China starts up first Generation IV commercial nuclear reactor

[MillCreek]

https://newatlas.com/energy/china-brings-worlds-first-generation-iv-nuclear-reactor-online/?utm_source=New+Atlas+Subscribers&utm_campaign=108fef9ab3-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2023_12_14_02_48&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_65b67362bd-108fef9ab3-%5BLIST_EMAIL_ID%5D

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095809916301552?via%3Dihub

Gas cooled, pebble bed and does not have to be sited on a body of water for cooling. I wish this was in the US, but a great step forward in reactor technology.

[230RN]

Trouble is, we're now 51% imbeciles... the 1% is accounted for by the legislative branch.

[charby]

If we are supposed to go more electric, the US needs to restart the nuclear generation program. Or at least geothermal.

[WLJ]

Listen to the first 20 minutes or so of this. Guy is pretty damning of government regs and the anti growth movement killing nuclear power in this country. China doesn't have this problem.

Can We Live on Mars? New SETI and Nuclear Energy with Dr. Robert Zubrin
https://youtu.be/33aPPLPX2RY

[French G.]

Geothermal ain't going to cut it. Every nuke we can build is the only way. Also, take a Wikipedia look at pumped storage and who is planning and building them. China will be the only country that can actually use wind and solar properly because they possess a will to build infrastructure that we cannot match.

[Boomhauer]

If we are supposed to go more electric, the US needs to restart the nuclear generation program. Or at least geothermal.

They won’t. SC and GA hosted the first attempts to build new nuclear reactors in the US in decades.

SC’s went bankrupt after wasting 9 billion and were on the way to 25 billion. A project originally projected to cost $9.8 billion in total and recoup 2 billion in tax credits.

GA’s project of two reactors is at 34 billion and climbing. I personally know quite a few people involved in both projects and the costs are mainly due to extreme waste and corruption.

[charby]

Geothermal ain't going to cut it. Every nuke we can build is the only way. Also, take a Wikipedia look at pumped storage and who is planning and building them. China will be the only country that can actually use wind and solar properly because they possess a will to build infrastructure that we cannot match.

There are a few spots in the US where geothermal like Iceland will work.

[charby]

due to extreme waste and corruption.

There lies the problem, people need to be going to prison for defrauding the government.

[Ben]

This is a sad state of affairs. China is becoming the US of the 1950s, when we were the innovators the world looked up to: Nuclear power, medical achievements, the Ivy league universities were the real deal, an ever advancing military, and we told the UN and all the other busybodies to FOAD when they tried to curtail our path.

Now China is the one building reactors, I just saw that the Chinese education system (obviously for those the party educates) is one of the top rated in the world, they are building a modern navy, and they are telling the world (including us) to FOAD when we tell them to go solar and do DEI.

Call me a pessimist, but I don't see us going Apollo Program with nuclear energy ever again. There are simply too many uneducated ninnies pushing climate change and other stupid policies whose brains explode when you tell them nuclear is cleaner and 100X more efficient than solar.

[Pb]

Geothermal ain't going to cut it.

Why is that?  Honest question.

[cordex]

China will be the only country that can actually use wind and solar properly because they possess a will to build infrastructure that we cannot match.

I keep hearing both ways on China.
"We make 6 month plans, China thinks in terms of umpteen bazillion year plans.  China can focus and do all the things in ways we can't!  No one can defeat the Glorious Chinese Empire!"

Then I hear people repeating the Zeihan-type perspective of "China is going to collapse last week because their demographics suck, their leaders are isolated and never told the hard truth, half their infrastructure is abandoned, built of dried dog crap, and collapsing and the other half only exists on paper."

I'm sure the truth lies somewhere in between, but I'd love to know which side it is closer to.

[charby]

I keep hearing both ways on China.
"We make 6 month plans, China thinks in terms of umpteen bazillion year plans. 

I think that is the main difference between the west and the east, in terms of economics and development. Japan was doing that when they rebuilt after WW2, S. Korea did the same thing in the 90s, etc.

I feel like the western world, especially the US is how fast can we make a buck and GTFO of it, not caring who gets screwed in the process.

[cordex]

I think that is the main difference between the west and the east, in terms of economics and development. Japan was doing that when they rebuilt after WW2, S. Korea did the same thing in the 90s, etc.

I feel like the western world, especially the US is how fast can we make a buck and GTFO of it, not caring who gets screwed in the process.

I'm not sure I follow.  I was poking fun at that viewpoint as simplistic and a bit narrowminded.

