Thailand Sets Sights on Nuclear Power Integration by 2037

[Donga]

51 minutes ago, CygnusX1 said:

Nuclear of some sort is essential for reliable base load power, whether as small modular reactors or more conventional plants. Even if it’s more expensive, I’d happily pay more for reliable power. The way we’re going with renewables, is that the wealthy will be OK, as they’ll be able to afford to install a large array of  lithium batteries in their home for backup power, whereas the poorer will just have to endure blackouts. 

 

I can’t understand the anti-nuclear hysteria. I read media reports of the ‘elephant’s foot’ puddle of radioactive fuel at Chernobyl, which apparently would kill anyone standing next to it for a short time. However, many of the substances routinely handled by  modern industry are so much more dangerous - for instance, a single drop of hydrofluoric acid on the skin will lead to a horrible death, yet this substance is used in the electronics industry without any apparent media hysteria.

 

I do have the anti-nukes to thank for one thing though - a few years ago, I realised that the highly successful campaign by the Greens against nuclear power meant that we’d be dependent on thermal coal for far longer. Bought some coal shares, and have so far multiplied my investment by a factor of 5.

 

Yep with their anti-nuclear stance over the decades, The Greens delayed the nuclear renaissance to result in energy mayhem and in the countries that took them more seriously, massive energy cost increases and in Germany, recession.  The lessons are there.

I don't have a problem with Renewables as long as people realise the more we have, the more back-up is required, be it hydro, nuclear, gas or those batteries we keep hearing about. Then there's the reality that the solar panels and turbines will have to be replaced or hopefully refurbished at some cost 3 to 4 times during the life of a nuke reactor.

[RJRS1301]

5 hours ago, mfd101 said:

The Australian federal opposition (Liberal/National) is taking a plan for SMRs (starting later 2030s) to the federal election due in May. The argument is that modern economies require RELIABLE electricity - and more & more of it (eg AIs), which renewables - wind, batteries & hydro (the latter almost non-existent in Oz) - are incapable of. Gas & coal required for the transition to a nuclear & renewables longterm.

 

It will take a major blackout in NSW or Victoria or Queensland before the election to swing enough voters to the Coalition to change the government. The current Labor government is wedded to renewables-only and getting rid of coal asap. Recently however it has conceded that gas will have to continue longer as widespread blackouts threaten.

 

Interestingly, the polls show that younger voters (say 18-38) are very open to a nuclear future.

Uncertainties in estimating production costs of future nuclear technologies: A model-based analysis of small modular reactors

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544223015980

[RJRS1301]

5 hours ago, mfd101 said:

The Australian federal opposition (Liberal/National) is taking a plan for SMRs (starting later 2030s) to the federal election due in May. The argument is that modern economies require RELIABLE electricity - and more & more of it (eg AIs), which renewables - wind, batteries & hydro (the latter almost non-existent in Oz) - are incapable of. Gas & coal required for the transition to a nuclear & renewables longterm.

 

It will take a major blackout in NSW or Victoria or Queensland before the election to swing enough voters to the Coalition to change the government. The current Labor government is wedded to renewables-only and getting rid of coal asap. Recently however it has conceded that gas will have to continue longer as widespread blackouts threaten.

 

Interestingly, the polls show that younger voters (say 18-38) are very open to a nuclear future.

Dutton promised costing months ago

so far done released because LNP have none

Polls do not indicate acceptance of the idea

^{The glaring gaps and unanswered questions in the Coalition’s nuclear plan and costings}

 

[parallelman]

As long as they don't mix up their phone numbers with atomic numbers, should be ok.

[RJRS1301]

APOLOGIES FOR THE BOLD LARGE FONT, SOMETHING HAPPENED ON MY COMPUTER

 

[Terry Juhlin]

7 hours ago, bokningar said:

Thai maintenance and nuclear power what can go wrong?

But by then the chines might have taken over.

Take over? The Chinese will build it. They’ll grease the palms of the Thai officials so they get the all the construction and maintenance contracts. They’ll bring in Chinese engineering which will include suppling all the materials needed and the experienced construction crews to build it. Chinese banks (the CCP) will finance it and be primary owners owners of it and lease it and sell all the electricity that is generated to the Thai government or to the The Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) …

[MikeandDow]

1 minute ago, RJRS1301 said:

APOLOGIES FOR THE BOLD LARGE FONT, SOMETHING HAPPENED ON MY COMPUTER

 

This is way out of date !! nothing to do with Thailand

[MikeandDow]

3 minutes ago, Terry Juhlin said:

Take over? The Chinese will build it. They’ll grease the palms of the Thai officials so they get the all the construction and maintenance contracts. They’ll bring in Chinese engineering which will include suppling all the materials needed and the experienced construction crews to build it. Chinese banks (the CCP) will finance it and be primary owners owners of it and lease it and sell all the electricity that it’s generated to the Thai government or to the The Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) …

Thats about right !! Total coruption  No jobs for Thais, will be as you said primary owners,

[Grumpy one]

6 hours ago, soalbundy said:

I don't care, I'll be dead by then.

