Comments by "Bob thebomb" (@bobthebomb1596) on "Any 'serious conversation’ about net zero must include nuclear energy" video.

@Derty_the_grower Who is recommending building reactors based on fifty year old technology?
3
Given Australia's reserves of uranium a mix of solar, wind and nuclear must be the way to go. The country could meet its targets and be self sufficient in clean energy.
2
@richardfeynman7491 Not really, you have to find some way to even out power generation. Battery technology is expensive. Molten salt storage would be a good option and would tie into upcoming modular reactors based on that technology. Most of the expense of current nuclear infrastructure originates from fuel production, waste processing, decommissioning and capital outlay. Fuel production and waste processing are much simpler with these types of reactor. Decommissioning and initial outlay are far cheaper with small modular systems due to the much smaller reactor vessels, production line manufacturing techniques and elimination of large, high spec containment buildings.
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 Then it is time to spend the big buck on developing it. There are several potential options.
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 It will take ten years to license and build any nuclear reactor. Start with a modern PWR by all means, but molten salt is the way to go. There are just so many advantages. I have no issue with coal as long as it is fitted with carbon capture technology.
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 The Chinese are building their new coal plants with a view to replacing the furnace with a modular reactor when they become available. Makes sense as they only have to replace the heat source and not build a complete power plant.
1
@buildmotosykletist1987 I have heard differently. They are building them so that they can close down the coal furnace and hook a reactor up to the same set of steam turbines. The "end product" as you call it is the steam to drive the turbine not the electricity.
1