Energy Transition ShowIn Ep. 219, longtime nuclear industry journalist and campaigner Jim Green of Friends of the Earth Australia recounts nuclear power’s long track record of failure, and explains why nuclear power, including small modular reactors (SMRs), will not contribute to the #energytransition. (For more on the history of nuclear power's genesis in nuclear weapons, listen to Ep. 209.) https://xenetwork.org/ets/episodes/episode-219-nuclear-illusions/
tom_webler@TransitionShow #209 with Jim Green was a good show. I'm not of the church of nuclear, but it's interesting to compare your show with Dave Roberts last interview with Jigar Shaw. He thinks we will see more AP1000s built. And he made the fair point that the price of Vogtle is so high because we did not have the trained workforce. The next two reactors at Vogtle will be cheaper.
@TransitionShow But Jigar pointed out how AMZN et al. are willing to pay more for low carbon electricity for their AI and data centers. He said MSFT alone estimates its AI will need 10 GW by 2050. He sees AP1000 filling that need.
Chris Nelder 🤘@tomwebler @TransitionShow Yes, I listened to Dave's show with Jigar as well. True to the form of nuclear proponents, Jigar focused on what could be, if... whereas we focused on what has been and is. And Jigar never actually made the case why load growth must be met by nuclear. He just asserted it. I disagree. As do many of the modelers we have featured on the show, e.g., Ep. 188.
@chrisnelder @TransitionShow
Jigar said something about their models showing that, after predicted wind and solar deployment there would still be a huge shortfall in power needs. He didn't say which models and I forget the size of the shortfall, but it was a lot.
Jigar said something about their models showing that, after predicted wind and solar deployment there would still be a huge shortfall in power needs. He didn't say which models and I forget the size of the shortfall, but it was a lot.
@tomwebler @TransitionShow I'll believe it when I see their models, in detail, and can thoroughly interrogate their assumptions. Without that, I don't believe it for a second. Again, we have seen LOTS of models that are extremely transparent in their methodology and assumptions that see no significant role for nuclear in the future, like Ep. 46, 74, 111, 133, 146, 159, 188. So I have no reason to just take Jigar's word for it.
@tomwebler Finally, some real analysis pushing back on questionable load growth projections from utilities that can rate-base the new gas plants they all seem to want to build... https://energyinnovation.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/MEETING-GROWING-ELECTRICITY-DEMAND-WITHOUT-GAS.pdf