"French small modular reactor developer Blue Capsule Technology has announced the start of construction of ELISE - a full-size test rig for sodium at high temperatures - at Peyrolles-en-Provence, in collaboration with France's CSTI Groupe."
https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/articles/blue-capsule-begins-building-sodium-test-loop
@collectifission ah yes. Sodium at high temperatures. That’s the fun stuff! Are we sure we’ve learned the lesson from Monju?
@doc I guess we can only learn by doing stuff. I wonder if they have links to the Phénix project, which ran until 2010. If so, they're building on a wealth of knowledge.
As longas society pays for it, they can go on and on...
@earthworm Trying to figure out what you're trying to say. So, you're against any and all subsidies for clean energy producers?
It's just that the nuclear industry has surprisingly good connections to governments.
They receive a *lot* of support in all stages and don't have to assume the huge hidden costs.
When it comes to decommission, accidents or whatever, the companies get nationalized.
Not at all subtle.
https://www.dw.com/en/the-hidden-cost-of-nuclear-power/video-75412400
https://www.hoover.org/research/high-and-hidden-costs-nuclear-power
@earthworm @collectifission I would argue that we need to cost equal things otherwise the comparison is less than useful. Nuclear produces 24/7 power carbon free power. If we want to compare solar and wind to nuclear we must include cost associated with storage and CO2 capture required to make solar and wind 24/7 carbon free. In all the grids I studied seasonal renewable deficits are unbridgeable except with gas.
@earthworm offshore wind is as expensive as new nuclear, and is heavily subsidized, should we stop with that?
https://greennuclear.online/@collectifission/115983976769572166
Decommissioning likewise seems to be wildly expensive, likely counting into the hundreds of billions for the planned offshore wind in the North Sea. Also, as things stand, something tax payers are going to pay for.
https://greennuclear.online/@collectifission/116037231688841409
Or is it just: “I don’t like this particular energy source, so I’m going to complain it receives subsidies”? Trying to get that clear.
The energy transition to zero carbon emissions is going to cost us a lot, so if we’re discussing costs, let’s compare on a level playing field and not single out nuclear because that skews the public discourse and keeps us away from our zero carbon goals.
To put it differently: talking about ‘expensive nuclear’ feels like a deflection to me.
