solarpunk memes

2913 readers

345 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

ex_06@slrpnk.net

tsugu@slrpnk.net

Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net

354

The masculine urge to nuclear project posting (slrpnk.net)

submitted 4 days ago by ecoenginefutures@slrpnk.net to c/memes@slrpnk.net

65 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 days ago (2 children)

No advancements?

Is SMR a joke to everyone?

Look, I'm not saying nuclear is the only path forward, far from it. I don't think any path is the only path forward. I believe that we'll need a compilation of various generation methods to meet the demands of tomorrow.

The only thing I want to see in that future is no coal, nor fuel plants. Those two are the most common types of greenhouse gas-producing plants in use. The objective, in my mind, is to entirely phase them out. Whatever gets us there, is good with me. If that turns out not to be nuclear, that's fine too. If SMR or any other kind of nuclear is required to make that a reality, that's also fine.

I. Don't. Care.

[–] ChairmanMeow@programming.dev 4 points 2 days ago

Is SMR a joke to everyone?

Yes, because it hasn't really been demonstrated to be particularly viable. You don't need tons of small reactors, that's way too much logistical and regulatory overhead for little capacity. And you need way more auxiliary infrastructure and personnel that way, driving up costs that exceed what you save by modularizing them.

In October 2023, an academic paper published in Energy collated the basic economic data of 19 more developed SMR designs, and modeled their costs in a consistent manner. A Monte Carlo simulation showed that none were profitable or economically competitive.

In 2024, Australian scientific research body CSIRO estimated that electricity produced in Australia by a SMR constructed from 2023 would cost roughly 2.5 times that produced by a traditional large nuclear plant, falling to about 1.6 times by 2030.

[–] Zink@programming.dev 1 points 2 days ago

I love the idea and the potential of SMRs, but the comment you’re replying to said there weren’t sufficient advances to make it economically competitive. That’s true.

Any time I see a new graph of the cost per kwh for the several largest power generation types, the SMR range makes me sad. I’m sure a bunch of the smarter timelines are getting 80% of their power from cheap, mass produced, passively safe, self-contained SMRs installed individually in remote areas or in large banks near population centers. But for our dumb asses it seems so far off economically. (Granted that’s because fossil fuel power plants don’t cover the costs of their externalities, but that’s also how our stupid world works)