←back to thread

1041 points mpweiher | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
yellowapple ◴[] No.45225313[source]
[flagged]
replies(12): >>45225401 #>>45225408 #>>45225486 #>>45225487 #>>45225540 #>>45225582 #>>45225601 #>>45225657 #>>45225689 #>>45225714 #>>45227579 #>>45228776 #
V__ ◴[] No.45225582[source]
I agree that the fears are overblown, but at the same time the hype for nuclear is just weird. It's more complex, more expensive, less adjustable and more risky. Even the new hip small modular reactors are many years away.

The LCOE (Levelized Cost of Electricity) for solar with battery is already better than current solutions, and dropping. Wind and battery closely following. There is no way that nuclear technology will be able to compete on price in the foreseeable future.

replies(6): >>45225618 #>>45225651 #>>45225662 #>>45225749 #>>45226158 #>>45226373 #
oceanplexian ◴[] No.45225618[source]
How is the hype for a limitless clean energy source, something that could benefit every aspect of humanity more than any other invention in human history considered “weird”?
replies(3): >>45225658 #>>45225666 #>>45225865 #
delusional ◴[] No.45225666[source]
> limitless clean energy source

Like the guy you're responding to, I'm not a nuclear hater. We also have other "limitless clean energy sources" however, wind and solar.

How is nuclear going to benefit humanity in ways electrical energy hasn't already? We haven't been energy constrained in the past 10-20 years. It really doesn't seem like additional energy production is going to make that much of a difference.

replies(2): >>45225720 #>>45227582 #
1. throwawayffffas ◴[] No.45227582[source]
There are hard limits on wind and solar.