166
submitted 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) by TheLastHero@hexbear.net to c/news@hexbear.net

The Shidaowan nuclear power plant, which features the world's first fourth-generation reactor, started commercial operations on December 6, China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC), one of the project's developers, said.

"China's independently developed high-temperature gas-cooled reactor demonstrator commenced commercial operation," CNNC said in a statement.

"It signifies that China has completed the world's first commercially operational modular nuclear power plant with fourth-generation nuclear technology, marking the transition of fourth-generation nuclear technology from experiments to the commercial market."

Generation IV reactors are considered safer and more efficient.

"The tests confirmed that commercial-scale reactors could be cooled down naturally without emergency core cooling systems for the first time in the world. It is the so-called inherently safe reactor," Tsinghua University, one of the joint developers of the reactor, said.

Such reactors can produce heat, electricity, and hydrogen and would help China and the world "become carbon neutral," Zhang Zuoyi, dean of the Tsinghua University Institute of Nuclear and New Energy Technology and chief designer of the Shidaowan reactor project, told South China Morning Post.

The fourth-generation reactor in operation now puts China "ahead of other countries in terms of nuclear technology research and development," Francois Morin, China director of industry group World Nuclear Association, told The Wall Street Journal.

According to Morin, Western countries are set to launch their fourth-generation nuclear reactors only in the early 2030s.

David Fishman, a China-based senior manager at energy consulting firm Lantau Group, told the Journal that "China is arguably peerless in actually building and commercializing next-generation nuclear power technology."

Many countries in the West, with the notable exception of Germany, have recognized that nuclear power generation would help them achieve net-zero emission goals.

At the COP28 climate summit currently underway in Dubai, the United States and 21 other countries pledged to triple nuclear energy capacity by 2050, saying incorporating more nuclear power in their energy mix is critical for achieving their net zero goals in the coming decades.

The United States, alongside Britain, France, Canada, Sweden, South Korea, Ghana, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), among others, signed the declaration at the COP28 climate summit.

"The Declaration recognizes the key role of nuclear energy in achieving global net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 and keeping the 1.5-degree Celsius goal within reach," the U.S. Department of State said.

China is not a signatory to that declaration, but it aims to develop more nuclear energy capacities to reduce emissions as its demand for electricity rises. xigma-male

As of 2020, nuclear energy accounted for 5% of China's generation mix, which continued to be dominated by coal, per data from the World Nuclear Association.

By 2035, nuclear energy is expected to make up 10% of the electricity generation mix and 18% by 2060, Chinese media quoted the China Nuclear Energy Association (CNEA) as saying earlier this year.

As of September 2023, China had 55 nuclear power units in operation with a combined installed capacity of 57 GW, and 24 units under construction with a total installed capacity of 27.8 GW, Xinhua quoted CNEA official Wang Binghua as saying. By 2060, that capacity is expected to jump to 400 GW, the official said.

China is also expected to approve six to eight nuclear power units each year "within the foreseeable future."

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ZapataCadabra@hexbear.net 105 points 11 months ago

It's fake. It doesn't work. They skipped safety procedures. It's not efficient anyways. It's not scalable. It wouldn't work without state funding. State funding is the reason it doesn't work. Social credit score.

[-] Sephitard9001@hexbear.net 75 points 11 months ago

Can't wait for r/science and r/China to be suddenly populated by Nuclear physicists who can vaguely gesture at this particular model being completely unsafe and just an inefficient money pit made for the unscrupulous Chinese to steal more money and how actually Western stagnation is the best model for reliable and cheap energy

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] WhatDoYouMeanPodcast@hexbear.net 45 points 11 months ago

sighs to be fair, this is 1984 coded and a major 🚩YIKES 🚩

China YTA and UR FIRED! XD

[-] ChairmanSpongebob@hexbear.net 29 points 11 months ago

uh uh uh the Asiatic brainpan does not have space to uh imagine atomic particles! here's why it's better to leverage private industry to create profit... I mean energy!

[-] Beaver@hexbear.net 22 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

We joke about this, but people in real positions of decision-making power actually believe this kind of skull caliper shit about how Asians aren't capable of the same level of creative thought as Americans. A lot of people literally can't imagine that the Chinese are developing this tech on their own rather than engaging in industrial espionage.

[-] invo_rt@hexbear.net 24 points 11 months ago

tin man square, tank man, vuvuzela

[-] ZapataCadabra@hexbear.net 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Calling it Tankaman Square would be a good bit.

[-] UmbraVivi@hexbear.net 74 points 11 months ago

Many countries in the West, with the notable exception of Germany, have recognized that nuclear power generation would help them achieve net-zero emission goals.

germany-cool i live in the dumbest country on the planet yea

[-] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 38 points 11 months ago

Germany actually had a similar reactor in the 80s lol

[-] PolandIsAStateOfMind@lemmygrad.ml 15 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

We need renewables!

