• Sonori@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      At first glance I thought it was reuseing the coal plants turbines, but looking though the article the only connection I can find is that it’s located several miles away and the only connection is that it plans to hire a hundred or so people from the coal plant it’s replacing and that Wyoming’s powder river basin is nearby and its associated highly automated low sulfur coal mines are in the vauge area.

      All this to say, yes it has practically nothing to do with coal.

      • Dempf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I wonder if it has to do with reusing the transmission lines from the coal plant.

    • jjagaimo@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Coal plant burns coal to heat water, makes steam, and the steam powers a turbine to produce electricity. A nuclear power plant uses nuclear fuel to heat water and produce steam similar to a coal plant. It may do this indirectly (e.g. second loop between the nuclear fuel and water loop to prevent the water becoming radioactive). This means that to build a nuclear plant you essentially need to build a coal plant, and then also the nuclear reactor and safety stuff, which makes them more expensive. Since coal plants are being turned off anyways, it might be more cost effective to just retrofit old coal plants so the only cost is the nuclear reactor side of things (plus any necessary maintenance and upgrades)