Summary

France’s Flamanville 3 nuclear reactor, its most powerful at 1,600 MW, was connected to the grid on December 21 after 17 years of construction plagued by delays and budget overruns.

The European Pressurized Reactor (EPR), designed to boost nuclear energy post-Chernobyl, is 12 years behind schedule and cost €13.2 billion, quadruple initial estimates.

President Macron hailed the launch as a key step for low-carbon energy and energy security.

Nuclear power, which supplies 60% of France’s electricity, is central to Macron’s plan for a “nuclear renaissance.”

  • Flying SquidM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    151 day ago

    They better retool their power plants to use something other than uranium. Last I read, we had about a century’s worth at the current rate of mining.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      241 day ago

      There is around a century’s with of uranium with current mines.

      But right now uranium is very cheap so most of it is “wasted”. There is plenty of way of recycling used nuclear fuel or improving the productivity of uranium enrichment.

      If uranium supply starts to actually be a problem there is a way to “create” more nuclear fuel: breeder reactor.

      With breeder reactor France could fuel their reactor for millennia only with the depleted uranium they have in stock (when enriching uranium you end up with a tiny account of enriched uranium on one side and depleted uranium on the other, France is keeping the depleted uranium in stock specifically for this scenario)

      source (french)

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        318 hours ago

        Yeah or put another way: All that nuclear waste we occasionally talk about burying under a mountain has something like more than 90% of its energy left.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          212 hours ago

          No.

          They speak about it in the article I linked (in French unfortunately). The waste that we talk about burying is what’s left AFTER extracting all the components that could be reused.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          117 hours ago

          I have always wondered how it’s stored… always imagined like 55 Gal drums in some Simpsonsesque way, but that doesn’t really make sense… but maybe it does?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            115 hours ago

            Like that but way bigger. The fuel is still in solid form and stored in giant heavy dry casks that essentially armor that fuel from the outside world.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              18 hours ago

              Also encased in glass, and both the cask and the glass can stop the radiations on their own iirc.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 day ago

      Don’t worry, the consultants are already on the task and invoicing hundreds of millions for their hard work.

      No ETA but will keep you posted… in about 12 years.

      • Flying SquidM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        131 day ago

        It’s based on what can actually be used.

        The world’s present measured resources of uranium (6.1 Mt) in the cost category less than three times present spot prices and used only in conventional reactors, are enough to last for about 90 years.

        https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/uranium-resources/supply-of-uranium

        (Note this is a *pro-*nuclear power organization.)

        New technology may change that. We were once told that the oil in the Canadian tar sands was not economical enough to extract and now they’re extracting it. The paper also discusses the possibility of thorium as a fuel source, although it has yet to see commercial viability.

        As-is, and with current reactors, we don’t have much we can use. Relying on new technology to change that could be a poor gamble.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      122 hours ago

      You probably read about U-235, but yes. There are soviet BNs, their chinese clone, french experimental reactor and I think topic reactor, which can work on plutonium, which is side-product in regular reactors.