IEA Rings Alarm Bell On Phasing Out Nuclear Energy

[Sofia + 35]

A steep decline in nuclear energy capacity will threaten climate goals and power supply security unless advanced economies find a way to extend the lifespan of their reactors, said IEA.  

Nuclear is currently the world’s second-largest source of low-carbon electricity, behind hydropower, and accounting for 10 percent of global electricity generation. But nuclear fleets in the United States and Europe are on average more than 35 years old and many of the world’s 452 reactors are set to close as cheap gas and tighter safety requirements make it uneconomical to operate them.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nuclearpower-iea/iea-rings-alarm-bell-on-phasing-out-nuclear-energy-idUSKCN1SX1XW 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 hour ago, Sofia said:

A steep decline in nuclear energy capacity will threaten climate goals and power supply security unless advanced economies find a way to extend the lifespan of their reactors, said IEA.

The logical solution is to only remove and replace the reactor core part, which is subject to metal fatigue and thus has a limited lifespan, b ut keep all the rest, the generator part, all that wiring, transformers, switchgear.  You get an effectively new power plant for a fraction of the cost.  Longer term, the way to go is with a thorium reactor, but hey, you have to walk before you can run!

Modern industrial societies that attempt to operate without nuclear are headed for disaster.  Running only on renewables is not possible (except for Norway and its hydropower, of course). Keep in mind that the energy density of thorium/Uranium is 50 million times that of coal. A sobering thought, to be sure.