Renewables total cost of ownership is significantly lower. Nuclear is not required anymore.
Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
311–320 of 731 posts
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#312Can we just get something straight about the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant? Although it was a 1960's design, the reason it failed the way it did was because of one design flaw... Its backup generators were not placed up on the hills above it. Rather, the backup generators were situated below sea level underneath the reactor buildings. DERP. Fukushima Dai-ichi survived the Magnitude 9 earthquake. It did not s…
Also the generators were originally situated in a raised location but had been moved to the ground level after their installation. If the generators had not been moved they would have functioned through the tsunami.
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#313I am pro-Nuclear power as long as we keep the power plant as well as the spent fuel in your backyard.
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#314Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s not what happens with next-gen renewables —- they are modular and can be built much faster and much cheaper. New build nuclear is not cost competitive with new build wind and solar (even when you account for firming costs), and the cost of wind and solar is still falling at an astonishing rate.
> New build nuclear is not cost competitive with new build wind and solar (even when you account for firming costs), and the cost of wind and solar is still falling at an astonishing rate. The future will tell, as it is now, Germany already spent more on renewable than the total French nuclear industry, even when you add decommissioning and with the bad results we know. Maybe countries should learn on the German mist…
Germany already spent more on renewable than the total French nuclear industry
Source? What does that even mean? Where'd you find an honest assessment of the regulatory and construction costs for France's nuclear power plants, much less a sensible estimate for decommissioning plants that are still running? Does it include research and development in either case? Does it include maintenance, personnel, fuel, cleanup, storage of spent fuel both temporarily and long term?
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#315Renewable energy is cheaper than nuclear, or will be imminently. Proponents of nuclear tend to ignore the long-run costs associated with nuclear (eg. waste transport and storage), and the potential for cost blowouts due to acute disasters like Fukushima (estimated cost to taxpayers: USD $100 Billion). The fact tax money is going towards Fukushima highlights another problem with nuclear power: the agency problem. The…
>Renewable energy is cheaper than nuclear, or will be imminently.
Solar and wind are plenty cheap. That's not their problem. The problem, as the article stated, is that "they are not available around the clock, rain or shine, and batteries that could power entire cities for days or weeks show no sign of materializing any time soon."
So now what do you do?
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#316Nuclear power can save the world.... If the US can build reactors at 1/10th the cost they do right now. That’s the solution. Not the much cheaper clean energy sources that already exist and are being built out in record numbers... Nuclear is great. It just loses out because it’s too expensive and worse, it gets more expensive with time. If the reasoning behind that is based on irrational human fears then first propos…
> It just loses out because it’s too expensive and worse, it gets more expensive with time. "The estimated cost of the remaining border wall segments are between $15 and $25 billion, with each mile of fencing costing $16 million." [1] "The total investment for the stellarator itself over 1997–2014 amounted to €370 million, while the total cost for the IPP site in Greifswald including investment plus operating costs (…
Wendelstein is an experiment, many decades away from a practical application. The ITER is expected to cost >20bn €
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#317Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that "taking all disaster scenarios into account" is easy in hindsight, but maybe not in planning. But I believe that modern nuclear power reactors can be build intrinsically safe. For me, the real problem begins with the treatment of the waste: It's hard to find a good place to store it or reprocess it. Not so much because finding the actual place is hard, but because using that place will face hard o…
A considerable part of the waste can be reprocessed and further burned in fast breeder reactors, creating fuel for the conventional ones. The rest can be vitrified and stored. Why we don't already do this? Fear of nuclear proliferation, breeders are quite expensive, anti nuclear sentiment.
What are the radioactive properties of the end product like? E.g. does this produce waste with longer half lives? Lower initial radiation?
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#318Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, this is anecdotal evidence. But having grew up there I obviously read up about it a lot and this is why I am speaking my opinion on this matter. Also, in my opinion, what I saw written about it in the US media is fear mongering or outright lies about death tolls, radiation levels in nearby areas, cancer rates, etc. To give you an example. Did you know that CNPP was profitably working until 2000 while the disaste…
Yes but the RBMK is still an irresponsible design: highly positive void coeficient, no containment, then the control rod misdesign which was fixed. VVER reactors (Russian PWRs) are much more safer by contrast. Of course it was profitable, it ran on natural Uranium and it was cheaper to build (no containnent). You should watch the "A is for Atom" episode from Adam Curtis "Pandora's Box" series. It also talks about US…
I am not advocating for building more CNPP - like plants. Those reactors are obsolete. There are much, much safer options now ( such as generation 3 reactors in US).
However, even those older designes are statistically much safer than coal - how many people died just in coal mines colapses?
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#319Renewable energy is cheaper than nuclear, or will be imminently. Proponents of nuclear tend to ignore the long-run costs associated with nuclear (eg. waste transport and storage), and the potential for cost blowouts due to acute disasters like Fukushima (estimated cost to taxpayers: USD $100 Billion). The fact tax money is going towards Fukushima highlights another problem with nuclear power: the agency problem. The…
Somebody gets it! It makes absolutely no sense to start building nuclear now. Even if you could guarantee 10 year build time at a fixed cost today (which you can't), by the time it is operational solar+storage will be even more economical than it is today. The cost curves are simply too favorable for any private market to favor nuclear over solar currently. Everyone in this thread keeps talking about the technology,…
>It makes absolutely no sense to start building nuclear now.
Imagine if the developed world invested in nuclear to the extent that France did in the 60s and 70s - how many trillions of tons of CO2 would NOT have been emitted into the atmosphere? You can talk about Republican denialism, but it is anti-nuke lobby that will be held responsible for climate change.
>by the time it is operational solar+storage will be even more economical than it is today.
Will it? Will the sun shine at night? when it's cloudy? No? Then it doesn't matter how cheap solar and wind are. You're not going to use either as a cornerstone of modern energy generation. So if not solar and wind, then what else is left? Germany knows - they are signing multi-decade deals for natural gas and coal-based power (from Russia and neighbors), as they are shutting down their nuclear plants.
Re: Nuclear power is the fastest way to slash greenhouse gas emissions, decarbonize
#320Hi Everyone,
My name is Sam Samida-Pugh, and I am the CEO and Founder of Progressive Fusion Solutions (PFS), a fusion energy research company I started when I was 16. I've been operating PFS for 2 years now, and so far, our team has constructed 2 fusion reactors, raised $17k in funding, and presented our research at TRIUMF, Canadas National Lab for Particle Physics. Our fusion area of focus is that of the Polywell, a method of fusion which is commercially viable on a small, and inexpensive scale in relation to other fusion projects. We have 3 patents on the Polywell, and it is our goal to demonstrate energy extraction from one of our models by 2025. Currently, we are looking to raise $2 million to advance our company to its 3rd stage this year. If anyone is interested in learning more, or is aware of anyone who may be interested, then I kindly invite you to visit our website: https://www.progressivefusionsolution.com/, or send me an email through progressivefusionsolutions@gmail.com.
Cheers, Sam