what would be the cost of converting nuclear plants into solar electric plants??

Question

would it really be that astronomical? couldn't people be retrained and keep their jobs??? wouldn't this be better for the enviornment AND the economy, and SAVE money buy not building new plants?

Answer 1

Why would we do such a thing? The two technologies are totally different. There is little commonality upon which to build (or rebuild) when converting from one to the other.

Case in point...solar electricity comes from photo-electric cells. These are cells that produce electricity directly from the solar energy that strikes them. There are no intermediate steps between sun and electricity. Further, it would take acres of photoelectric cells to create the electrical power equivalent to a typical nuclear power plant. That is, solar plants require a lot of land (which is why many are in open desert areas), while nuclear power plants are much more compact.

On the other hand, nuclear power plants start with the source of energy, the nuclear pile, and convert the heat produced by that pile into some sort of propulsion energy. Typically, that means creating superheated steam. But to avoid irradiating the water, there is usually a step where the pile's heat heats up another liquid, like a form of liquid sodium, which is then carried to where the water is. The steam then propels generators that, finally, generate the electricity. In other words, there are several intermediate steps between the nuclear power and the electrical power. And photo-electric cells need none of those steps.

The bottom line is this...photo-electric power plants are so different from nuclear power plants that it would be far cheaper to build new solar plants on new grounds than to rebuild the nuclear power plants on the same grounds.

Answer 2

Yes, it would be very astronomical. A solar plant would not be as efficient as a nuclear plant and thus would not save any money. That's why solar plants are not in abundance. It might be better to install solar panels in each housing unit and combine that with other sources of electricity, via nuclear, fossil fuel etc.

Job skills are different and not all employees will be retained. In all, not a practical thing to do.

Answer 3

Just the sheer size that a solar plant would have to be to take place of a nuclear one is prohibitive. And the first responder is correct in saying that solar plants have their own type of environmental concerns.

Answer 4

a) why on earth would you want to?
b) a nuclear power plant consists of a few buildings and cooling apparatus. solar electricity is produced in solar panels. I suppose you could place a few solar panels on the roof the buildings but that won't exactly provide much electricity.

nuclear power provides 20% of the US electricity. coal is 71%, hydroelectric is 7%, the remainder is odds and ends like solar.

nuclear power, contrary to your beliefs, is very very much cleaner than coal. if you want to make an impact on greenhouse gases and our environment why not propose we switch from coal to nuclear instead of nuclear to solar

the problem with solar power is this... 1) the efficiency of the panels is low. say 10%. 2) the panels are very expensive, 3) power production varies due to weather and time of day. the links below claim solar electricity is 10x the price of coal (this is low I think because you have to buy massive amounts of land to place the panels)

in addition, in the US, we have 103 operating nuclear power plants that produce 7.4 x 10^10 kwh of electricity. that's an average of about 7.2 x 10^8 kwh per plant. Solar panels operating at the standard 10% efficiency produce 5,000 kwh per 10,000 m^2

so,

7.2 x 10^ 8 kwh x ( 10,000 m^2 / 5,000 kwh) x (1 mi^2 / 2.59 x 10^6 m^2) = 556 square miles

if you consider that you would probaby need say 25% spacing between solar panels for maintenance, then you need area about say, 900 square miles. 30 miles x 30 miles each way covered with solar panels to produce as much electricity as 1 nuclear power plant.

To replace 103 nuclear plants, you would need an area about the size of colorado. Given that it would be a bit expensive to buy colorado and build 100,000 square miles of solar panels there, it's not realistic. The cost would be infinite.

my apologies, forgot to mention. let's say you wanted to produce all our electrical needs from solar power. Since my calculation above was for nuclear power vs solar power, and since nuclear is 1/5 of our power supply, you would need 5 times that or 5 colorados covered with solar panels to meet all our electrical needs. that's about 1/7 of the entire US. That would create a totally different set of environmental concerns.

solar power is interesting but not capable of providing all of our electrical needs

Answer 5

very little of our power comes from nuclear plants, and the only problem with nuclear plants is what to do with the waste. Nuclear power plants are cheaper to maintain but more expensive to build. Coal power plants, however, are much more common and they are cheaper to build but more expensive to maintain. Personally I hope we all convert to solar power (cars, homes, etc.) eventually, but since solar power needs less maintenance, I assume many people would lose their jobs. Retraining is a possibility, whether it's for solar power plants or for something else they'd prefer, but it is a large setback for people who care more for the human aspect as opposed to the environmental, and yes, it would be hugely expensive.

Answer 6

You can't convert them. You'd have to build new plants. And yes, the cost would be astronomical to generate a similar amount of energy. And it would have environmental consequences of it's own. Solar energy has its place, but sorry, the idea's a non-starter.

I can't wait for floodtl to weigh in on this one. :)

Answer 7

Guide To Solar Power : http://Solar.eudko.com/?vWk

Answer 8

Nuclear power supplies much of the electricity to this country. So my question to you is, what if you have a week of clouds and rain, no sunlight, where are you going to get electricity from? And at night, how will the plant produce power?

Answer 9

not sure, but likely in the astronomical range...
nuclear power is an excellent power source and we would be better served building NEW nuclear plants...

Answer 10

Imbecile!

Imagine trying to actually convert one. lol! Could somebody rip the cables out of the generators and scrap the rest please! Now bring in those solar panels!