in july only 213 of 720MW (30%) was subscribed.
subscriptions have since dropped to 104MW (14%)…
of the 36 towns in #nuscale's pilot project, the "carbon free power project" #CFPP:
• 8 towns have withdrawn entirely
• 24 reduced their share entitlement
• 3 maintained identical entitlement
• 1 joined (token level).
with the planned 12 module plant undersubscribed, #nuscale is now looking at downsizing to either 4 or 6 modules.
counteracting this fall of subscriptions, nuscale has uprated modules from 60MWe to 77MWe each.
as such, nuscale now has 33% subscriptions for a 4 module plant…
if @ENERGY allows @smartenergy+#nuscale to keep full $1.355b 10-year grant (despite halving project size) it'll help pilot plant hit challenging US$55/MWh goal.
smart move: smaller project, lower capital expenditure, higher chance of completion, lower tech & commercial risk…
#nuscale's project is precarious:
• budget creeping
• completion schedule slipped to 2030
• will DoE review grant in light of changed scope?
• project participants: struggling to attract more, some wobbly, can't afford to lose any
• 5+ years until final approvals secured.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
don't think of a scenario as a prediction, but rather a set of constraints/assumptions and the cheapest path found to supply power within those constraints.
let's talk about the 'step change' scenario.
'step change' is the closest to being compliant with the paris agreement — ie. a half-decent start if we want to keep the great barrier reef, not destroy civilisation etc.
it gets us to 96% renewables in 2042.
(the central 'business as usual' scenario is a few years slower.)
earlier this year adelaide-based nuclear lobby group @BNW_Aus submitted this chart (sans emoji) to the #victorian parliamentary inquiry into #nuclear prohibition.
one problem: it’s 🐂💩!
.@BNW_Aus claims to be an environment group, yet *all* they seem to do is fight against australia’s nuclear bans.
i’ve no problem with nuclear advocacy — nuclear technology is pretty amazing & we should keep our minds open — but why not just be honest & admit your sole purpose?
the chart aims to show that nuclear is awesome because it’s just so thrifty.
BNW's GM @dayne_eckermann says it’s relevant because “you need materials mined from the ground to make things. it's better if we limit that as much as possible to protect the environment”.
🤓 carbon capture & storage has been given a bad rap.
yes, we've wasted $billions trying to graft it on to coal — we absolutely need to give up on that — but it's likely we'll eventually need the technology.