What exactly is it that the east did that the west didn't do?  What great success has it lead to for them relative to western nations?

Don't get me wrong, Japan and South Korea have had periods of significant economic growth and are doing very well in a lot of respects, but they've also been rocked by serious downturns.  I guess I'm not seeing their long-term strategy as significantly better than a couple of cherry picked European countries or something.  Certainly nothing that makes me think "ah ha, that's what happens when you take the long view", or "golly, they sure seem to not care about making a buck without caring who gets screwed in the process."

[Northwoods]

Listen to the first 20 minutes or so of this. Guy is pretty damning of government regs and the anti growth movement killing nuclear power in this country. China doesn't have this problem.

Can We Live on Mars? New SETI and Nuclear Energy with Dr. Robert Zubrin
https://youtu.be/33aPPLPX2RY

I saw Zubrin give a talk on his case for exploring Mars almost 25 years ago.

[charby]

I'm not sure I follow.  I was poking fun at that viewpoint as simplistic and a bit narrowminded.

What exactly is it that the east did that the west didn't do?  What great success has it lead to for them relative to western nations?

Don't get me wrong, Japan and South Korea have had periods of significant economic growth and are doing very well in a lot of respects, but they've also been rocked by serious downturns.  I guess I'm not seeing their long-term strategy as significantly better than a couple of cherry picked European countries or something.  Certainly nothing that makes me think "ah ha, that's what happens when you take the long view", or "golly, they sure seem to not care about making a buck without caring who gets screwed in the process."

See if I can clarify it a bit.

I remember reading something in the 90s that Asian economic investments look for a return in their investments over a lot longer time then the western world. Granted Japan, S Korea, and definitely China has a heavy-handed government setting economic policy to assist in a longer return on investment.

Seems like in west, especially the US, the demand for a return on investment is a lot shorter time frame, due to our (not so) free market economy. Some businesses seem to get burnt to the ground for sake of a profit for a small pool of private equity firms/people. Or as in the nuclear programs mentioned by Boomhauer, they were full of over costs from waste and corruption.

[cordex]

I remember reading something in the 90s that Asian economic investments look for a return in their investments over a lot longer time then the western world. Granted Japan, S Korea, and definitely China has a heavy-handed government setting economic policy to assist in a longer return on investment.

I'm sure there can be a value in that kind of top down, long-term planning, and if their economic system is really as strategic and forward-thinking as you imagine then I have no doubt that there are projects that they might well attempt that would be difficult for us to do. 

That said, I also think that planners tend to overestimate their ability to determine what will work economically in the long run.

[MechAg94]

Why is that?  Honest question.

As a national level power generation method, I would say it won't cut it.  As a potential power generation method in specific locations, sure it might work.  Just my opinion. 

[MechAg94]

I'm sure there can be a value in that kind of top down, long-term planning, and if their economic system is really as strategic and forward-thinking as you imagine then I have no doubt that there are projects that they might well attempt that would be difficult for us to do. 

That said, I also think that planners tend to overestimate their ability to determine what will work economically in the long run.

Yeah, the problem with long term is predicting the what will happen beyond the short term.  Free market companies don't do that as much simply because it doesn't pay off enough.  However, that doesn't mean Western companies don't do it.  People build growing companies and try to develop products to pay off down the road all the time.  The company I work for does a lot of 15 year contracts.  Oil and gas companies have to invest in infrastructure, but they are constantly smacked in the face with gas prices and govt regulations.

On corporations, I recall years ago seeing someone complain about the law allowing stock dividends to be taxed as income.  It led to stockholders favoring growth in value over dividends.  A stable company that makes good profits isn't enough anymore.  Gotta constantly grow and expand.  I am sure there are 100's of other things to add into the discussion. 

[230RN]

This is a sad state of affairs. China is becoming the US of the 1950s, when we were the innovators the world looked up to: Nuclear power, medical achievements, the Ivy league universities were the real deal, an ever advancing military, and we told the UN and all the other busybodies to FOAD when they tried to curtail our path.

Now China is the one building reactors, I just saw that the Chinese education system (obviously for those the party educates) is one of the top rated in the world, they are building a modern navy, and they are telling the world (including us) to FOAD when we tell them to go solar and do DEI.

Call me a pessimist, but I don't see us going Apollo Program with nuclear energy ever again. There are simply too many uneducated ninnies pushing climate change and other stupid policies whose brains explode when you tell them nuclear is cleaner and 100X more efficient than solar.

