Large Industrial Companies going Off-Grid???

Is this the future of large companies? I worked for a company that did cogeneration (using biogas) to reduce their electrical costs. But OFF-GRID—- wow!

This Texas company is promoting off-grid solutions. They are proving themselves with state of the art battery backup installations.

I can see large power-hungry data centers going down this path.

https://www.canarymedia.com/article...o-build-837m-worth-of-grid-batteries-in-texas

Intersect Power to build $837M worth of grid batteries in Texas

Intersect Power CEO Sheldon Kimber has a vision: A world where energy-hungry industrial facilities can connect directly to massive solar and battery projects, skipping the interminable line to plug into the U.S. power grid.

But for now, his clean energy development firm is focused on more conventional projects. This week, the company unveiled a major expansion of its storage plans targeting the red-hot Texas grid battery market.

 

That's why Microsoft want their own nuclear power plant.

 

It’s also why China builds captive coal power plants in other countries to power smelting operations. Less red tape, quicker access to power (waiting lists to get on overloaded grids), no future brownouts or blackouts when overloaded grids fail.

 

Gotta link? Why would a company that aspires to 100% renewables want to deal with high-level radioactive waste.

 

Yeah good point. Radioactive waste in the hands of everyday Americans is probably not a good idea. Of course, coal tailings are a hazardous waste also, and a lot of corporations shy away from that.

 

Here you go.
Three Mile Island nuclear power plant will reopen ...

NPR
https://www.npr.org › 2024/09/20 › nx-s1-5120581 › t...

Sep 20, 2024 — The agreement will span 20 years, and the plant is expected to reopen in 2028. It will be renamed the Crane Clean Energy Center in honor of ...


Amazon, Google and Microsoft Are Investing in Nuclear ...

The New York Times
https://www.nytimes.com › ... › Energy & Environment

5 days ago — Microsoft has agreed to pay an energy company to revive the shuttered Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania. And this week, ...

Microsoft deal propels Three Mile Island restart, with key ...

Reuters
https://www.reuters.com › markets › deals › constellatio...

Sep 21, 2024 — Constellation Energy and Microsoft have signed a power deal to help resurrect a unit of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania ...

 

Bill Gates has a nuclear power company. Is currently building a nuc plant in Wyoming. Gates is all in on nuclear.

Large companies like Microsoft have to eventually deal with reality. Little girls daydream about riding unicorns, but even the luckiest only end up with a pony. Never a unicorn.

 

Any large business that depends on electrical power better take a long hard look at captive power supplies.

Even countries like the Netherlands and Norway that have been transitioning to electrical powered industry and EVs etc. simultaneously are facing grid failures, even if generation capacity is sufficient.

Getting off the grid could set a large company up to annihilate competitors who would still be paying high rates to upgrade the entire grid and be subjected to crippling blackouts and brownouts in spite of paying increasingly higher rates.

If a business needs power and has the capital to invest, captive power generation is the smart move whether it’s coal, wind or nuclear.

 

Some Liberals are all-in on Nuclear power, as are some Conservatives. On the Liberal front there are anti-Nukes who hate the idea. On the Conservative side, there are a large number who reject Nuclear for reasons of immorality. Many Christians are most adamantly opposed to Nuclear energy because of the WASTE to FUTURE GENERATIONS dilemma.

Regardless of the philosophy of the opposition, perhaps you can explain what benefit future generations get from all this waste, and also explain who will maintain it, and provide the necessary security for hundreds of thousands of years.

 

The “waste” problem is only to frighten low information voters and consumers. It’s not really a problem.

 

Your opinion. In a world of Climate Change, many disagree. Renewables have now been demonstrated to supply this power affordably and reliably. And many backup schemes have now been proven to fill in the gaps, including the battery plants mentioned in the topic post.

 

Repeat - “perhaps you can explain what benefit future generations get from all this waste, and also explain who will maintain it, and provide the necessary security for hundreds of thousands of years.”

 

No it’s not my opinion. Large energy intensive companies ARE going off grid. And countries like I mentioned. ARE nearing grid failure due to overload.

