3 ms·

The parent commenters argument was based on zero reports so I think my comment was appropriate. But even your link shows for France in €/MWh in 2017: 20 Hydro

by amai 6y ago

The parent commenters argument was based on zero reports so I think my comment was appropriate. But even your link shows for France in €/MWh in 2017: 20 Hydro power 43.24 Solar farms 50 Nuclear (with state-covered insurance costs) 60 Onshore wind 61 Natural gas turbines without CO2 capture 100 Nuclear EPR So nuclear is never cheaper than solar and only cheaper than wind if the state is covering the insurance cost! And your argument about nuclear ramping up and down at will only works, if you have enough Uranium available. Where do you buy your Uranium? How long will the Uranium reserves last? And where will you deposit the nuclear waste? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwY2E0hjGuU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwY2E0hjGuU

Youden 6y ago
> So nuclear is never cheaper than solar The price of solar doesn't include energy storage, so the two can't be easily compared. > if the state is covering the insurance cost Yes, though I'd be interested to know what those costs actually are. > if you have enough Uranium available. Where do you buy your Uranium? How long will the Uranium reserves last? Australia and Canada, both allied countries (to France/Germany), have megatons of the stuff [0]. Current reserves are enough to last about 90 years [0] but exploration is limited, more deposits likely exist. Spent fuel rods can also be reprocessed [1]. > And where will you deposit the nuclear waste? First, reprocess it [1]. When it's finally done for good, bury it deep in the ground [2]. Remember, nuclear isn't a new technology. It's been around for decades and solutions to these problems exist. [0]: https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/uranium-resources/supply-of-uranium.aspx https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fu... [1]: https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/conversion-enrichment-and-fabrication/uranium-enrichment.aspx https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fu... [2]: https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-waste/storage-and-disposal-of-radioactive-waste.aspx https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fu...
- amai 6y ago
  > bury it deep in the ground [2] Countries try to find suitable places to put their nuclear waste for 60 years now and haven't managed to select a single one, yet. The process costs billions of dollars of tax payers money. And it is roughly as fast as the invention of nuclear fusion. The success is always only 30 years away in the future. When you're riding a dead horse the best strategy is to get off.

by amai 6y ago

Youden 6y ago

> So nuclear is never cheaper than solar The price of solar doesn't include energy storage, so the two can't be easily compared. > if the state is covering the insurance cost Yes, though I'd be interested to know what those costs actually are. > if you have enough Uranium available. Where do you buy your Uranium? How long will the Uranium reserves last? Australia and Canada, both allied countries (to France/Germany), have megatons of the stuff [0]. Current reserves are enough to last about 90 years [0] but exploration is limited, more deposits likely exist. Spent fuel rods can also be reprocessed [1]. > And where will you deposit the nuclear waste? First, reprocess it [1]. When it's finally done for good, bury it deep in the ground [2]. Remember, nuclear isn't a new technology. It's been around for decades and solutions to these problems exist. [0]: https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/uranium-resources/supply-of-uranium.aspx https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fu... [1]: https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/conversion-enrichment-and-fabrication/uranium-enrichment.aspx https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fu... [2]: https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/nuclear-waste/storage-and-disposal-of-radioactive-waste.aspx https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fu...

amai 6y ago
> bury it deep in the ground [2] Countries try to find suitable places to put their nuclear waste for 60 years now and haven't managed to select a single one, yet. The process costs billions of dollars of tax payers money. And it is roughly as fast as the invention of nuclear fusion. The success is always only 30 years away in the future. When you're riding a dead horse the best strategy is to get off.