One major difference, when you look at China, Japan, and Korea (etc.) is the homogeneity of their populations.  The US and many European countries have been seduced by the supposed "nobility" of "diversity," which sometimes merely results in a muddying of the waters of progress.

Are there self-righteous factions disrupting progress in any of those eastern countries?  You rarely hear of them, either because of information control  and/or the Tienanmen Square effect.

     
 
Whatever happened to him? (Rhetorical question.)

Somehow, my limited little brain has a hard time seeing how DEI is going to positively affect energy policies, "nobility" or no "nobility."

Rather, it would seem to open the door for more "uneducated ninnies" to participate in the decisioneering.

Terry, 230RN 

Pic credit in Properties

[Northwoods]

This is a sad state of affairs. China is becoming the US of the 1950s, when we were the innovators the world looked up to: Nuclear power, medical achievements, the Ivy league universities were the real deal, an ever advancing military, and we told the UN and all the other busybodies to FOAD when they tried to curtail our path.

Now China is the one building reactors, I just saw that the Chinese education system (obviously for those the party educates) is one of the top rated in the world, they are building a modern navy, and they are telling the world (including us) to FOAD when we tell them to go solar and do DEI.

Call me a pessimist, but I don't see us going Apollo Program with nuclear energy ever again. There are simply too many uneducated ninnies pushing climate change and other stupid policies whose brains explode when you tell them nuclear is cleaner and 100X more efficient than solar.

Who is rating their schools, and by what criteria?  I'm in the camp of our public school system sucking hard core, but if the Chinese system was so superior why do they rely on stealing our tech and then building shitty copies of it?

Lag time between us starting to suck and them being "better" only explains so much.

Regarding anti-nukular ninnies, they've just found a way to be louder than rational people.   It's a political problem that could be solved if we got the rational people to make their voices heard.  But that's like herding cats.  So, more likely is a Pinochet taking over and giving private helicopter flying lessons to the ninnies.  But that comes with its own set of problems too.

[230RN]

Hmmmm "loudness."  It's hard to imagine engineering students blocking streeets and proclaiming "Stop Oil."

I see a great schism between the "detail, cause and effect" type of mind and the "not like oil, bad, must stop" emotional attitudes (can't call it "thinking") of a street blocker.

In a way, that's similare to the gun debate... emotions and public relations trump  cold facts and reality.  Unfortunately, as I've mentioned before, we've reached that 51% tipping point of emotions over realty...

Heh:  emotions / reality > 1.0.

Heh-heh-heh-hehhhh.

The crux is that emotions don't require thinking.

Terry, 230RN

[JTHunter]

There are a few spots in the US where geothermal like Iceland will work.

One good spot would be Yellowstone.

BUT, in doing so, the geothermal features there would at the very least, be altered, probably permanently.

[Northwoods]

Don't need "good spots for geothermal", or at least not in the traditional sense.  We shall see at least how this plays out.

https://youtu.be/xwgivqvvYDs?si=q7YQmU5_HHQM9DhU

[zahc]

See if I can clarify it a bit.

I remember reading something in the 90s that Asian economic investments look for a return in their investments over a lot longer time then the western world. Granted Japan, S Korea, and definitely China has a heavy-handed government setting economic policy to assist in a longer return on investment.

Seems like in west, especially the US, the demand for a return on investment is a lot shorter time frame, due to our (not so) free market economy. Some businesses seem to get burnt to the ground for sake of a profit for a small pool of private equity firms/people. Or as in the nuclear programs mentioned by Boomhauer, they were full of over costs from waste and corruption.

The term you may be looking for is the "buxton index".

I think this theory is attractive but wrong. There's no doubt that the US is falling, but it's not the length of planning that makes the difference. I've worked with the Japanese too long to believe they are taking bigger gambles on the future; they are extremely conservative and tend towards "a bird in the hand" even if it means passing up opportunities.

The US is falling because of asymmetry of investment. In the US, the system rewards and facilitates extracting value from the general welfare and distributing it to favored special interests. The corallary is that it's nearly impossible to do anything that's to the benefit of the general welfare. This is why and how America is falling. It is our singular brand of corruption.

You can come up with imagined, plausible reasons all day long for why we don't have nuclear power plants. But the real reason is that there's no favored special interest that benefits from building them..."just" everyone. It's the same reason we don't have modern passenger trains. These are things that create value for the economy at large, but don't distribute value to any existing favored special interest.