it a little more.
The use of URT (Uranium reprocessing) mentioned above would also be a way, but unfortunately requires the construction of dedicated facilities which would take ten years, so not really a crisis solution.
So to sum up, at the end of 2014, about 5 years of reserves plus what it would be possible to recover from depleted uranium. This with a hypothesis of total cessation of imports, which nevertheless seems unlikely.
1 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79120
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Re: Nuclear continues in the world




by Christophe » 19/03/23, 17:57

Not so secret then :)

Thanks for looking, it's more than I thought (at the time at least)...
0 x
sicetaitsimple
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9773
Registration: 31/10/16, 18:51
Location: Lower Normandy
x 2638

Re: Nuclear continues in the world




by sicetaitsimple » 19/03/23, 18:39

Addition to my response to Ahmed on the price of uranium, based on what I just wrote about reserves.
It is obvious that having substantial reserves, even if it "costs" in fixed assets, is likely to stabilize prices at a reasonable level. The seller who knows that you have about 5 years of reserves in front of you will necessarily be less greedy than the one who knows that you only have a few months before having problems.
3 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79120
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Re: Nuclear continues in the world




by Christophe » 19/03/23, 19:04

Here is the nuclear news of the week: the Finnish EPR is on the way again...

0 x
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Nuclear continues in the world




by izentrop » 19/03/23, 23:38

Ahmed wrote:Perhaps, Sicetaitsimple, could you answer my previous question:
"I have a (really) naive question. Nuclear requires power plants that are expensive to build, expensive to operate, but normally still produce fairly cheap electricity because, it seems, of an economical fuel: how is this last feature to be explained?
Remundo told me about the plants and found that the fuel was, quote, "not very expensive in itself, to then drift on its usual fads, without explaining in any way why this price "not very expensive".
The administrations and the State have it all wrong because they do not count the complete sector, the area used, the centralization, the real price sold on the public market for intermittent energies, sold at a loss in overproduction and requiring only energy controllable take over...
Intermittent renewable energies
(solar, onshore and offshore wind) have
production costs higher than
"new" nuclear energy benefiting from an
series. Full cost comparison
of electricity production of each type
of energy - which include in particular the costs
“systems” (connection costs, costs
balancing, profile costs) and the part
quantifiable environmental costs -
shows that the costs of new nuclear
benefiting from a series effect would, for
example, €30/MWh lower than those of
onshore wind power and €40/MWh to those of
the offshore wind turbine placed on the ground, before
Account of System Costs and Costs
environmental.
https://cereme.fr/wp-content/uploads/20 ... icite_.pdf
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79120
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

Re: Nuclear continues in the world




by Christophe » 20/03/23, 12:38

1 x
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Nuclear continues in the world




by Obamot » 20/03/23, 13:17

Honestly, this chick is a joke. It's not so much the fact that it would reinforce the "power of Vladimir Putin" (blah-blah-blah) than Western and hypocritical presumptuousness, which no longer knows how to hide all its contradictions! We are really at the sacrificial point of the patient who wants to commit suicide, according to Bruno Bettelheim's approach... The practitioner put mattresses at the bottom of the 2nd floor window, and said to his patient:
- "We don't want to prevent you from jumping out the window, but we want to prevent you from getting hurt.".

And in the case of the patient, he was not jumping... There the West jumped out of the window...
What else?
2 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Nuclear continues in the world




by Ahmed » 20/03/23, 13:52

In an economically highly interdependent globalized world that condemns national sovereignties to a rather symbolic status, these contradictions are generalized and concern both the West and Russia. How to justify this delivery to states deemed "decadent", henchmen of American imperialism and leagued against Russia? I guess there shouldn't be too much publicity about it.
The fight between the two imperialisms looks a bit like those dog fights, very violent in appearance, but in reality overplayed and where real blows are carefully avoided. Except that in the case that interests us here, it is the Russian and Ukrainian peoples who bear the brunt of these arrogant claims in which the parties manage each other, however, by avoiding direct confrontation.
That there is a substantial dose of hypocrisy here, I readily concede.
1 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
Obamot
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 28725
Registration: 22/08/09, 22:38
Location: regio genevesis
x 5538

Re: Nuclear continues in the world




by Obamot » 20/03/23, 15:07

Aaaah, and as a specific example, frank and direct, what does it give?

Nuclear, oil, gas services... who was the big winner ensuring the prosperity of the EU at the same time?
And who continued to honor the contracts despite the sanctions and now the war?

Hypocrisy? Not content to be judge and judged?
Stunning beyond comprehension, yes!
1 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 251 guests