Germany: ok, start burning charcoal

[-] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 62 points 11 months ago

So nuclear reactors - like all thermal power plants - already produce heat that can't be further turned into electricity. This is sometimes used to heat cities (district heating). For instance, Haiyang Nuclear Power Plant heats 200,000 homes. The only way to produce hydrogen in a sustainable manner is through electrolysis. This requires a boatload of electricity and is the reason why most hydrogen is produced from hydrocarbons instead. However, electrolysis can be done more efficiently at higher temperatures. High temperature nuclear reactors such as this one can use their waste heat and electricity in order to produce relatively cheaper green hydrogen. Only a few high temperature gas cooled reactors have been built, and zero very high temperature ones (over 750°C). I think this is the only currently operating full-scale commercial one (as opposed to research).

Finally, I think this design is suitable for use in inland China. IIRC after Fukushima they canceled inland plants until improved designs were ready.

[-] nymwit@lemm.ee 15 points 11 months ago

excess heat could also be used for seawater desalination if you need the drinking water

[-] Evilphd666@hexbear.net 9 points 11 months ago

Maybe we could refine the way we do hydrogen separation than making exclusion zone roulette boxes? Surely there are better ways if the research is put into it.

[-] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 35 points 11 months ago

We could cover a shit ton of land and water in wind turbines and solar panels and use that electricity for less efficient electrolysis, but unfortunately those cause a ton of death as well as create exclusion zones too.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] zifnab25@hexbear.net 56 points 11 months ago

According to Morin, Western countries are set to launch their fourth-generation nuclear reactors only in the early 2030s.

I remember back in the late '00s when I was told HSR would be here in the '20s. This shit is never going to happen. We're simply going to outsource everything to China and let them take care of it, while periodically waging our fists and insisting we'll start a war with them if they don't get in line.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Tankiedesantski@hexbear.net 52 points 11 months ago

According to Morin, Western countries are set to launch their fourth-generation nuclear reactors only in the early 2030s.

We're already at the point where China is almost a decade ahead in some high tech sectors. That gap doesn't look like it's going to start narrowing any time soon.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Cigarette_comedian@hexbear.net 43 points 11 months ago

Common China W :some-controversy:

[-] SkingradGuard@hexbear.net 35 points 11 months ago

07 stay winning, PRC

[-] ComradeChairmanKGB@lemmygrad.ml 35 points 11 months ago

🇨🇳 World Leader

[-] Egon@hexbear.net 35 points 11 months ago

I wanna live in China so fucking bad dude

[-] invo_rt@hexbear.net 21 points 11 months ago

I watch videos from on YouTube from the Walk East channel and it makes me feel like the US is a rural backwater.

[-] voight@hexbear.net 10 points 11 months ago

Do you all know any good channels for going around the US that aren't reaction bait like Cash Jordan / wranglerstar strolling Portland while uttering nonsense?

[-] BoxedFenders@hexbear.net 15 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

This channel is pretty good, but it's heavily focused on NYC and its surrounding neighborhoods. He does venture out to other cities though, both in the US and abroad. He also does bike rides which is why I started watching it to get a feel for the routes before I rode them.

[-] voight@hexbear.net 10 points 11 months ago

that's wise of you idk why i just went by trial and error with my life at stake

[-] alcoholicorn@hexbear.net 27 points 11 months ago

Two safety demonstration tests were conducted on the two reactor modules, each at a power of 200MWt, on August 13 and September 1, respectively. The normal energy transfer driven by power was stopped during the tests. The measured nuclear power and temperatures within the different reactor structures, described how the reactors were naturally cooled down, without human intervention or emergency core cooling systems. The tests confirmed that commercial-scale reactors could be cooled down naturally without emergency core cooling systems for the first time in the world. It is the so-called inherently safe reactor.

The major purpose of HTR-PM is to co-generate high temperature steam up to 500℃ and electricity. It is currently cost-effective in the Chinese market to supply steam and electricity for the petrochemical industry to substitute the burning of natural gas and coal.

[-] blakeus12@hexbear.net 26 points 11 months ago

the sad part is that even with these huge accomplishments, we still can't save the planet doomer

[-] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 35 points 11 months ago

smuglord The planet will survive, but at what cost?

[-] Smeagol666@lemm.ee 14 points 11 months ago

"The planet isn't going anywhere... we are!"- George Carlin

[-] DragonBallZinn@hexbear.net 13 points 11 months ago

I can totally see this being a headline in 2030. People say 'better dead than red' and they mean it. Human extinction is totally worth it as long as they never have to stop everything going their way.

[-] Beaver@hexbear.net 26 points 11 months ago

I can't wait for the Peter Zeihan video about how this means that China is going to collapse and starve next year morshupls

[-] Krause@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

zeihan will collapse before china does

[-] Evilphd666@hexbear.net 25 points 11 months ago

I worked on nuke reactors. I left it after I saw the carelessness and mountains of bullshit in the community. There is no such thing as a safe nuke reactor. I don't care how many times they claim to have redesigned the unsinkable Titanic and THIS time, surely they worked out all the kinks. Fukushima was supposed to have been the anti Chernobyl with the nEgAtIvE coefficent of reactivity. How'd that work out? Be it nature, human error, or something out of their control that they thought would never happen. All it takes is one.

