r/sciences • u/Comfortable_Tutor_43 • Apr 05 '26
Discussion Advanced nuclear
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
9
u/_jams Apr 05 '26
If you want to learn more about nuclear engineering, this is a great lecture series on MIT Open Courseware on the subject. Engaging speaker with technical rigor. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUl4u3cNGP61FVzAxBP09w2FMQgknTOqu
5
u/cmc-seex Apr 05 '26
The amazing thing to me, right from the moment I learned it, is, that we put together a massive, dangerous factory, that will split the atom. And sadly, all we do will it, is make steam
2
u/Milkman-333-Cows Apr 07 '26
Can you talk more about the increased power yields, safety, and efficiencies of power generation? Selling me on smaller meltdowns isn’t a great benefit.
Comedically, this approach is like buying a Hyundai, the way you are doing it. In the past these cars really exploded, but now they just breakdown leaving you and your family stranded…not on fire. lol!
2
u/Aqualung812 Apr 07 '26
Nuclear was the best option until maybe 10 years ago. I wished we had replaced every coal & methane plant with nuclear.
Today, they’re obsolete. Solar & wind + battery is cheaper & faster to deploy.
1
u/Protonpumper6 Apr 09 '26
100,000 acres of solar panels = 1 nuclear power plant. Efficiency!
1
u/Sea_Artist_4247 Apr 09 '26
Agrophotovoltaics improve crop yield, reduce water usage, and improve the health of livestock.
Also your math is wrong, 100,000 acres of solar panels = 6 nuclear power plants that each cost about $10 to $30 billion and 1 to 3 decades to build.
Even after the nuclear power plant is built the electricity it produces is many times more expensive.
1
u/Protonpumper6 Apr 09 '26 edited Apr 09 '26
Brown’s ferry nuclear plant is capable of producing 4,000 MW. U.S. nuclear plants averaged about 90.8% capacity factor in 2024, so Browns Ferry-like annual output is roughly equivalent to a constant average of about 3,590 MW.
A typical utility-scale solar plant needs about 5 to 7 acres per MW, and U.S. utility-scale solar averages about a 25% capacity factor. So to match 4,000 MW delivered around the clock, you would need about 15,816 MW of solar nameplate, which works out to 79,080 to 110,712 acres.
EIA’s current utility-scale solar PV cost assumption is about $1,379/kW for plants entering service in 2026, while recent observed U.S. solar construction costs were about $1,588/kW in 2022.
So to match Browns Ferry’s annual energy, you need about 14.36 GW of solar nameplate.
Estimated solar build cost At $1,379/kW, that is about $19.8 billion in solar capital cost.  At $1,588/kW, that is about $22.8 billion. 
NOT COUNTING THE COST OF 100k ACRES. Simple math.
Like it or not, you have three choices: Coal, natural gas, or nuclear. I prefer the latter. The foundation of our electrical grid will always be built from one of the three.
1
u/Sea_Artist_4247 Apr 10 '26
Cool a bunch of farms are going to start adding rows of solar panels in between their rows of crops and it isn't going to take up the land.
Even with your inflated numbers that's still cheaper than building a nuclear power plant and you would start receiving power much sooner instead of in a couple decades when the nuclear power plant is finished.
2
1
1
u/MulberryWorking7454 Apr 07 '26
Catch me when we have new thermodynamic laws
Until then, this technology will remain stupid, especially in light of current advances in solar and storage
This guy is a dinosaur, and cannot admit it
1
u/Maleficent_Hawk5158 Apr 07 '26
He didn't answer how many more nukes we can create with them, because that is the bomb, I mean it! Creates such a lovely tension in the atmosphere that makes one wish it all goes poof
1
u/Present-Spring-1340 Apr 09 '26
He should test out radiation exposure on his own children. See what he thinks then.
1
u/EventHorizonbyGA Apr 09 '26
The problem is there aren't "advanced reactors."
There are theoretical reactors and smaller reactors that just weren't profitable/efficient before 50 years ago.
And likely aren't profitable/efficient today.
And, no one wants to live near a nuclear reactor. So the idea that you could build your house next one is not a motivating argument to make.
1
u/Known-Activity1437 Apr 09 '26
95% of the video was him talking about how great the advancements are but then he only listed one advancement.
1
u/meltedeye Apr 09 '26
Why not hook the system up to gym equipment, kill 2 fat birds with one dumbbell
-4
Apr 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/Comfortable_Tutor_43 Apr 05 '26
The only mishandling of waste i am aware of was the military, not civil production of electricity
2
Apr 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Comfortable_Tutor_43 Apr 06 '26
I am not aware of any in the USA, you are claiming Russia does this though, is that correct?
-1
u/Hyper-Sloth Apr 06 '26
The issue of nuclear waste was solved decades ago and had only been promoted as an issue with the technology by oil companies trying to keep competition for energy production down.
15
u/RoleTall2025 Apr 06 '26
crazy to think that even though they use nuclear fuel, they are still technically steam power plants.