Thailand Sets Sights on Nuclear Power Integration by 2037

[placnx]

On 1/15/2025 at 4:25 PM, MikeandDow said:

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

If not wind turbines, what kind of turbine are you talking about?

[MikeandDow]

1 hour ago, placnx said:

If not wind turbines, what kind of turbine are you talking about?

 G7 or G9 dual fuel Turbines

[SpaceKadet]

On 1/15/2025 at 8:19 AM, JoePai said:

Can only hope the operators understand a littlemaintenance  needs doing from time to time on these reactors

You are very ignorant, no maintenance on SMR's that they are talking about...

 

[SpaceKadet]

To me it's amazing how ignorant and uneducated the general populace is about nuclear power, and SMR in particular.

They tend to go for stereotypes, and listen only to the loudest mouthpieces shouting out their propaganda.

 

It would not take more than 30 minutes to search and read some unbiased articles, but no, why bother, the leftists and greens already brainwashed the unwashed masses...

[MikeandDow]

11 minutes ago, SpaceKadet said:

You are very ignorant, no maintenance on SMR's that they are talking about...

 

Just to be clear you are saying SMR's do not have to be maintained ??

and I dont think calling some one  ignorant, is showing respect ??

[SpaceKadet]

On 1/15/2025 at 1:08 PM, lordgrinz said:

 

Fusion is just around the corner, maybe 10 years, or 20, or 50, or 1000.

It's always 30 years away. Been like that since the 50's when they first start taking about it.

I'm talking commercial application, where a fusion plant can produce a stable supply of, say, 500MW to 1TW of power. Not those baby steps that the scientists are so happy to talk about today. 

[SpaceKadet]

5 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

Just to be clear you are saying SMR's do not have to be maintained ??

and I dont think calling some one  ignorant, is showing respect ??

Yes, it's correct, the SMR reactors do not need maintenance, or very minimal and not on-site constant supervision. Generally, the SMR designs, say up to 100MWt, let's you dig a hole and drop the reactor there. And replace it at the end of fuel cycle some 30 years in the future. Just check how long the nuclear subs need before fuel re-cycle. Or just put the whole reactor in a standard 40 foot container and tow it where you need it.

However, the aux equipment needs maintenance, like the generators and other. But that is not much different from what is needed in conventional power plants. And Thais are quite capable of doing it now.

 

The ignorance shows up it the postings, and has nothing to do with respect. I'll happily go out for a few beers with people that know squat about nuclear. However, when they post just hearsay and rumors, without knowing the facts, that is ignorance, and I will call it that.

[MikeandDow]

2 minutes ago, SpaceKadet said:

Yes, it's correct, the SMR reactors do not need maintenance, or very minimal and not on-site constant supervision. Generally, the SMR designs, say up to 100MWt, let's you dig a hole and drop the reactor there. And replace it at the end of fuel cycle some 30 years in the future. Just check how long the nuclear subs need before fuel re-cycle. Or just put the whole reactor in a standard 40 foot container and tow it where you need it.

However, the aux equipment needs maintenance, like the generators and other. But that is not much different from what is needed in conventional power plants. And Thais are quite capable of doing it now.

 

The ignorance shows up it the postings, and has nothing to do with respect. I'll happily go out for a few beers with people that know squat about nuclear. However, when they post just hearsay and rumors, without knowing the facts, that is ignorance, and I will call it that.

well lets just correct a couple of minor points,  SMR are only max 300MWe, dont know what is MWt ???? and yes, basicly dig a hole,!! But it is the maintenance of the Aux pumps ect, and if not maintaied your in big trouble with a nuclear reactor, Chernobyl comes to mind, plus the cost of these SMR are in the billions (Baht), conventional turbines G7 or G9 lot cheaper, and EGAT have and own, the SMR's will not be owned by Thailand, i would suspect china !! Thailand does not have a great safey record nor in maintaning equipment,  which are facts,

there are lots of posts that  are ignorant, but there is no need to go and abuse some one because of there lack of knowledge,that is what a forum is, posters post hearsay and rumors, i belive the poster was just trying to make a joke!!

 

[SpaceKadet]

27 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

well lets just correct a couple of minor points,  SMR are only max 300MWe, dont know what is MWt ???? and yes, basicly dig a hole,!! But it is the maintenance of the Aux pumps ect, and if not maintaied your in big trouble with a nuclear reactor, Chernobyl comes to mind, plus the cost of these SMR are in the billions (Baht), conventional turbines G7 or G9 lot cheaper, and EGAT have and own, the SMR's will not be owned by Thailand, i would suspect china !! Thailand does not have a great safey record nor in maintaning equipment,  which are facts,

there are lots of posts that  are ignorant, but there is no need to go and abuse some one because of there lack of knowledge,that is what a forum is, posters post hearsay and rumors, i belive the poster was just trying to make a joke!!

 

I have answered this many times in the my posts, but lets go one more time... Just to clarify the terminology; MWt is MegaWatt termal, it's what the reactor produces in heat. MWe is MegaWatt electric, i.e. the electric energy a nuclear reactor can produce from the turbine. Typically a 50MWt reactor would produce 30MWe. But all the extra energy is not wasted, as it can be used for H2 production, or water desalinization.

 

Modern reactor designs employ passive security, which means that the reactor would scramble automatically and without any human intervention if excessive heat was produced. Just using basic laws of physics... the aux equipment for the electricity generation has little to nothing to do with the actual reactor. Modern designs employ liquid sodium and or other metals for cooling and internal ( to the reactor vessel) electromagnetic pumps with no moving parts....

 

If you are really interested in a modern 50MWe SMR, just check out the 4S from Toshiba. It was almost deployed in Alaska before the coal and oil lobby stopped it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_4S. And yes, it only needed 30m deep hole for the reactor plus some small aux building for gens and such.

 

Chernobyl is a special case, based on the reactor design and the flawed operating procedures. Fukushima is just the location and the plant design. TMI is the case of bad operational procedures.

 

Currently, the most advanced SMR designs come from Russia (who has one running in production), Japan and USA. 

 

I am ignorant on many topics myself, but that does not mean I would post stuff that is just hearsay, or just help me Thai bashing, which most of the ignorant posts on this thread are. Better to shut up than post and show how ignorant you are.

 

Just because Somchai in a local car workshop FU your car during maintenance, does not mean that Thais cannot manage power generation plants. They've been doing it for some time, you know...

 

And, if you read my original post, I did not quote/reply to any poster. Was just a personal reflection without mentioning anyone specific.

[MikeandDow]

39 minutes ago, SpaceKadet said:

I have answered this many times in the my posts, but lets go one more time... Just to clarify the terminology; MWt is MegaWatt termal, it's what the reactor produces in heat. MWe is MegaWatt electric, i.e. the electric energy a nuclear reactor can produce from the turbine. Typically a 50MWt reactor would produce 30MWe. But all the extra energy is not wasted, as it can be used for H2 production, or water desalinization.

 

Modern reactor designs employ passive security, which means that the reactor would scramble automatically and without any human intervention if excessive heat was produced. Just using basic laws of physics... the aux equipment for the electricity generation has little to nothing to do with the actual reactor. Modern designs employ liquid sodium and or other metals for cooling and internal ( to the reactor vessel) electromagnetic pumps with no moving parts....

 

If you are really interested in a modern 50MWe SMR, just check out the 4S from Toshiba. It was almost deployed in Alaska before the coal and oil lobby stopped it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_4S. And yes, it only needed 30m deep hole for the reactor plus some small aux building for gens and such.

 

Chernobyl is a special case, based on the reactor design and the flawed operating procedures. Fukushima is just the location and the plant design. TMI is the case of bad operational procedures.

 

Currently, the most advanced SMR designs come from Russia (who has one running in production), Japan and USA. 

 

I am ignorant on many topics myself, but that does not mean I would post stuff that is just hearsay, or just help me Thai bashing, which most of the ignorant posts on this thread are. Better to shut up than post and show how ignorant you are.

 

Just because Somchai in a local car workshop FU your car during maintenance, does not mean that Thais cannot manage power generation plants. They've been doing it for some time, you know...

 

And, if you read my original post, I did not quote/reply to any poster. Was just a personal reflection without mentioning anyone specific.

Now that is a good informitve post, better than you first 2 agro posts, Not really into Nuclear power stations, Turbine power stations is more me G7, G9 duel fuel,  but in my opinion SMR is not for thailand Cost to much better "buck"is turbines as i said EGAT have these already, but i still stand by Thailands safety record is Not good nor is its maintance record  yes Thais can run power station have no doubt, But to what safety level and maintance, and Thailands Quality control is very bad   Just take an example of the transmission lines,  very little maintance  every time it rains there is a power cut   due to poor maintance of tree  falling poles ect 

[JoePai]

13 hours ago, SpaceKadet said:

You are very ignorant, no maintenance on SMR's that they are talking about...

 

Are you really that stupid !

 

https://www.iaea.org/topics/operation-and-maintenance

[JoePai]

13 hours ago, SpaceKadet said:

Yes, it's correct, the SMR reactors do not need maintenance, or very minimal and not on-site constant supervision. Generally, the SMR designs, say up to 100MWt, let's you dig a hole and drop the reactor there. And replace it at the end of fuel cycle some 30 years in the future. Just check how long the nuclear subs need before fuel re-cycle. Or just put the whole reactor in a standard 40 foot container and tow it where you need it.

However, the aux equipment needs maintenance, like the generators and other. But that is not much different from what is needed in conventional power plants. And Thais are quite capable of doing it now.

 

The ignorance shows up it the postings, and has nothing to do with respect. I'll happily go out for a few beers with people that know squat about nuclear. However, when they post just hearsay and rumors, without knowing the facts, that is ignorance, and I will call it that.

The only ignorant person here is you, now wind it in

 

https://www.iaea.org/topics/operation-and-maintenance

[SpaceKadet]

3 hours ago, JoePai said:

Are you really that stupid !

 

https://www.iaea.org/topics/operation-and-maintenance

Your reading comprehension needs improvement. We are talking SMRs here, not the 2TWe dinosaurs.

Power plants that can fit in a 40 foot container, and reactor vessels that are factory sealed. No external components needed to run the reactor.

 

And wouldn't you agree that you calling me stupid implies the mental level of a 13 year old?

[MikeandDow]

Commercial SMRs are new technology.Small reactors were first designed mostly for military purposes in the 1950s  only China and Russia have successfully built Commercial operational SMRs,

SMRs do, however, also have economic disadvantages. Several studies suggest that the overall costs of SMRs are comparable with those of conventional large reactors. Moreover, extremely limited information about SMR modules transportation has been published. Critics say that modular building will only be cost-effective for a high number of the same SMR type, given the still remaining high costs for each SMR. A high market share is thus needed to obtain sufficient orders.

Why Thailand is thinking about this is Stupid !!  it is not cost effective and who will bear the cost the consumer, electric cost will go up !!