Every nuke reactor built is rolling the dice. Go put he money in fusion. At least when that blows it's not going to be a multi generational exclusion zone or needing to irradiate the ocean where your food supply grows.

Wasn't China one of the more vocal, and rightfully so, critics of dumping all that radioactive slop where their waterways were?

But I know I'm talking to a wall-talk but I get upset with the arrogance of thinking adding more of those loaded guns is some sort of celebration.

[-] iridaniotter@hexbear.net 52 points 11 months ago

Every energy source comes with deaths. Nuclear ends up being on the safer end of the scale despite all the hype they get when something goes wrong.

[-] DefinitelyNotAPhone@hexbear.net 30 points 11 months ago

I'm pretty sure solar kills more people than nuclear. There's been a grand total of 10k deaths from nuclear energy in 70 years despite hundreds of commercial reactors being built and operated, it's the definition of a rounding error.

[-] CarbonScored@hexbear.net 9 points 11 months ago

Of directly provable deaths, yes. In terms of casualties / long-term illness caused, not even close.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] barrbaric@hexbear.net 17 points 11 months ago

Wasn't China one of the more vocal, and rightfully so, critics of dumping all that radioactive slop where their waterways were?

If you're talking about the (heavily-diluted) water tanks from Fukushima being dumped into the ocean, the levels were safe and imo China was wrong.

[-] crispy_lol@hexbear.net 10 points 11 months ago

Don’t worry guys, I’ll dilute all that poison I’m putting in the environment!

Nuclear nerds really going off

[-] nymwit@lemm.ee 9 points 11 months ago

Have you read anything about the numbers? And what the material was? Hardly the "nuclear slop" mentioned above. It's a lower concentration than was discharged during the plant's decades long operation, lower than other places in the world, and much lower than the IAEA's limit. You can say the danger isn't fully known, but it's likely more dangerous in high concentration sitting in a tank waiting for an accident. Also, as silly as it sounds, dilution is the solution to (some) pollution.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Swoosegoose@hexbear.net 9 points 11 months ago

Do you wear a hazmat suit when passing by the bananas at the grocery store?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] nymwit@lemm.ee 16 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I won't argue the technical aspects (because I don't know them offhand) but Fukushima was built and commissioned before Chernobyl. The way you talk about it above seems to imply Fukushima was designed in a way that corrects some design flaw of Chernobyl.

[-] invalidusernamelol@hexbear.net 15 points 11 months ago

Go put he money in fusion. At least when that blows it's not going to be a multi generational exclusion zone or needing to irradiate the ocean where your food supply grows.

Sadly, the reaction chamber of fusion reactors is radioactive. There isn't really any design that doesn't either produce radioactive material from reactions in the containment chamber or require radioactive intermediates to sustain the fusion reaction

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] EffortPostMcGee@hexbear.net 11 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

So are you saying that in your opinion, all nuclear reactors, which includes this one developed by this team of researchers and engineers, are unsafe because you've seen the careless disposition of other people in the workplace(s) that you worked in? What exactly about this qualifies you to make all the other claims you're making?

But, why has no one pointed out the obvious chauvinism or overt racism in your comment? You are saying that no nuclear reactor designed thus far has been safe, and therefore this one made in China must also be unsafe, or that these scientists and engineers in China must be lying or over hyping the claims they are making. Concerning the technical limitations you are trying to gesture at, you can only come to the conclusion you are coming to if you think that there is something about China, or Chinese people, that forbids it from doing science and engineering better than wherever you come from. Concerning the only thing of substance you make a claim of knowledge for, you are saying that there is something about China or Chinese workers that forbids them from actually giving a fuck about their jobs as nuclear reactor technicians, scientists, and engineers, such that they strictly could not design safer processes or conduct themselves in an appropriately professional way better than wherever you come from.

Moreover, I don't really understand why you think other people should listen to your perspective on the matter when you have put basically 0 effort within your comment to give any real justification. Essentially you are saying "I worked with these things, so just simply trust me."

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] SkeletorJesus@hexbear.net 9 points 11 months ago

If there's arguments that solar is better, sure, I'm sympathetic to those. I can understand if nuclear technology is not safe enough yet for widespread use. I think that arguments about nuclear being inherently unsafe are not convincing, though. As long as each reactor is safer than the last, we can minimize that inherent unsafeness. To take an example from programming: the only bug-free program you'll ever write is a hello world program. Introducing complexity naturally increases the amount of unaccounted for states. Cutting-edge medical technology is invariably going to have an astronomical amount of unaccounted for states and the bugs that come with them. That doesn't mean computing has nothing to offer medicine, only that its use must be weighed against alternatives. Fusion might be less inherently unsafe but AFAIK it's not on the table right now, and we need energy today. China's investing in nuclear technology, but it hasn't been neglecting wind and solar, either. Putting feelers around each solution just seems like the no-brainer thing to do.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] shath@hexbear.net 19 points 11 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 12 Dec 2023
166 points (100.0% liked)

news

23569 readers
626 users here now

Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.

Rules:

-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --

-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --

-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --

-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --

-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--

-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--

-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --

-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS