💧simon holmes à court Profile picture
Mar 6, 2021 15 tweets 7 min read Read on X
🤓@senbmckenzie facts are important…

while there's an immense amount of energy in all matter — E=mc² and all that — we *don't* have technology to get a lifetime's energy for a person out of a golfball sized lump of uranium.

since we can't rely on @MineralsCouncil, a thread:
if you did want to power an average australian's lifetime energy needs from uranium, what would it take? 🧐

…by a couple of different methods (link at end), i estimate that 2.1GWh would cover all the energy needs of an average australian lifetime, assuming full electrification.
working back from this handy chart from @WorldNuclear, in the best case you'd need 417cc of nuclear fuel (mainly UO₂) for a single australian's lifetime.

but how do you get that? read on…

world-nuclear.org/information-li… Image
first, if you are using traditional mining techniques, you'd need between 4.8 and 96 tonnes of uranium ore, depending on ore quality.

you then mill this to produce 46kg of yellowcake.

…you now have ~4.8 to ~96 tonnes of mill tailings to dispose of. ImageImage
at this point only 0.7% is the useful uranium-235 isotope, but you need it to be ~5%.

so you convert it to 58kg of uranium hexafluoride (UFl₆) — an extremely toxic compound — and run it through cascades of centrifuges to create a sample that has the right concentration. Image
thanks to the centrifuges, you've now got ~6kg of enriched UFl₆. awesome!

unfortunately, you've also got 52kg (10.2 litres) of UFl₆ "tails".

what to do with it?

put it in cylinders and store it, could come in handy some day! (not joking. just make sure it doesn't leak!) Image
now, you take the enriched UFl₆ and convert it into 4.6kg of UO₂ (plus a few other materials), put it into tubes (fuel rods) and configure into a fuel assembly. ImageImage
then you stick it in a reactor where it participates in a controlled chain reaction, producing heat that boils water, which ultimately drives a steam turbine and makes lots of lovely, very low CO₂ electricity. ImageImage
after ~5 years the fuel has done its useful work, and it's time to dispose of it.

…but it's still a bit too spicy, so it sits in a spent fuel pool for a few years. Image
then, generally when the pool is full, you take it out & put it into casks.

it's quite safe when encased in (lots of) concrete & steel — but if you plan to eat it, wait 130,000 years until it's as _radioactively_ benign as natural uranium.

(uranium is toxic. pls don't eat it.) ImageImage
so, @senbmckenzie,

for an aussie lifestime, you'll need 4.8–96t of uranium ore, leaving:
• almost as much mill tailings
• 10 litres of toxic UFl₆
• a bit more than a coke can lump of toxic & radioactive waste

a lot less than coal, but a *lot* more than "a golf ball amount".
don't get me wrong… it's freaking amazing that humans worked out how to do this… but let's not confuse the public with false claims.

[nb. i haven't tackled costs above. hoo boy, that's another massive subject!]

calcs here:
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d…
erratum:

uranium hexafluoride is UF₆, not UFl₆.

(mr edwards, my chemistry teacher would be most disappointed!)
erratum #2:

wrong to say we don’t have the technology!

technically we do… we can put U into a breeder reactor (quite rare), reprocess (quite expensive) & repeat.

it’s not economic, and to my knowledge has never been done, but it’s _theoretically_ possible with existing tech.
so, in commercial/standard practice, you’d need the equivalent of ~100 golf balls of natural uranium to power an average aussie life.

...but if money was no object we know how to build a process that could approach the theoretical potential.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with 💧simon holmes à court

💧simon holmes à court Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @simonahac

Mar 21
⚛️ @abcnews's recent #FactCheck made a classic rookie error in calculating that the latest US nukes had "build times of 10.1 and 10.4 years".

depending how you count it, it took somewhere between 13.9 years and ~19 years to build them.

easy mistake to make.

let me explain… 🧵
ABC's analysis assumes the build time is the elapsed period between "construction start" and "grid connection" dates.

in the real world, a nuclear power building project begins years before "construction start" and often finishes months after "grid connection".
"construction start" is defined by the IAEA as the "the date when first major placing of concrete for the base mat of the reactor building is made."

"grid connection" is when "the plant is first connected to the electrical grid for the supply of power."

pris.iaea.org/PRIS/Glossary.…
Read 18 tweets
Mar 13
☢️beware #nuclear porkies #2 🤥

australians🇦🇺: you're going to hear lots about ontario🇨🇦, which does have a very clean grid and cheap retail power.

but you should know 🧵

1. average age of ontario's nuclear fleet is 40 years. all government owned, but ~half privately operated. Image
2. the current nuclear price (as determined by the ontario energy board) from this old fleet is CAD 10.1¢/kWh which is the same as A$113/MWh.



ontario's proposed new nuclear power stations will cost much more…oeb.ca/sites/default/…
3a. a 2018 canadian gov't + industry report estimated cost of power from SMRs would have a mid-point of CAD$163/MWh, or CAD$215/MWh with a 3% cost overrun.

in 2024A$, this range is A$220 – A$290/MWh.



generally, SMR estimates have increased since.smrroadmap.ca/wp-content/upl…
Read 7 tweets
Mar 9
⚛️ why #nuclear power is a distraction for australia

if implemented, the #coalition's plan would see:
• increased gas & coal usage
• increased cost
• increased emissions
• higher chance of blackouts

read on to find out why… 🧵 Image
firstly, let me say i have a deep interest in nuclear.

i've visited multiple nuclear plants, met with companies planning to build SMRs and nuclear VCs, taken a nuclear course at @MIT and closely watched the sector for years.

i encourage the use of nuclear where it makes sense. Image
some context: nuclear has had a long history of nothing in australia, including the start of construction in jervis bay (promptly cancelled by a liberal PM) and a federal ban (under a liberal PM).

important to note there are also state bans, including in NSW, VIC & QLD. Image
Read 30 tweets
Feb 4
🤓 an interesting thing about the govt's proposed 'new vehicle efficiency standard' (NVES) is how they're consulting.

they've put 3 options on the table, and are wanting to hear the public's views.

but first, a little 🧵 about the NVES:
we've been talking about 🚗⛽️ efficiency standards since at least 2008!

over 85% of cars sold worldwide are covered by a new vehicle efficiency standard, but not here!

russia & australia: the only developed countries without 🚗⛽️ efficiency standards.


Image
…as a result, passenger cars in australia are, on average, 20% less efficient than passenger cars in the US.

lower efficiency cars mean we buy more petrol…

which means we waste a lot of money 💸 on fuel, with higher pollution per km travelled.

🚗◾️◾️▪️▪️
Read 15 tweets
Jan 3
i asked #chatgpt4 to show me what other australians think people from #Victoria look like: Image
…then i asked #chatgpt4 to show me what other australians think people from #NSW look like: Image
…then i asked #chatgpt4 to show me what other australians think people from #Queensland look like: Image
Read 8 tweets
Dec 24, 2023
my wish for you all today is that you’re not seated at xmas dinner next to your uncle who wants to convince you that australia needs to go #nuclear. ☢️

bit if you do get cornered, you might want to remind him that… 🧵
1. about 90% of our coal power will shut down by 2035, the rest well before 2040 — due to age and economics

2. nuclear won’t be able to contribute meaningfully to our grid before 2040 — SMRs won’t be commercially available for years, and large-scale nukes take that long to build
3. AEMO, the grid operator, is very confident we can keep the lights on and keep industry humming with wind, solar and hydro, supported by storage and backed up by a small amount of gas.

…we’ll burn less fossil gas in most years than we do now
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(