วีดีโอ

Its called recycling............ or the world can keep burning coal........

The blame lies firmly with our useless government and its snail-like progress in ordering their construction.

About 470MWe..

So tell us what to invest into?

@@jabz4431 Great question and I will apologise for the length of the reply. If you are like Australia and need to do something fast then gas turbines like GE and Siemens have in their inventories that can use hydrogen either in part or full. When I first became aware of Australia's dire position back in 2016 2 power stations in particular stood out as not only being old but also inefficient. Torrens Island (commissioned 1967)and Newport (commissioned 1981) are both gas thermal power stations. Instead of burning coal they burn natural gas to boil the water. At best they were about 35% thermal efficient. The current generations of gas turbines are around 45% thermal efficient. So just as gas turbines they'd burn less gas, but if fitted with cogeneration systems which use the exhaust to generate steam and power a secondary turbine there thermal efficiency goes to almost 65%. BUT if you put in a turbine like the GE 9HA that can run up to 50% hydrogen then you can reduce the natural gas needed to generate the same amount of electrical power by around 75% and with that reduce the emissions around 75%. The thing I can't get people to see right now (but it might change) is that we need to see the green hydrogen production from wind in the same way we see natural gas production from wells. Its not a matter of how efficient it is. Its a matter of can we deliver fuel to the power station at an acceptable cost. The other massive aspect to this is that rather than compete against direct wind and solar such a system deals with 2 aspects of wind and solar which are both stability issues. 1) It allows the power system to buffer the power that's being generated with bulk storage. Yes there's losses but there's losses with batteries and pumped hydro too. Its a matter of are the losses acceptable. 2) It provides grid stability 2 ways. The first is the obvious power on demand but its the second that's an major issue nobody discusses. The YT channel real Engineering did a great video on the issue with wind where he described the problem with HOW the large wind and solar systems feed power into the grid by inverters. I happen to know inverter technology quite well because its how modern motor controls work. So I understood exactly what he was saying in that video and he's 100% right. A large gas turbine with a secondary steam turbine would help provide the system with (as Real Engineering says) inertia because there's these massive lumps of rotating machinery that have physical inertia. So that's what I'd be investing in Australia. What you'd do in other places depends on what your needs now and in the future are and that's important. The most important aspect is WHEN do you need that new power to come on line. Australia has been incredibly stupid with its energy planning because of an idiotic combination of politics and economics and as a result we don't have time to wait for SMRs or a few other things. We don't have time and should have built and commissioned at least 4 new power stations in recent years and we don't even have suggestions let alone a public discussion let alone any actual plans. That's how farked up we are because the only people allowed to speak are economists. How farked other countries are depends on how stupid they are. Some will be smarter than Australia and others dumber.

I suggest to EVERYONE who watches this get some perspective. There's a long presentation by Tom Peacock, Component Lead, Steam Generator & Heat Exchangers, Rolls-Royce SMR posted by Cambridge Society for the Application of Research and posted here on TH-cam 1 Dec 2022. He goes over EVERYTHING and its worth watching if you're a tech geek and I am an aerospace engineer. *HOWEVER* he also says quite clearly that they wont be available until at least 2035. That's the bit of perspective that people need to understand. Yes its very likely that SMRs will be fantastic and deliver as claimed, *BUT THEY ARE NOT HERE YET AND WONT BE FOR SOME TIME.* Meanwhile we have to deal with the facts that many developed nations now have failing energy sectors because we have some many old worn out power stations and its NOT because engineers haven't been trying to warn people. *It just doesn't make very good media to have a boring engineer warn you about how old the local power station is failing.*

I suggest to EVERYONE who watches this get some perspective. There's a long presentation by Tom Peacock, Component Lead, Steam Generator & Heat Exchangers, Rolls-Royce SMR posted by Cambridge Society for the Application of Research and posted here on TH-cam 1 Dec 2022. He goes over EVERYTHING and its worth watching if you're a tech geek and I am an aerospace engineer. *HOWEVER* he also says quite clearly that they wont be available until at least 2035. That's the bit of perspective that people need to understand. Yes its very likely that SMRs will be fantastic and deliver as claimed, *BUT THEY ARE NOT HERE YET AND WONT BE FOR SOME TIME.* Meanwhile we have to deal with the facts that many developed nations now have failing energy sectors because we have some many old worn out power stations and its NOT because engineers haven't been trying to warn people. *It just doesn't make very good media to have a boring engineer warn you about how old the local power station is failing.*

I've been saying this for ages.

@@lolroflpmsl What we believe about SMR’s was at one time promoted quite widely online and several positive articles can still be found. That’s where I got info to base my comment on. However, recently I’ve noticed several critical articles which offer nothing but negativity and contradiction. It makes me wonder why and who is behind this criticism and what are their motives. I think something fishy is going on. Especially when other renewable energy systems are not without major problems, such as the toxic heavy metals within solar panels and their poor efficiency when they get dirty. Also, the difficulty in disposing the huge fibreglass wind turbine blades, which only have a lifespan of 20 years at best. Already they are being dumped in landfill and even in piles here and there across the country. SMR’s would seem to be the sensible, continuous, long term solution until nuclear fusion is perfected.

@@iancanty9875 As the next generation of reactors they make sense, but the same could be said if you build a dozen AP1000s, the economy of scale drives cost down. The challenge we have is that there's only so much uranium and we're going to have to revisit closing the fuel cycle (again) in light of others also being interested in increased nuclear capacity. Gen IV reactors are the next step, logically, but development is needed.

Its a lot cheaper to build these all over the country than massive plants like Hinkley C which is in the news recently for massive delays and cost over runs.

@@thefowlyetti2at least we know the cost and hinkley exists as a physical thing. This does not.

Rolls Royce have been building small nuclear reactors for decades. Its not like its a revolutionary product, just a new concept. Id rather the government invest in home grown nuclear industry rather than the mess EDF has become.@@marble296

What if what goes wrong ? this is a 3rd Gen PWR they’ve been around for ages and RR already use them in Subs, as for for Containment these things are designed to withstand a LOCA

To the moon, like my RR stocks!

My understanding is that these devices are self contained meaning that once exhausted they can be safely buried without fear of leakage.

This is one of many reasons why we should build Stable Salt Reactors instead. The SSR(W) can consume existing waste unlike the RR SMR which makes long lived high level radioactive waste.

5 Billion dollars, 55 Billion if the government gets involved.

Also if you were clever you could use the waste heat through a heat exchanger.

Government is already providing good support to SMR industry 😁

Wow only a million homes. They're letting in 1 million per year from the third 🌎.

Exactly, there’ll give it to Hitachi to save costs and later regret it when RR build these abroad. I’m sure our globalist government are deliberately ruining british manufacturing, ever since Margaret Thatcher began privatisation.

@@hemshah1567yes but who? Hitachi and foreign firms?

Looks like getting Polish government contract first.