On Thu, 7 Nov 2024 17:12:34 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:

> A key part of "SMR" is *Small* ... but if you want to power up half a
> STATE then "small" isn't how to do it.
>
> Or do you propose Edison's vision of a power plant on every block ?

That will never happen but it would solve a lot of distribution problems.
At least in the US new HV transmission lines are as popular as herpes only
matches by the NIMBY distaste for nuclear plants.

It would also solve the single point of failure problem. Many post-
apocalyptic novels correctly point out the lead times for new switch gear
if it's destroyed in some sort of Carrington event, assuming the gear can
even be manufactured.

On 07/11/2024 22:12, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
> On 11/7/24 5:37 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 06/11/2024 21:46, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>
>>>    From a few negative experiences, the one thing you REALLY
>>>    need to guard against is some kind of melt-down. To that
>>>    end, "pebble bed" reactors are THE solution. Word is that
>>>    China is building a number of them right now.
>>>
>> SMRs are also meltdown proof, in practice.
>> But a meltdown as in 3MI or Fukushima is by itself only a destroyed
>> reactor. It represents no public danger.
>>
>>
>>>    The thermodynamic efficiency of pebble beds isn't AS great
>>>    as with some modern designs, but the SAFETY factor is
>>>    WORTH it IMHO.
>>>
>> Same for SMRs.
>
>
>   A key part of "SMR" is *Small* ... but if you want to
>   power up half a STATE then "small" isn't how to do it.
>
Currently Rolls Royce's SMR is 470MWe.

That sits well with steam turbines and generators

Big nuclear power stations usually have several reactors.

Hinkley point will be 2x 1600MWe.
Britain's existing reactors are all 600Mwe or thereabouts, in pairs for
around 1200 Mwe per station, except Sizwelll B which is a single 1200MWe

three to four SMRs will do the same, and can be placed on the same site.

The advantage of multiple smaller power stations is the reduction in
grid capacity it affords, as they can be sited closer to where demand
is, and the finer granularity means that if one reactor goes off line
its no huge loss.

>   Or do you propose Edison's vision of a power plant
>   on every block ?
>

One SMR at 470MWe will do around 250,000 homes and a bit of industry.

How big are US blocks?

>   "Now down here we have the laundry room on the right,
>   the rec room on the left, and down at the end of the
>   hall is the reactor room ..."
>
If only.

Sadly reactors that small are not really feasible. I think the smallest
ever built was military and about 5MWe.

That's still around 2000 homes

>
>

--
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a
kind word alone.

Al Capone