• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Home
  • About
  • Podcast
  • Archives
  • Links

Atomic Insights

Atomic energy technology, politics, and perceptions from a nuclear energy insider who served as a US nuclear submarine engineer officer

Atomic Show #270 – Fastest Path to Zero

March 27, 2020 By Rod Adams 5 Comments

Fastest Path to Zero logo

Suzanne (Suzy) Hobbs Baker serves as the Creative Director for Fastest Path to Zero. I recently spoke with Suzy and Steve Aplin, a consultant to the Canadian nuclear industry and frequent Atomic Show guest, about the work that Fastest Path to Zero has done and plans to do in the near future.

Fastest Path to Zero is an important initiative in the effort to dramatically reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Here is their concise self-description from the About page of their website.

We are an interdisciplinary team of experts, including University of Michigan staff and students, working to support communities as they plan and pursue ambitious climate goals. We offer a variety of  tools to help communities transform their energy systems while adapting to a changing climate. Our tool belt includes big data analytics combined with a passion for human-centered design and engagement.

https://fastestpathtozero.umich.edu (accessed March 27, 2020)

Diversifying nuclear industry by adding sizes

Suzy had an another commitment, so she had to depart early. For the second part of the show, Steve and I talked about micro modular reactors that might find their initial customers in the northern, often First Nation, communities in Canada.

He provided an important perspective on some of the unique opportunities and challenges that developers might face when seeking to deploy their systems to serve that diverse, and quite small market.

We also discussed how nuclear system development in multiple sizes and configurations increases the usefulness of nuclear fission and diversifies the nuclear industry.

Nuclear industry organizations that specialize in large projects should not feel threatened by the influx of people whose talents and philosophical focus make them more suited to rapid deployment of much smaller systems involving smaller teams and serving customers with smaller power or heat needs.

I hope you enjoy the wide ranging discussion. Your comments and feedback are always appreciated.

Note: I apologize the occasional audio interruption. Systems like Skype are getting more use than usual a means of maintaining personal connections across social distance. Even in the virtual world, traffic can cause unexpected and uncomfortable slowdowns.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/AtomicShowFiles/atomic_20200326_270.mp3

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:03:11 — 72.4MB)

Subscribe: Google Podcasts | RSS

Filed Under: Advanced Atomic Technologies, Alternative energy, Clean Energy, Climate change, Podcast, Smaller reactors

Avatar

About Rod Adams

Rod Adams is an atomic energy expert with small nuclear plant operating and design experience, now serving as a Managing Partner at Nucleation Capital, an emerging climate-focused fund. Rod, a former submarine Engineer Officer and founder of Adams Atomic Engines, Inc., one of the earliest advanced nuclear ventures, has engaged in technical, strategic, political, historic and financial discussion and analysis of the nuclear industry, its technology and policies for several decades. He is the founder of Atomic Insights and host and producer of The Atomic Show Podcast.

Please click here to subscribe to the Atomic Show RSS feed.

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. AvatarMartin Burkle says

    March 27, 2020 at 4:13 PM

    Please interview people, ask good questions, but don’t interrupt your guest and talk so much.

    Reply
  2. AvatarDavid B. Benson says

    March 27, 2020 at 4:43 PM

    Zero isn’t good enough. Also required is removing the excess carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

    Reply
  3. AvatarJack Devanney says

    March 27, 2020 at 5:13 PM

    Zero is a phony number. There is no such thing as a zero carbon
    grid. IPCC puts nuclear life cycle at 16 gCO2/kWh and
    you will need some fossil fuel peaking
    even in an “all” nuclear grid.

    IPCC says PV solar is 48 gCO2/kWh. The all renewables
    “zero” carbon grids typically have to install 5+ times
    peak demand to be able to make a dubious claim that
    they are reliable. That’s 250 g/CO2/kWh. And you will
    need a boatload of batteries at 150 to 200 kg-CO2/kWh.
    Even after adjusting for some decrease in these numbers
    in a low carbon grid you are still a long, long way from zero.

    With nuclear you can get reasonably close to zero.
    A grid which attempts to be reliable by installing an enormous
    amount of almost always surplus capacity will never get close.

    Carbon capture and burial, if it can be done, will require enormous amounts of 24/7 power. It better be very low CO2 power or you will go backwards.

    Reply
    • AvatarEngineer-Poet says

      April 1, 2020 at 10:03 PM

      (This is a comment I’ve posted several places already, but here because it’s topical.)

      Some very rough calculations on the olivine enhanced weathering solution to excess atmospheric CO2:

      ~500 billion tons CO2 removal required to return to 350 ppm.

      1.25 tons CO2 removed per ton olivine weathered:
      https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Oliver_Tickell/publication/48321940_Enhanced_weathering_of_olivine_to_capture_CO2/links/5694e75a08ae820ff0747619/Enhanced-weathering-of-olivine-to-capture-CO2.pdf

      ~400 billion tons dunite required

      $15/ton dunite = $6 trillion total material cost

      Assuming all cost is for electric power @ $0.05/kWh (very rough estimate):
      300 kWh/ton dunite, 1.2e14 kWh total energy required

      Spread over 20 years, that’s 684.5 GW average power.

      This number could be high by a factor of 2; if energy at the reference mine costs $0.10/kWh instead of $0.05, the power requirement would fall to 342 GW average.  Or there could be other costs which increase it somewhat.  I’d bank on the number being within a factor of 2.

      Another thing:  A 60% efficient combined cycle plant burns 6 MJ of gas per kWh.  At 50 MJ/kg LHV, that’s 0.12 kg of gas which burns to 0.330 kg of CO2.  Producing 300 kWh in such a plant generates 99 kgCO2 (call it 100).

      If it takes 300 kWh to mine and crush 1 ton dunite and it removes 1.25 tCO2 from the atmosphere, we can burn fossil fuel to power our CO2 removal systems and barely dent the positive effect.

      This would be a big job, requiring the mining of literally cubic kilometers of ultramafic rock and distributing it as fine particles so they would weather quickly.  But it’s doable.  We CAN save the planet from our fossil fuel habit.

      But will we?

      Reply
  4. AvatarMichael Scarangella says

    March 31, 2020 at 9:15 AM

    Thank you to Steve Aplin for giving some insight about Inuit settlements and how they may not be ideal sites for deployment of nuclear reactors. I tried to phrase that uncharacteristically carefully. I found Steve’s reasoning very pragmatic and in line with my own thinking; I found Suzy’s reasoning to be – well – young.

    I agree with Atomic Rod’s closing comments with regards to COVID19 – that modern humanity’s response (total shutdown) has been out of proportion to the severity threat. This type of behavior parallels the challenges inhibiting wider application of nuclear power – fear rules all decisions.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You have to agree to the comment policy.



Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

Primary Sidebar

Search Atomic Insights

Follow Atomic Insights

The Atomic Show

Atomic Insights

Recent Posts

Five Myths about the Lone Star Blackout

Atomic Show #291 – Kalev Kallemets, Fermi Energia

Preliminary lessons available to be learned from Feb 2021 extended cold spell

South Texas Project Unit 1 tripped at 0537 on Feb 15, 2021

Atomic Show #290 – Myrto Tripathi, Voices of Nuclear

  • Home
  • About Atomic Insights
  • Atomic Show
  • Contact
  • Links

Search Atomic Insights

Archives

Copyright © 2021 · Atomic Insights

Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy