- Joined
- 22 Aug 2006
- Messages
- 7,050
- Reaction score
- 1,171
- Country



2.5-3.5 MW? A mere child's toy. That's tiny now, modern turbines go up to 13MW and even more powerful ones are being developed.You missed the point. It's still far from being useful on a large scale. In houses, yes, but it's not for example useful to store excess wind power. Relative to absolutely useless, yes it has moved a lot.
Still crap for energy density too:
View attachment 394914
A large wind turbine can produce about 2.5 to 3.5 megawatts (MW). I'll let you do the sums.
Order of 100 tonnes of battery for a day's worth. Each.
If you posted that 15 years ago it would have had coal at the same percentage as gas.
storage of electricity will grow as will nuclearalways
Speaking as someone who used to make valves, they don't need to be anymore expensive than other valves, unless the material used in more expensive. The tolerances shouldn't be finer, and the quality of finish shouldn't need to be different (even if they are, this can be accounted for quite easily). Many industrial valves are done to order, to specific specs anyway, so this isn't unique to nuclear industry.For valves there are typically two loops in a PWR, the hot section is chemically very different to that of any other industrial situation and you want to select the components not just for the usual extreme corrosion and pressure concerns but how they degrade with irradiation and the particular chemical mix of the coolant fluid.
The Three Mile Island meltdown was caused by a faulty valve, in that case it was a badly flawed design. No deaths, but it melted the reactor and you don't repair those, you wall them up and pretend it never happened.
There's a limit to how much storage is viable, even now costs are coming down. We may be able to reduce gas use, but will always need it for this long dark nights when there is very little wind. Its just not worth having that much storage for what could happen once per year or even less.storage of electricity will grow as will nuclear
gas will shrink in the energy mix
If you posted that 15 years ago it would have had coal at the same percentage as gas.
Which would have proven to your satisfaction that we could never phase out Coal.
You need a lot of valves for a nuclear plant. Lots lf them are critical for operation, the TMI valve that failed was an emergency pressure release valve, if you dont have one of those then you can make your steam loop explode. Thats bad. Worse than the meltdown that happened because the pressure valve leaked.Speaking as someone who used to make valves, they don't need to be anymore expensive than other valves, unless the material used in more expensive. The tolerances shouldn't be finer, and the quality of finish shouldn't need to be different (even if they are, this can be accounted for quite easily). Many industrial valves are done to order, to specific specs anyway, so this isn't unique to nuclear industry.
If they're relying on a valve to work to prevent a meltdown, ten that is clearly a design flaw. One that wouldn't happen in modern designs.
I don't know that we're exactly reliant.Omg. Do you never give up?
This graph is a snap shot in time in time this morning. Personally it’s very good news but I’d much prefer it if the UK wasn’t so reliant on the interconnects to a variety of countries to make us have energy security
Yes, its a snapshot and says nothing about our ability to phase out gas. It does show the difficulty though.Omg. Do you never give up?
This graph is a snap shot in time in time this morning. Personally it’s very good news but I’d much prefer it if the UK wasn’t so reliant on the interconnects to a variety of countries to make us have energy security