←back to thread

177 points belter | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
mentalgear ◴[] No.43623495[source]
I, for one, welcome the solar age. Truly clean power that can be generated decentralised, on a regional, even local commune level.

It's wild how big companies, certain countries and billionaires are still holding on to nuclear fission (not fusion).

Nuclear reactors:

- take decades to build

- go massively over budget, at least 2x if not more [0]

- are inherently uneconomically: energy companies would never invest/build them on their own, only by lobbying governments for HUGE subsides (in various forms) do they get build

- inherently uninsurable: no private insurance company would insure a plant, again if private companies would need to build/run them on their own, every insurance company would deny them

- deconstructing them takes again billions and decades

- there's still no real-world solution (or even long-term secure storage) for nuclear waste in the world

---

Solar / Wind / Storage

Compare the 60 Billions for 1 single nuclear plant (UK) to what you would get from the same investment in solar (plus battery tech getting cheaper and better for storage). We are talking about differences in the magnitudes.

About the only value nuclear fission has is that's a central power source which gives the entities owning it huge power over the consumers.

[0] https://apnews.com/article/uk-nuclear-plant-hinkley-point-co...

replies(2): >>43623552 #>>43624230 #
1. ZeroGravitas ◴[] No.43624230[source]
The mention of nuclear in the article was weird:

> But [solar at 7%] remains eclipsed by wind, which grew to 8% last year, and nuclear to 9%.

Which is a bit mangled but seems to be suggesting nuclear grew to 9%.

Nuclear did grow slightly in absolute terms, but in percentage terms it hit a 45 year low as the total grew faster and so the share shrunk.