Reading List for 05/31/2025
Wind wars, ALARA, power plant water use, grassroots opposition to data centers, and more.
Welcome to the reading list, a weekly roundup of news and links related to buildings, infrastructure, and industrial technology. This week we look at wind wars, radiation limits, US power plant water use, grassroots opposition to data centers, and more. Roughly 2/3rds of the reading list is paywalled, so for full access become a paid subscriber.
A few housekeeping items this week:
Last week I tried out a new reading list format of more items with shorter descriptions of each. People largely seemed to prefer the old format, so I’ll continue to stick with that.
Some folks pointed out that the simplified energy analysis used in Can We Afford Large-scale Solar PV? misses some important factors that can affect the cost of large-scale solar PV deployment. For instance, my analysis used fairly simple energy accounting (how much capacity do we need to meet demand at any given time), but utilities have stricter requirements, based on concepts like Effective Load Carrying Capability (ELCC), which calculate how much additional capacity a resource can serve while maintaining a given level of reliability, and which may drive up the requirements for firm sources like gas turbines. I’m working on a more complex analysis that takes this and other factors into account.
Wind wars
Wind turbines generate power by extracting energy from moving air, and transforming it into electricity. This extraction means that wind slows down after it passes through a turbine (by around 40-50%), and that a turbine can cast a wind shadow on turbines downwind of it, reducing how much power they generate. In some places, such as the North Sea, these wake effects have resulted in wind farm owners accusing each other of “wind theft”. Via the BBC:
From an investment perspective, even relatively small wake effects can cause problems for offshore developers, Finserås says. "There are huge costs to building an offshore wind farm," he explains, due to the sheer scale of these farms as well as all the complex related work, including deploying special-purpose vessels. To justify their investment and make a profit, "it's very important for a developer to be able to project that the wind farm will produce a given amount of electricity for 25 or 30 years", the typical lifespan of a wind farm, he says. Even a relatively small, unexpected reduction in that energy output can upset this investment calculation and make the wind farm not financially viable, Finserås says.
If operators or countries try to avoid these wake effects by securing the best spots for themselves, it can create another risk, he warns: wake effects may cause what's known as "the 'race to the water' phenomenon, whereby states rush development in order to reap benefits from the best-yet available wind resources". Rushing development could then increase the risk of ignoring other important aspects of wind farm planning, such as protecting the marine environment, he says.
ALARA reconsidered?
Nuclear power enthusiasts often note that nuclear power is unreasonably harmed by a policy of ALARA: that radiation exposure should be “As Low As Reasonably Achievable”. In practice, this means that safety requirements constantly ratchet upward, driving up the costs of nuclear safety systems and making nuclear power uneconomic. ALARA, in turn, is based on a “Linear No Threshold” model of radiation damage (roughly, that risk from radiation increases linearly with dose, and there’s no dose that’s “safe” other than zero) which many experts feel is inaccurate.
A recent Trump executive order aimed at boosting nuclear power requires the Nuclear Regulatory Commission reconsider its use of the Linear No Threshold model. A recent piece on Works in Progress looks at the executive order, and the history of Linear No Threshold:
In 2013, GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy, a joint venture between General Electric and Hitachi, applied to build three advanced boiling water reactors in Wales. Fission reactions would boil water into steam, turning a turbine, powering a generator, and producing electricity. This specific design had been employed in four Japanese reactors, which had survived earthquakes of a greater magnitude than have ever hit the UK without posing any threat to workers or the public.
Even though the reactor had a flawless safety record, the UK’s Office for Nuclear Regulation was not satisfied. Over the course of a four and a half year process, it demanded a series of design changes. These included the installation of expensive, bulky filters on every heating, ventilation, and air conditioning duct in the reactor and turbine building, a new floorplan for the room in the plant’s facility that housed the filtration systems, and an entirely new layout for the facility’s ventilation ducts. This was justified on two grounds. First, it would optimise the ventilation system for accidents, despite the fact that the reactor design already had an entirely separate safety system, with redundancy built in, for this exact purpose. Second, it would cut radiation exposure during routine operation. As GE-Hitachi pointed out, this reduction amounted to 0.0001 millisieverts per year – the amount a human ingests when they consume a banana.
I’m optimistic about the potential for making nuclear cheaper by revisiting some of the safety assumptions that drive its expense, but as we noted a couple weeks ago, congress’ dismantling of the Loan Programs Office is very likely to hamstring any potential future US nuclear deployment.
BYD price reduction
Chinese cars are already gaining marketshare around the world thanks to their low cost and (apparently) surprisingly high quality. Now carmaker BYD is upping the ante by cutting prices even more, which it can do thanks to its vertical integration and resulting high margins. Its bestselling Seagull EV now costs less than $8000, down from $10,700 in 2023, and some models have been reduced in price by more than 30%. Via the Financial Times:
These price cuts come as the EV industry enters a new phase. While total sales remain high, growth is slowing. In China, dealerships held 3.5mn unsold EVs as of April, the highest level since December 2023.
Most carmakers would respond cautiously to a slowdown, cutting production and incentives. The reason BYD can afford to take the offensive is its unique cost structure rooted in vertical integration. It makes its own batteries, designs its chips and tightly controls operations.
That cost advantage means that when rivals cut prices, it is at the expense of fragile margins. When BYD cuts prices, it buys market share and future pricing power. Despite multiple rounds of price cuts in recent years, some as steep as 30 per cent, gross margins have continued to rise since 2021, reflecting its margin buffer.
In other BYD news, BYD is now outselling Tesla in Europe. Via the Wall Street Journal:
Tesla registered 7,165 battery-electric vehicles in Europe last month, down 49% from a year earlier, according to data from JATO Dynamics, a consumer-research group. In contrast, registrations for BYD more than doubled to 7,231 vehicles.
GM builds V8 plant
In the US, on the other hand, “slowing” EV sales have caused GM to pivot back towards internal combustion: it’s investing nearly a billion dollars in an ICE engine plant, and is planning a new V8 engine model that won’t start production until 2027. Via the Wall Street Journal:
General Motors has abandoned a plan to pump $300 million into electric-vehicle motor production at its upstate New York plant and will instead invest $888 million to make the latest V-8 engines.
Since the EV announcement two years ago for its Tonawanda plant, electric-vehicle sales have slowed, prompting GM and other carmakers to walk back investment plans for the technology.
The company said Tuesday its new plan marks its largest single investment in an engine plant…
It’s not clear to me what “slowing EV sales” really means here. GM’s quarterly income presentation, Cox automotive, and data from California car dealerships, all suggest GM EV sales are way up. Sandy Munro must be rolling in his (metaphorical) grave.