We can have plenty of both.
replies(1):
In the meantime how many GWh of wind, solar, and battery storage can they install without waiting?
A recent detailed CSIRO report on exactly this considered nuclear modular reactors to be a dud option that kicked the can down the road while continuing a reliance on fossil fuel for power generation.
Renewables were judged the pragmatic best bang for the buck in a multi decade near timeframe.
And wind, even if it was not a pipe dream, does not escape this. Norway cannot make wind power feasible at all, it will never be able to do that, because even if it could in theory be feasible, which I doubt, our regulation makes it impossible even after the government has thrown billions of dollars of our tax money after it.
We do not need wind, wind is not faster, it's not better, it's not going to fix Europe's energy crisis. Nuclear can and will, but the impediment there is not the nuclear industry, its the crony European politicians that run our economy in China's favour.
Nuclear is still needed since expanding hydro isn't an option. And it's great for district heating in the north
You are right about regulations but even if you fix em now, framatome and whouse are just some shadows of what they've been in the past compared to current rosatom/chinese nuclear. Ramping up to the past lvl will be hard.
Fyi, I'm not sure but I think the statement about funding Ukraine is a bit misleading because EU as a whole and each EU country have different funding and budget mechanisms. Maybe I'm wrong but I remember I've read something about this in the past
> Europe estimated to have bought €22bn of fossil fuels from Russia in 2024 but gave €19bn to support Kyiv
Norway was never anywhere near having drought problems and what the Labour Party did has not reduced water usage by Hydro at all, they made it worse.
It's not the most expensive form. Some current builds are expensive, but it generally can provide for very cheap. Check out Goesgen open data for Switzerland
Norway does definitely have problems to takle
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2022/08/20/n... https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/southern-norway-...
Wind works well, especially offshore: there are 1133 GW of installed wind capacity globally in 2024, so it seems to be working for somebody. This is compared to 377 GW of nuclear globally.
In 2024, the cost for storing nuclear waste just up until 2100 was estimated to be 170 Bln. [1]
This cost is always, without exception, excluded in the calculation of the cost of generating a MWh. It's externalized, paid for by the next generations of taxpayers.
Gösgen's open data, just like all the other data, does not include waste management cost.
Gösgen is a perfect example for how brittle and outdated the technology is. The nuclear plant is off the grid since May 2025 and will remain down until at least February 2026 [2]
Just like the newly-built Flamanville 3 (12 years late, 10+Bln over budget), it's off the grid until further notice. [3]
The world is phasing out nuclear.
[0] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endlagersuche_in_Deutschland
[1] https://www.zeit.de/wissen/2024-08/atommuell-endlager-suche-...
[2] https://www.schwarzwaelder-bote.de/inhalt.akw-faellt-aus-ker...
[3] https://www.energy-charts.info/charts/power/chart.htm?l=en&c...
2- It's covered by kenfo, auto reinvested fund paid by operators. It has about 24bn. In comparison Onkalo in Finland did cost 1bn to build. A similar repository is built in Sweden in Fosmark
3- Goesgen data does include the tax for both waste handling and decommissioning, didn't you read the data?
4- you don't seem to understand why Goesgen is offline. It's not about being brittle. They installed new equipment that performed too good and they need to upgrade other connected components
5- Flamanville did cost merely ~a single year of German EEG subsidies for renewables
6- 2024 was record TWh from nuclear, for like, ever. It'll grow more, mostly due to Asia unless Hitachi/Whous/EDF will do something