I don’t post opinions. Like there are 90 billion tons of nuclear waste in the US and 270 billion tons globally. Or like elephants weigh approximately 250 lbs. I tend to post factual content that’s based on reality.

Nothing wrong with renewables. I’ve not said there is. Take your strawman and add it to your imaginary billions of tons of waste and tiny elephants.

 

The "waste" is neither a danger nor a problem. The answer to your "who" question is no one.

 

Guess I’ll repost, since you chose simply to attack the messenger instead of the scientific message. Sad that you have to resort to that.

Renewables have now been demonstrated to supply this power affordably and reliably. And many backup schemes have now been proven to fill in the gaps, including the battery plants mentioned in the topic post.

 

So high level radioactive waste doesn’t have to be monitored? And no security is required?

There are a number of abandoned nuclear plants in CA, with wastes stored on site. Please prove that no security is required.

 

Reasonable precautions already in place are sufficient.
AI weighs in:

Learn more…Opens in new tab
Radioactive waste is not considered a major problem because its radioactivity naturally decays over time, meaning the hazard significantly decreases with each passing year, and most nuclear waste has a relatively low level of radioactivity, with only a small portion requiring long-term isolation due to its high activity; additionally, proper storage and disposal methods can further mitigate risks to the environment and human health.

Key points about radioactive waste:

• Decay process:
  Radioactive materials naturally decay at a predictable rate, reducing their radioactivity over time.
  
  
• Volume of high-level waste:
  The majority of nuclear waste is considered low-level with relatively low radiation levels.
  
  
• Storage and disposal methods:
  Technologies exist to safely store and dispose of high-level waste in deep geological repositories, isolating it from the environment for thousands of years.
  
  
• Comparison to other pollutants:
  Compared to some industrial waste like heavy metals, nuclear waste can become significantly less hazardous over time.

 

Dude. I posted facts. It’s a fact companies are looking to get off grid. It’s a fact countries with high EV numbers are overloading grids and can’t build out capacity fast enough.

These are FACTS. I’ve never claimed there is a problem with renewables so why lie about what I posted?

 

Yep, that’s exactly what this thread is about. The company mentioned in the title post is offering solutions. If they can show a cash advantage to heavy industrial users to go off-grid, using renewables and battery backup, that will be very advantageous for the company and for the communities.

 

Do you understand what half life means? Your post is inaccurate. It probably holds true for low-level waste, which is probably the subject matter Of this firewall site.

 

Your ideology is in conflict with the facts.
". . . most nuclear waste has a relatively low level of radioactivity . . . "

 

Amazon has jumped aboard the nuclear bandwagon.
Amazon Looks to Advanced Nuclear Reactors
Justine Calma, The Verge

 

You’re obviously in over your head. HIGH LEVEL RADIOACTIVE waste —- perhaps you can answer the previous question after reading and understanding this link.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spent_nuclear_fuel
Nuclear fuel rods become progressively more radioactive (and less thermally useful) due to neutron activation as they are fissioned, or "burnt", in the reactor. A fresh rod of low enriched uranium pellets (which can be safely handled with gloved hands) will become a highly lethal gamma emitter after 1–2 years of core irradiation, unsafe to approach unless under many feet of water shielding. This makes their invariable accumulation and safe temporary storage in spent fuel pools a prime source of high level radioactive waste and a major ongoing issue for future permanent disposal.

 

I'm just not given to irrational panic.
AI again:

However, most nuclear waste is only hazardous for a few tens of years and is disposed of in near-surface disposal facilities. Only a small volume of nuclear waste is long-lived and highly radioactive.

5 Fast Facts about Spent Nuclear Fuel

Department of Energy (.gov)
https://www.energy.gov › articles › 5-fast-facts-about-sp...

Oct 3, 2022 — We'll get you up to speed with these 5 fast facts on spent fuel that is generated from commercial nuclear power reactors in operation today.

Radioactive Waste – Myths and Realities

World Nuclear Association
https://world-nuclear.org › nuclear-waste › radioactive-w...

Aug 12, 2024 — Most nuclear waste produced is hazardous, due to its radioactivity, for only a few tens of years and is routinely disposed of in near-surface ...

 

How is that study on High Level Radioactive waste going? When are you going to get started?