←back to thread

EU court rules nuclear energy is clean energy

(www.weplanet.org)
1041 points mpweiher | 2 comments | 12 Sep 25 18:18 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
aussiegreenie ◴[12 Sep 25 23:08 UTC] No.45227784[source]▶
Nuclear power is clean but VERY EXPENSIVE.

Dispatble solar and wind are about 1/5 the price of new nuclear.

replies(2): >>45229346 #>>45230128 #
casey2 ◴[13 Sep 25 04:40 UTC] No.45229346[source]▶
Your comment is just disinformation at this point. If nuclear was very expensive China wouldn't have built 30 in the last 10 years despite massive opposition.

In reality when you take all the costs into account there is no cheaper form of energy generation and there likely never will be, outside of cost decreases in Fission based nuclear itself.

replies(2): >>45229576 #>>45231259 #
oezi ◴[13 Sep 25 05:31 UTC] No.45229576[source]▶
It is hard for humans to work with exponential curves. Solar went from 15 cents per kwh to 5 cents per kwh over the last 10 years.

Anticipating such a rapid decline is hard and a lot of people still are stuck on outdated data.

Sure China commissioned these plants in the past and will plan more, but it won't be due to cost.

replies(1): >>45230894 #
1. pzo ◴[13 Sep 25 10:22 UTC] No.45230894[source]▶
But you don't need to work with exponential curves to know that you can use solar only for like half a day and even less during winter. Those solar installation now are big part of overall cost. And with majority of EU population living in flats where you gonna install them?
replies(1): >>45260131 #
2. oezi ◴[16 Sep 25 09:48 UTC] No.45260131[source]▶
Solar installations are already so cheap that they are cheaper than the fuel being burned in existing power plants. So it makes sense to have them replace this kind of fuel burning.

They are still getting cheaper so there is no stopping solar.

I have seen statistics showing that solar parks currently cover less area than there are Golf courses (at least in Europe).