Acceptance of nuclear power

[77TA]

I thought Norway , 95% hydro, was the cheapest and France not far behind them.
Most expensive Denmark...windy power.

You’re right, Norway has cheaper power using mostly hydro. Hydro is great where you can do it.

I mean to check but perhaps you might know how thermo power in Iceland is in comparison.

[seewood]

I mean to check but perhaps you might know how thermo power in Iceland is in comparison.

About 19 cents CDN/kwt/hour. for residences and about 9 cents for business'.

Iceland, June 2022: The price of electricity is 0.137 U.S. Dollar per kWh for households and 0.065 U.S. Dollar for businesses which includes all components of the electricity bill such as the cost of power, distribution and taxes.

Bit more that what we pay.

The wells in Iceland go down about 100-200 meters only compared to what we might consider in BC. I believe Meger Creek test wells were 1500-3500 meters down to get the desired temps.


Nuclear is the way to go if jurisdictions don't or can't depend on weather to produce cheap electricity.

[DANSPEED]

Molten-salt reactors are suppose to be fail safe but I still wouldn't want one in my backyard. Nuclear power is classified as clean energy until you mention spent fuel rods. Maybe some day every home will have its own mini reactor installed and maintained by FortisBC. Our monthly bills will include a rod transport and storage fee!

[TylerM4]

Molten-salt reactors are suppose to be fail safe but I still wouldn't want one in my backyard. Nuclear power is classified as clean energy until you mention spent fuel rods. Maybe some day every home will have its own mini reactor installed and maintained by FortisBC. Our monthly bills will include a rod transport and storage fee!

It's for that reason that I prefer Hydro.

Yes, fission MAY be on the horizon but it's still at least 30 years until it's proven on a large scale and that's being very optimistic.
For what's available to us today: Hydro where possible, Nuclear where it's not...

[Jlabute]

I personally would rather have nuclear in my back yard. Nuclear reactors may some times have failures, but no where near as often as hydro dams and no where near the death toll. Fission, or fusion when it comes, is fine to me.

[seewood]

For what's available to us today: Hydro where possible, Nuclear where it's not...

yeup, having to depend on weather to produce reliable, stable, cheap, 24/7 power I don't believe is the best solution, without backup of some sort.

We are so very fortunate in BC having cheap hydro and this seemingly continual seeking for grants to install solar is a waste of money.

Nuclear is the best solution when hydro is not available. Glad China is building more nuclear power plants today.
: https://world-nuclear.org/information-l ... dwide.aspx

snip : Today there are about 440 nuclear power reactors operating in 32 countries plus Taiwan, with a combined capacity of about 390 GWe. In 2021 these provided 2653 TWh, about 10% of the world's electricity.About 60 power reactors are currently being constructed in 15 countries, notably China, India and Russia. Units where construction is currently suspended, i.e. Ohma 1 and Shimane 3 (Japan), and Khmelnitski 3&4 (Ukraine), are not shown in the Table below.

[GordonH]

^^^ once Site C is completed and at full generation power, BC future electrical needs should be coming from Nuclear power plants. Simply because not sure if there is any more major rivers in BC that can be damed without flooding cities.

[seewood]

Simply because not sure if there is any more major rivers in BC that can be damed without flooding cities.

There are rivers that could be dammed, however they are now in parks or the pushback from the numerous eco groups or first nations would make any new dams untenable.
Site C will provide cheap renewable power to BC for years to come without any requirement for weather dependant windy solar, except perhaps in unique locations. If some private enterprise wants a go at windy solar, I hope it is subsidy free and they are reimbursed at hydro rates before transmission is taken into account.

When BC truly needs more electrical generation, I'll be long gone I suspect and the eco nuts will still be pushing for weather dependant electrical production for some silly reason when nuclear is the best option to keep prices down.

[GordonH]

Simply because not sure if there is any more major rivers in BC that can be damed without flooding cities.

There are rivers that could be dammed, however they are now in parks or the pushback from the numerous eco groups or first nations would make any new dams untenable.
Site C will provide cheap renewable power to BC for years to come without any requirement for weather dependant windy solar, except perhaps in unique locations. If some private enterprise wants a go at windy solar, I hope it is subsidy free and they are reimbursed at hydro rates before transmission is taken into account.

When BC truly needs more electrical generation, I'll be long gone I suspect and the eco nuts will still be pushing for weather dependant electrical production for some silly reason when nuclear is the best option to keep prices down.

I suspect a rather large amount of the electricity generated at Site C will be sent to Kitimat to the currently constructing LNG plant.
How much will be available to rest of BC will be determined later.

[seewood]

I suspect a rather large amount of the electricity generated at Site C will be sent to Kitimat to the currently constructing LNG plant.
How much will be available to rest of BC will be determined later.

Gordon H, your psychiatric or whatever..

From Castanet : A week earlier, the provincial government approved the proposed Cedar LNG project, alongside a new energy action framework that calls for electrification of major new resource projects. With that added demand, BC Hydro predicts that its current plans “are insufficient to meet the future needs of our customers, and that additional near-term actions are required.”

I really doubt BC will go the logical and best solution (nuclear) and will end up getting sucked down the weather dependant windy solar route. if that is the case, prepare for higher electric rates.

[nepal]

..
Acceptance of nuclear energy is increasing.
.

https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads ... ericans%20(57,energy%20sources%20emit%20no%20carbon.

.
The US has recently started-up a new facility, and is constructing a mini-reactor in Alaska large enough to power a small town. Several countries are continuing with nuclear as a viable energy source.
.
Canada has a good nuclear record with decades of use. Time for Canada to expand nuclear energy, especially with the technological advances now available.