Oglethorpe Power Corporation’s Post

I find it curious that much opposition is based on the cost (realistic) but ignoring the concept that renewables (excluding hydro) are weather or daylight-dependent. We will still need an assured base level of generation capacity - gas or nuclear? The generating capacities on recent announcements re nuclear seem great approaches to me. WA's coal generation (I was a geologist modelling the current Ewington-Premier seams in the Collie basin in 1989) has had six "individual" stations. Four (Govenment-owned) will close down by 2029 cutting out 1.1GW of capacity leaving two private stations to continue with capacity of 440 MW. So what will we do when those close? Base load from gas? Nuclear seems appropriate to me based at Muja where distribution is extant (not Collie, some 25 km away,that many opponents are cynically quoting)

Nuclear up to about 40% energy market share fits well into a generator fleet that must cooperate symbiotically to meet but not exceed society’s power demand (load) ongoing. With its high capital cost and very low fuel cost, NP must run at a high annual capacity factor to be economic and so is limited to the base load strata for optimum feasibility. Solar above 4% energy market, share and wind from the very first contraption, on the other hand, are not symbiotic with the balance of the generator fleet because they fail to provide either base load or load following generating characteristics and exacerbate net load fluctuation. Their zero fuel cost advantage is more than erased by their lack of control of load-directed fuel supply. Unfortunately, wholesale market design does not recognize lack of cooperation to meet load ongoing as a detriment.

Nuclear power serving humanity in a meaningful way. Need every scheme and technology to meet the ever growing demand for electricity.

Regarding the future of nuclear power generation, the NRC stated that they expected to see no fewer than 25 license applications for SMR and advanced reactors by 2029. No comment was made on the current product cycle (from approval to power generation), but the SMR industry continually focuses on a much shorter time-to-market than current nuclear power generation stations, when the SMRs are being manufactured as planned. Estimates are for a potential 90 GW of energy generation with the average SMR being a 200 MW unit.

Once operational, Sizewell C will generate low-carbon power for 6 million homes. That’s more energy security, whatever the weather. Investing in homegrown nuclear energy is vital to delivering lower bills and making the UK energy independent.

Best invest in Building and talking about Fusion power, space, and maritime propulsion systems and industry as data centres are. You talk about Nuclear (meaning Fission) and fail to discuss fusion. https://lnkd.in/ge_aeX7M The nuclear fission industry is, ignorant of what's happening around you. Pull your uranium heads out, start adjusting your industry to fusion energy and start preparing to enter the commercially growing fusion energy industry. As it dawns on Earth like the sun. Great Headline Guardian on Nuclear fission. https://lnkd.in/g8sMZtpR Fission is moving towards obsolescence at an accelerated pace, as it is "out of step, out of time, out of place," and merely a temporary industry globally. https://lnkd.in/gbd_mZqk Commercial fusion electrical generation is a promising innovative sustainable and clean energy method. By 2028, Helion is expected to start producing electricity from its first fusion commercial power plant, which will provide electricity to Microsoft. The plant will produce at least 50 MWe after an initial ramp-up period. https://lnkd.in/gY9J3MQY Now see what is happening in the Fusion industry in the world. https://lnkd.in/g9hMBD7a As fission trebles, fuel shortage is increasingly real,

A landmark commitment by G7 nations which further strengthens supports the execution and imolementation of declaration at COP28 to triple nuclear power by 2050. It is hoped that this would encourage more nations to pursue similar commitment thus further contributing to the achievement of net zero goals

A watershed moment for nuclear to finally being officially recognized as clean energy with key role in addressing climate change/ climate crisis. This is important recognition at top international Ministerial level . Cop28 was also historic with 22 world leaders recognizing nuclear's role in contributing to net zero and for enhancing security and this IEA Communique is a culmination to the global recognition of nuclear.

One of the comments mentioned: "As the governor said, we’re looking forward to Vogtle FIVE!"{Emphasis added] Some Thoughts: (1) Plant Vogtle is already the LARGEST Generator of CLEAN Energy in the U.S. (2) Depending upon "WHEN" the decision to build Vogtle Unit 5 is made (Shorter the GAP seems should be more Advantageous), the following important Benefits should be viewed as "Low-hanging Fruit".! - Standard Design (Successfully Operating AP1000s) - Supply-Chain - Experienced Craftsmen - More Efficient Construction - Lower Risks All the above should result in relatively "Lower" COST and "Shorter" Project/Construction SCHEDULE.! Btw: Potential Future Vogtle Site could look like.! Vogtle 1&2(PWR)+Vogtle 3&4(AP1000)+Vogtle 5(REPLICATED AP1000) [ COST=$8.9B ] [ COST =$36.85B ] [ Must be "Cost-competitive"] [ COD=1987-89] [COD=2023-24 ] [ ON-Bugdet & ON-Schedule] Many UNIQUE Issues! <---------------Lower NORMALIZED $/KWe & $/MWhr----------------> #DATABASE (1970-2024)  

More nuclear power progress in America but none in Australia until we lift the bans and the economic viability, investment and jobs can flow in.