News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Solar panel waste may not be nearly as bad as we once thought. Parent comment

Re:Solar panel waste may not be nearly as bad as we once tho... by Schroedingersat on Sunday November 13, 2022 @06:18PM (#33588417)
This is equivalent to asserting that they have a much shorter useful lifetime and low reliability. If you have to build as many reactors as you already have every 10 years in order to keep the old ones then you're going to run out of concrete or wires to hook them to fairly quickly.

It also has little to do with the shutdowns which skew towards newer plants.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Solar panel waste may not be nearly as bad as we once tho... by vidarh on Sunday November 13, 2022 @07:46PM (#33588979)
That's not at all what they said. The point is France have a bunch of reactors approaching the same level of wear, and by building a few more and staggering the maintenance,they'd spread the maintenance out and avoid this problem for the future.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Solar panel waste may not be nearly as bad as we once tho... by Schroedingersat on Sunday November 13, 2022 @09:39PM (#33589672)
That would be a very nice story if it fit the data at all

https://www.edf.fr/en/the-edf-group/who-we-are/activities/op...

Show me on the histogram the tight cluster of reactor start dates representing the outages

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Solar panel waste may not be nearly as bad as we once tho... by vidarh on Monday November 14, 2022 @05:11AM (#33592076)
You have it backwards. The evidence for a cluster is the cluster now in need of maintenance, and it's the clustering by maintenance cycles and how they occurred which matters, not start date.

Start date is by no means the only thing affecting later clustering of maintenance need. That's also easily achieved by for example deferring maintenance too long, or structuring of past maintenance cycles.

Understanding how to avoid maintenance cycles syncing up is critical for any risk management of large systems.

This is entirely separate from whether or not one supports nuclear, and an issue relevant for any type of generation. Or indeed managing any kind of system that includes any physical plants or machinery at all.

How that affects whether you see a given type of plant as viable is an entirely separate issue.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Solar panel waste may not be nearly as bad as we once tho... by Schroedingersat on Monday November 14, 2022 @05:40AM (#33592287)
...Which is nothing to do with the grandparent comment which blamed it on not building more reactors and claiming it was because they were the same age.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Solar panel waste may not be nearly as bad as we once tho... by vidarh on Monday November 14, 2022 @06:42AM (#33592695)
I addressed your claim, not theirs.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Solar panel waste may not be nearly as bad as we once tho... by Schroedingersat on Monday November 14, 2022 @10:14PM (#33604809)
No you didn't. My claim was that the clustering of maintenance being due to similar age would imply the offline reactors would be the same age.

You agreed with me. The clustering of maintenance is from failing to correctly manage the inherent unreliability and high costs of maintenance.

[ Parent | on HN ]