4 ms·

> we know we'll need Do we? Everything points to renewables like wind now. Of course there are problems to overcome but they’re not bigger than with nuclear po

> we know we'll need Do we? Everything points to renewables like wind now. Of course there are problems to overcome but they’re not bigger than with nuclear power.

arduanika 8y ago
"Everything points" Source (no pun intended)? See my comment elsewhere on this thread about "workers per watt", which is about solar, but the same applies almost as drastically to wind. You do the math. https://www.energy.gov/downloads/us-energy-and-employment-report https://www.energy.gov/downloads/us-energy-and-employment-re...
- will_pseudonym 8y ago
  Nuclear also has the lowest mortality rate of any energy source, 0.1 per terawatt-hour. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/#3b97817709b7 https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-d...
  - VyperCard 8y ago
    Given that the waste will be around thousands of years more, i don't see these numbers final yet, sorry.
- amanaplanacanal 8y ago
  Do you think we are going to run out of workers to support it? Renewables are already the cheapest form of new power in much of the US, cost of the workers included. I would think with the current thrust of automation, having these types of jobs available would be a welcome thing.
realusername 8y ago
Why would the future point to renewables? There's tremendous progress which is still possible with nuclear technology, compare that with wind which is mostly a solved turbine technology now, I doubt I will see a 30% gain from wind in my lifetime.
- olau 8y ago
  Unless you're planning to die tomorrow, you just need to wait a couple of years, and the price/MWh will have fallen 30% for wind, due to industrialization. There are some planned offshore parks in Northern Europe which were awarded without subsidies, i.e. the bidders think they can make money competing against already built and financed power plants.
  - realusername 8y ago
    You are talking about price, I talk about efficiency. The savings you gain with industrialisation aren't going to last forever. And I stand by my point, I'm unlikely to see a 30% gain in efficiency from wind in my lifetime, there's 200 years of incremental progress on turbines, I doubt we'll improve it by much.

> we know we'll need Do we? Everything points to renewables like wind now. Of course there are problems to overcome but they’re not bigger than with nuclear power.

arduanika 8y ago

"Everything points" Source (no pun intended)? See my comment elsewhere on this thread about "workers per watt", which is about solar, but the same applies almost as drastically to wind. You do the math. https://www.energy.gov/downloads/us-energy-and-employment-report https://www.energy.gov/downloads/us-energy-and-employment-re...

will_pseudonym 8y ago
Nuclear also has the lowest mortality rate of any energy source, 0.1 per terawatt-hour. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-deathprint-a-price-always-paid/#3b97817709b7 https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2012/06/10/energys-d...
- VyperCard 8y ago
  Given that the waste will be around thousands of years more, i don't see these numbers final yet, sorry.
amanaplanacanal 8y ago
Do you think we are going to run out of workers to support it? Renewables are already the cheapest form of new power in much of the US, cost of the workers included. I would think with the current thrust of automation, having these types of jobs available would be a welcome thing.

realusername 8y ago

Why would the future point to renewables? There's tremendous progress which is still possible with nuclear technology, compare that with wind which is mostly a solved turbine technology now, I doubt I will see a 30% gain from wind in my lifetime.

olau 8y ago
Unless you're planning to die tomorrow, you just need to wait a couple of years, and the price/MWh will have fallen 30% for wind, due to industrialization. There are some planned offshore parks in Northern Europe which were awarded without subsidies, i.e. the bidders think they can make money competing against already built and financed power plants.
- realusername 8y ago
  You are talking about price, I talk about efficiency. The savings you gain with industrialisation aren't going to last forever. And I stand by my point, I'm unlikely to see a 30% gain in efficiency from wind in my lifetime, there's 200 years of incremental progress on turbines, I doubt we'll improve it by much.