[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/sci/ - Science & Math


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


Will this kind of nuclear industrial heating offer a significant competitive advantage to the Chinese petrochemical industry? Or will it make no difference?
>>
File: HTR600S.pdf (102 KB, PDF)
102 KB
102 KB PDF
The Xuwei plant will have 4x 3180MWt Hualong-1 pressurized water reactors and 2x6 250MWt HTR-PM high-temperature reactors. It will primarily be used to supply heat to the nearby Lianyungang petrochemical complex, and remaining power being used to generate electricity. The first construction phase of Xuwei was approved by the Chinese state council a few weeks ago.
>>
File: xuwei1.pdf (347 KB, PDF)
347 KB
347 KB PDF
>>16384532
Some pics from the environmental impact report (which is in Chinese)
https://www.mee.gov.cn/ywdt/gsgg/gongshi/wqgs_1/202307/W020230705398788877470.pdf
>>
File: xuwei3.pdf (319 KB, PDF)
319 KB
319 KB PDF
>>16384551
It seems to have been printed and then re-scanned again, so the quality isn't very good
>>
A map, taken from here
http://www.xwxq.gov.cn/xxxq/tzzn_sub/content/c84ab8d8-6404-4bc5-be84-59295ff032c3.html

34°29'37.2"N 119°26'58.9"E
>>
>>16384523
State subsidies can offer a significant competitive advantage or not depending on how big the subsidy is.
>>
>>16384594
Well that depends on how much the nuclear is being subsidized aint it? It's obviously a good idea to use heat directly from a heat source if you want heat instead of making electricity first if that's what you are asking.
>>
>>16384591
Yes, however that is true independent of what technologies are being used.

The question here is whether the use of dedicated nuclear reactors to provide heat is likely to offer a competitive advantage, in the sense that heat provided by nuclear reactors is likely to be fundamentally cheaper than heat provided by the usual method, i.e. combusting a fuel
>>
>>16384601
Did you use the wrong talking point by accident? May want to delete the thread and start again otherwise they may get pissed at you lol
>>
>>16384597
>depends on how much input X is being subsidized
That's true of any technology. The question is: is it likely to be *inherently* cheaper? The two reasons they could think this is a good idea is either because they think it will be inherently cheaper, or because they want to reduce imports of fuels, or both

> It's obviously a good idea to use heat directly from a heat source if you want heat instead of making electricity first if that's what you are asking.
No, that's not what I'm asking. In this type of industry, it is already a common practice to generate heat locally and use the heat directly rather than converting it to electricity as an intermediate
>>
>>16384607
I thought the wording of my previous comment might have been a bit incorrect and unclear. I'm not a native English speaker.

Should I interpret your snark and repeated insistence on missing the point as that you are jealous because the Chinese are building something cool and high-tech that your country isn't? Or what? If you don't like the subject of the thread, then just leave the thread and don't post in it.
>>
>>16384623
Well if you want to elaborate on "the point" as you call it, then just post the listing prices for the heat sources and there you go. You can compare the offers at hand and choose the cheaper option.
>>
>>16384627
There are no "listing prices" to compare with.

To mention just some problems:

* A Hualong-1 reactor is said to cost about 2.5$/W to build. However, that is for electrical output. How much will it cost for thermal output? It is about 33% efficient when producing electricity, so it would cost about 0.8$/W for thermal output if all thermal output could be harvested. However I don't know how much of the thermal output can be harvested. Also, I don't know what the operating cost is.

* I have no idea what a HTR-PM reactor is likely to cost to build or to operate. Only a twin FOAK unit has been built so far, and to my knowledge they haven't disclosed the cost.

* How much heat energy will be lost when transferred from the NPP to the location of use? It is several kilometers distance. I don't know.

* For the operation of a petrochemical plant, how much of a cost is the fuel, compared to other expenses such as feedstock, spare parts and salaries? I don't know.

* One alternative for heating is natural gas. However, natural gas is not a unified market. Natural gas prices vary greatly across regions depending on what pipeline network they are connected to, and LNG prices can vary greatly from customer to customer depending on what kind of contract the customer has signed. Are they buying on the spot market? Or are have they signed a long term contract? There is no simple "listing price" for natural gas.

* Nuclear industrial heating is not common. There are a few examples, such as a small fraction of the output from Gösgen NPP being used for a cardboard factory. However, to my knowledge, there are not many existing examples to compare with, and certainly none of this scale.

Informed speculation is necessary, and I am not informed enough.
>>
>>16384638
Some other issues

* How expensive will this >>16384554 elaborate system of heat exchangers be, that heats the steam twice and provides steam at three different pressure/temperature combinations? A normal NPP does not have that.

* How much will it add to the cost that the turbines, generators, transformers, transmission lines, etc, of the NPP will operate below capacity for much of the time?

* How much heat above 480C is needed by a petrochemical plant? The Xuwei NPP only provides steam up to 480C.

Etc
>>
File: w5w0ge.jpg (52 KB, 640x447)
52 KB
52 KB JPG
>>16384523
Heating is the biggest reason why "le renewables + batteries" aren't enough and why nuclear power is necessary for net zero.

Nuclear power is an excellent source of 24/7 process heat. Wind and photovoltaics produce exactly as much power for heat as they do for electricity, because the main way to get useful heat from them is through resistance heating. Nuclear power plants can produce 2-3 times as much power when used for heat rather than electricity, meaning the cost is potentially 1/3-1/2 as much. Also, you don't need expensive electric transmission infrastructure, because you can usually build the reactor where the heat is needed.

Nuclear power is also potentially the best way to decarbonize district heating, assuming you can build reactors that are safe enough to place near towns, and which are cheap enough to turn off half the year, or which can alternate efficiently between generating heat during the winter or generating electricity for air conditioner peak use during the summer. In China's case, they have good candidates for those purposes, in the form of DHR400 and ACP100.
>>
>>16384523
Whatever. China's already mauling everyone else in the chemical industry anyway.
>>
>>16384586
same old same old, using everything in there power to stimulate the real estate and construction sector.
>business core area
>Productivity service area
>Advanced equipment manufacturing
>Xuwei harbor area
>world class petrochemical production base
how much you want to bet all these is just PR to get investment. At least on google earth none of those has been built yet, except the core business area.
>>
>>16385886
On Google Maps, Bing Maps or Yandex Maps you can see lots of things have been built

Coordinates:
34.545165, 119.599128

You can also find pictures online, such as this one
>>
>>16385886
I don't think chemical/nuclear industrial construction shares much supply chain with private home construction
>>
>>16384523
Is there much demand for hot steam? I can only remember one research reactor that sold hot steam as a byproduct to a paper mill.
The temperature is too low for calcination, which could have been a competitive very large scale application.
>>
>>16384914
Not per capita so who cares
>>
>>16384551
reminder all safety regulations on nuclear (and all other industries) should be removed.
Total, universal, unremitting, merciless bureaucrat extermination.
>>
>>16384523
>just doing what should've been done in the 1960s had communist subversion and dysgenics not sabotaged western industry.
>>16384591
i love how solar panel lifetime costs always include local government subsidies and fail to add chink subsidies on the sale price
>>
>>16390303
I think we can find a nice, minimal government bullshit balance somewhere in between the insanity of today's governments and companies dumping waste into waterways like in the 1800s and 1900s.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.