Or soon after  

[placnx]

7 hours ago, MikeandDow said:

Absolutely stupid !!!  the cost of SMRs can cost between $50 million for microreactors and $3 billion for larger units. 

 

Most G7 turbines cost in the $2-4 million dollar range so for the equivalent output ( need 3, G7 ) would be approx 6 mil

and a lot safer, Can you imagine the potential Danger !!!!!   spending that amout of money on SMR's they would have to raise the electrical cost !!!

There are hundreds of designs underway, but only two are under construction in CHina and Argentina (125 and 30 megawatts).

https://aris.iaea.org/publications/SMR_catalogue_2024.pdf

 

At a cost of around USD4mn for a 3 megawatt wind turbine, this would require 42 wind turbines at a cost of around USD168mn to equal the power generated by the Chinese SMR cited above. Time will tell whether these small reactors cost that much. The concept is assembling them in a factory and installing them onsite in a concrete shell (see designs in linked publication). Low maintenance compared to turbines.

[Trevor Collins]

Thais have problems operating a submarine (and buses, come to that) so how will they cope

with a nuclear power plant.

[pacovl46]

So stupid, considering how many sunny days and how much coastline Thailand has. They'd be much better off using solar and wave generators!

  

[PETERTHEEATER]

6 hours ago, soalbundy said:

I don't care, I'll be dead by then.

Lighten up! Radiation sickness isn't always fatal. 😀

[MikeandDow]

4 minutes ago, placnx said:

There are hundreds of designs underway, but only two are under construction in CHina and Argentina (125 and 30 megawatts).

https://aris.iaea.org/publications/SMR_catalogue_2024.pdf

 

At a cost of around USD4mn for a 3 megawatt wind turbine, this would require 42 wind turbines at a cost of around USD168mn to equal the power generated by the Chinese SMR cited above. Time will tell whether these small reactors cost that much. The concept is assembling them in a factory and installing them onsite in a concrete shell (see designs in linked publication). Low maintenance compared to turbines.

Cost of maintenance on a G7 or G9 is very minimal, ( G7 and G9 are Not wind turbines ) G9 output 145 MW output cost savings using Turbines far weights the outcome of  new Technology SMR,  G7 and G9 this is not new Technology and  are in use in Thailand now ! and are EGAT owned

[John Drake]

This is not going to happen. 

[Purdey]

While no doubt there are professionals in Thailand, I am not sure how they deal with the people who dig the foundations of the plant.

[MikeandDow]

47 minutes ago, Purdey said:

While no doubt there are professionals in Thailand, I am not sure how they deal with the people who dig the foundations of the plant.

Read the whole post its been addressed ( They’ll bring in Chinese engineering which will include suppling all the materials needed and the experienced construction crews to build it)

[Truth Teller]

Remember Chernobyl in Russia? Don't do it Thailand ESPECIALLY if the communist Chinese are involved and/or their 'friends ' the communist Russians. 

[MikeandDow]

The cost of these SMR are in the Billions, the output is not that great,  and dont forget the cost will be passed on to the consumer,

[Lancelot01]

12 hours ago, Gottfrid said:

Who pushed the wrong button?

Doh, Homer.

[NedR69]

Wondering what country will operate the plant…this country doesn’t even have Cat 1 aviation rating, and I can’t see them working  on anything near a reactor.

[MikeandDow]

7 minutes ago, NedR69 said:

Wondering what country will operate the plant…this country doesn’t even have Cat 1 aviation rating, and I can’t see them working  on anything near a reactor.

Can you not guess which country !!  it a country which will soon own Thailand

[connda]

Nuclear in Thailand?  When pigs fly.

[Gknrd]

Well with China and North Korea's help they should get there no problem.

[RJRS1301]

12 hours ago, MikeandDow said:

This is way out of date !! nothing to do with Thailand

I was responding to the post regarding the Australian oppose proposal for SMR

 

[geisha]

16 hours ago, Krabi King said:

Hopefully to be built on some far away islands 🫣

Koh Tao sounds good !

[bokningar]

14 hours ago, Terry Juhlin said:

22 hours ago, bokningar said:

Thai maintenance and nuclear power what can go wrong?

But by then the chines might have taken over.

Take over? The Chinese will build it. They’ll grease the palms of the Thai officials so they get the all the construction and maintenance contracts. They’ll bring in Chinese engineering which will include suppling all the materials needed and the experienced construction crews to build it. Chinese banks (the CCP) will finance it and be primary owners owners of it and lease it and sell all the electricity that is generated to the Thai government or to the The Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand (EGAT) …

The whole country 

[Justanotherone]

soon, cheap land for farangs to buy, near the reactors... or fall out zone

[asdf1234]

Where are they putting the plant? That place will be the next chernobyl

[BeastOfBodmin]

19 hours ago, black tabby12345 said:

Unable to maintain even own State Rail tracks.

Rampant corruption and lack of management at all levels.

Nuke business, by 2037?

 

Another 12 years to reach Minimum Safe Distance...

I expect they first need to work out how to use the blue piping in the build.