4 ms·

The renewables vs. fossil vs. nuclear issues have been debated extensively over the decades. There are two game changers today: fracking and lower-cost solar.

The renewables vs. fossil vs. nuclear issues have been debated extensively over the decades. There are two game changers today: fracking and lower-cost solar. Fracking has totally changed the equation. Natural gas has blown away oil and coal in power generation, and solar (when combined with the federal tax incentive) is finally becoming competitive with traditional utilities. Nuclear is appealing for various reasons, mainly the avoidance of combustion and carbon release, and also the technology has advanced greatly since its heyday in the '70s. Pebble reactors, micro reactors, better waste processing are compelling reasons to consider a renewed push into nuclear. But as more residences and commercial buildings adopt solar, and fracked gas (plus vast new gas field discoveries in the Mediterranean and elsewhere) continues to be extremely available and competitive, nuclear looks increasingly like an also-ran. Still, nuclear has a great future in orbital and interplanetary spacecraft, where miniaturization and reliability are paramount, and safety and affordability are secondary (just locate the nuclear plant at the tail end of the ship behind a few feet of shielding).

ci5er 10y ago
Also, we have a pretty good idea how far we can practically, economically, push things like solar/wind, IF storage is worked out. The processes of converting photons and wind into electron potential are well understood - it's just math. But, with storage - renewable power is still never going to be "free-ish". More cost-effective than burning hydrocarbons, maybe, but cheaper is not "free". What if we could bootstrap our way to free-ish? To do so, we'd have to develop the technology further than it has been developed so far today - and that's an evolutionary process. It would take decades of sustained R&D. But, the carrot is huge -- one benefit would be that we'd never have to worry about fresh water - anywhere - ever again. Nuclear, then nuclear++, then nuclear+++ offers us this hope, to a degree that renewables do not.

ci5er 10y ago

Also, we have a pretty good idea how far we can practically, economically, push things like solar/wind, IF storage is worked out. The processes of converting photons and wind into electron potential are well understood - it's just math. But, with storage - renewable power is still never going to be "free-ish". More cost-effective than burning hydrocarbons, maybe, but cheaper is not "free". What if we could bootstrap our way to free-ish? To do so, we'd have to develop the technology further than it has been developed so far today - and that's an evolutionary process. It would take decades of sustained R&D. But, the carrot is huge -- one benefit would be that we'd never have to worry about fresh water - anywhere - ever again. Nuclear, then nuclear++, then nuclear+++ offers us this hope, to a degree that renewables do not.