Recharging the Grid with Electric Cars - Page 10

 

Many plants in the US are getting license renewal to extend their operation
another 20 years.  Existing plants are getting 'uprated' to allow them to
generate more power.  So the projections are that the amount of generation
by nucs is going up for the next 10 years or so.  Care to compare the
projected rise in nuclear output against the projected growth in wind?

There are about 595 MWe of pending power uprates for nucs in the pipeline
and another 2894 MWe expected over the next five years (3489 MW total)
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/power-uprates/pending-applications.html
http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/power-uprates/expected-applications.html

EIA projects nuclear capacity growing from 100.9 GW in 2009 to 104.1 GW in
2015 (an increase of 3200 MWe).
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/aeoref_tab.html   (see table 9)

Using the lower projection of the EIA (3489 MW), if operated at a rather low
85% capacity factor, this represents a growth in annual generation of about
23,000 GW-hours by 2015.

EIA projects that although wind capacity will grow from 29.2 GW to 30.7 GW
(an increase of 1500 MW), its generation will only grow from 78,600 GW-hours
total in 2009 to 84,500 GW-hours total in 2015 for an increase of 5,900
GW-hours.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/aeoref_tab.html   (see table 16)

So for an industry that is 'going nowhere', it would seem nuclear growth is
outstripping wind.

daestrom

 

daestrom wrote:


http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/power-uprates/pending-applications.html

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/power-uprates/expected-applications.html

It would take ~ 700 of the largest currently planned ( 5MW ) wind turbines to
equal that and
then you have to derate by the capacity factor, so say around 3000 5MW turbines
would be
needed to be built to equal that and you can't rely on wind turbines for base
load.

Graham

 

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/power-uprates/pending-applications.html

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/power-uprates/expected-applications.html

  No problem they will just increase the average windspeed.

  Or convince more Senators to let the wind farms sprout up
in their backyards.

  Or kill off more migrating birds.

   Anything just as long as there are "No New Nukes", that's
no new American nukes, French ones are fine, of course.

  LOL;
     Ken

 

Ken Maltby wrote:


http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/power-uprates/pending-applications.html

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/power-uprates/expected-applications.html

around 3000 5MW

wind turbines for

Areva is a company I would buy shares in. The new EPR looks like a dead cert
winner and of
course, the French have the most experience in operating nuclear power.

No shortage of orders or planned installations either.

Graham

 daestrom wrote:

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/power-uprates/pending-applications.html  

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/power-uprates/expected-applications.html  

You are saying (correct me if I'm wrong) that existing plants will upgrade
or extend lifespans to produce about 4% more power by 2015 and no new plants
will have been built by then. It doesn't seem so healthy in that light, and
you have to wonder how they will squeeze this much more juice out of the
existing nuke plants as time continues to pass.

Meanwhile it is hard to see how anyone can accurately predict the future
of wind and solar. The Republicans actively fought alternative energy while
they were in power so the past is no guide. Obama favors it highly and if
the global economy does recover we will see the resumption of $4/gallon gas.
If you can't build nuke plants or coal what will you do?