Nuclear energy is more expensive than renewables, CSIRO report finds

And how many other forms of power generation are not subsidized by the government for construction and decommissioning?

Unless you can somehow show that is unique, this point proves absolutely nothing.

 

Here you go again with the rich. I mean, are you literally able to do absolutely nothing but parrot old Marxist slogans?

Once again, tell me how many of the rich generate their own power?

You keep repeating the same thing ad nauseum, and apparently think it means something.

 

My point was US has a ready base or nuclear-trained operators so we COULD build up a solid nuclear generating network fairly quick. Understand that "quick" is measured in multiple years or decades.

 

well maybe we could give up some life span for some power.... who knows, I mean 28,000 years is a bit much for my needs

 

what is your problem this new year? lol

 

Huh? The rate is based on the decay rate of the radioactive material used, and the amount of energy released as a result of that decay. If you want a large amount of energy, you need a substantial mass of radioactive material. That's what makes it difficult to work with ..

If instead you have a small amount of radioactive material you can only get a small amount of energy from it. (Like the lume on your watch)

 

And there is the rub. By the time we need them we probably won’t. Between our abundant solar supply and the vanadium batteries, which we are mining here nuclear looks less appealing

 

Once again, making stupid claims with absolutely no basis in fact. Just your own fears.

 

Wiki didn’t say but this is the Philippine government and I cannot imagine they would keep paying to keep this idle if there wasn’t a good reason.

 

You mean a gap power source that involves a lot of toxic chemicals in the manufacture, and batteries made out of a toxic chemical, right?

Batteries. You are aware are you not that batteries do not actually make power, right? They just store it, and are horribly inefficient. Yet once again you show your absolute love of any potential future thing and fail to ever consider that it is not feasible, right? Might as well talk about the use of anulax batteries made out of unobtanium.

 

Which is why we are building grid sized batteries
https://www.australianvanadium.com.au/vanadium-batteries/

https://qldem.com.au/vanadium-redox-flow-batteries-vrfbs/

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-23/vanadium-flow-battery-south-australia/102515616

 

Right. It did not say, therefore you assume whatever you want.

You know, that is completely counter to how science is supposed to work, right?

 

Wow! Forget watches - this would be a dream come true for NASA

 

I can find no evidence that the plant has sustained any seismic damage in 40 years either. The Philippines uses fossil fuels for more than 70 percent of it's electric generation. If the plant had been fueled, do you think that would have reduced the amount of atmospheric CO2 that the Philippines produced over 40 years?

Oh and as long as we are sourcing Wikipedia

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cor...he 2022 Corruption,180 countries in the Index.

 

Sure we are.

Here, from the very front page:

Notice the part I highlighted in red. Exactly how many of these "new and developing technologies" have ever come to pass?

Gravity batteries? Diamonds from the air? Atmospheric Vortex Engines? Cars powered by compressed air? Hyperloop? Solar freaking roadways?

You are confusing claims and promises made by a start-up that is trying to sucker in investors with real technologies that are proven and work. That is the problem with most of these threads you create. YOu keep posting biased and flawed claims and accept them as fact because you want to believe in them.

Oh, and nobody is "building" grid sized batteries. That is a fantasy. They want to build them, but that is nowhere near the same as somebody actually building them. And Australian Vanadium sure as hell is never building them. Never-ever-ever.

Are you even aware of the current stock price of Australian Vanadium Limited? Freaking Au$0.01 cent per share, and they just reported a loss in 2023 of over Au$7.2 million.

And that is the company you think is going to be building "grid sized batteries"? What a complete and utter joke.

 

That's interesting. I'm not familiar with vanadium batteries, although I saw it mentioned a while back. Good luck.

 

You think NASA hasn't known about beta voltaic cells for decades?

Of course NASA uses plutonium in long range space probes rather than carbon 14. Voyager, for example, has about 14kg of plutonium on board. At launch it produced about 470 watts. That's about enough power to run a laptop. The critical mass of plutonium is about 10kg.

You feel like lugging around a nuclear bomb's worth of plutonium in a 16kg laptop?

 

yep, and we will never fly, if God wanted us to fly he would have gave us wings... opps... guess never say never

 

"Nuclear Batteries" are not actually batteries in the conventional sense. That is more accurately called a Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator (RTG), which is what started most of this thread. That is actually not a battery at all, but a power generator in itself.

 

I am not discounting that there was corruption what I don’t get is why. Unless of course one of the fossil fuel vested interests were paying off politicians so they could keep operating coal fire plants but surely none of the fossil fuel brokers would do that? / sarcasm especially since COP 28

 

Okay Vanadium batteries have been around since the 1980s. Actually came out of some research at the University NSW. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanad...acos presented the,Wales in Australia in 1986. King Island in the middle of the Bass straight has been using one for years because even the “Roaring 40s” wind across the straight does stop occasionally. The BIG kicker is vanadium is a “rare earth” ego scarce and expensive - then along came a geological survey that identified some rich sources up near Julia Creek/ Richmond in QLD.
https://richmondvanadium.com.au/our-projects/

Expect to see more big battery installations, having said all of that there are also “Iron- Air batteries” in development and apparently about to be installed in West Virginia

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a42532492/iron-air-battery-energy-storage/

I keep thinking of an article I read that said “it makes NO sense that our current electrical grid has no storage capacity”. The big Hornsdale Project in SA showed grid batteries were not only viable but profitable

 

Non sequitur.

What I described is a physical limitation of the technology. Carbon 14 decays at a specific rate. That's why it's also used for dating old objects. It's not something you speed up with enough effort. Since it decays slowly the number of beta particles able to create a potential in the cell is very small.

Current is the amount of charge though a point over a second. The potential (voltage) is converted into current. Ohm's law tells us that if you try to draw more current than the charge available to flow, then your potential will drop. This is a fundamental property of the electric field. Imagine if it wasn't.

A shock from a hastily removed sweater can result from a potential of tens of thousands of volts. If you're older like me your resistance to the flow of current is about 300k ohms. Ohms law dictates that current equals voltage divided by resistance. A shock though about a centimeter of air is about 30k volts. That means if the shock lasts for a full second you'd feel 100mA of current, which is more than enough to kill you. Fortunately for human kind, the sweater can't hold that much charge, so the current depletes in a matter of nano seconds, saving your life to remove a sweater another day.

The same with beta voltaic cells. They can separate a small amount of charge to a voltage of about 2 volts, but the amount of charge separated is so small there can never be a large amount of current to do work.

 

Thanks. Good info.

 

Funny, you forgot to mention how they actually generate their power. Remember, "batteries" do not make power, only store it.

A diesel fuel 6 MW generator. That would be a big "Ooops".

And the "battery" you are talking about is once again does not actually exist at this time other than as an experiment. And King Island is where they are conducting the experiment.

And have you looked into it? The thing uses freaking 70,000 liters (18,500 gallons) of vanadium sulphate. A highly toxic substance that causes death by multiple ways. Through not only skin contact but ingestion or simply breathing the fumes. Oh yes, great plan in making a battery with over 35 metric tons of a deadly chemical.

I always laugh at how incredibly toxic almost all of these "green energy technologies" are. And that people are actually promoting destroying the environment in their pursuit of them.

 

Actually, our electric grid does have storage capacity. Primarily in the form of hydroelectric dams. That is why many areas have set up pumped storage operations.