4 ms·

My state is building 2 new reactors and they will be the first to be built in the US in 30 years. Despite Westinghouse going bankrupt and a utility company in S

by wil421 4y ago

My state is building 2 new reactors and they will be the first to be built in the US in 30 years. Despite Westinghouse going bankrupt and a utility company in South Carolina deciding they don’t want to be a part of it, construction continues. Unit 3 will hopefully be fueled this year and start making power next year. Unit 4 will be a few years. You can’t produce power at night with solar and the wind is not always blowing. Nuclear is what will get us off coal and gas if we combine it with renewable energy. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vogtle_Electric_Generating_Plant https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vogtle_Electric_Generating_P...

pfdietz 4y ago
Vogtle 3/4 are coming in very expensive. Much more CO2 emission would have been avoided by spending that money to build PV and wind. Vogtle 3/4 also were greenlighted back in an environment when it wasn't clear PV would get so cheap so quickly. When it became clear how cheap renewables would become, it was obvious that initial decision was bad. The other nuclear build in the US, V. C. Summer, reached the point where they had spent the initial estimate but found the cost had doubled. At that point, it was as if they were asked to make the initial decision again, but now against much cheaper wind and solar. The reluctant conclusion was that continuing made no economic sense. It made no economic sense at Vogtle either, but politicians forced it to continue (the execs in SC were revenge prosecuted for stopping the gravy train.)
- wil421 4y ago
  There is no path to clean energy without nuclear. If you don’t have nuclear you are going to burn coal and gas. Germany invested heavily on renewables and is having similar issues. The costs overruns are being eaten by the huge Co-Op Georgia Power, they pay for overruns but the other stakeholders will lose their share. If you stop building reactors for 30 years it’s going to be an extremely massive undertaking only a government can handle. It will be up to the governments to subsides the costs.
  - pfdietz 4y ago
    > There is no path to clean energy without nuclear. Stop this lying, please. There's clear paths to clean energy without nuclear. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9837910 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9837910 > With every iteration in the research and with every technological breakthrough in these areas, 100% RE systems become increasingly viable. Even former critics must admit that adding e-fuels through PtX makes 100% RE possible at costs similar to fossil fuels.

by wil421 4y ago

pfdietz 4y ago

Vogtle 3/4 are coming in very expensive. Much more CO2 emission would have been avoided by spending that money to build PV and wind. Vogtle 3/4 also were greenlighted back in an environment when it wasn't clear PV would get so cheap so quickly. When it became clear how cheap renewables would become, it was obvious that initial decision was bad. The other nuclear build in the US, V. C. Summer, reached the point where they had spent the initial estimate but found the cost had doubled. At that point, it was as if they were asked to make the initial decision again, but now against much cheaper wind and solar. The reluctant conclusion was that continuing made no economic sense. It made no economic sense at Vogtle either, but politicians forced it to continue (the execs in SC were revenge prosecuted for stopping the gravy train.)

wil421 4y ago
There is no path to clean energy without nuclear. If you don’t have nuclear you are going to burn coal and gas. Germany invested heavily on renewables and is having similar issues. The costs overruns are being eaten by the huge Co-Op Georgia Power, they pay for overruns but the other stakeholders will lose their share. If you stop building reactors for 30 years it’s going to be an extremely massive undertaking only a government can handle. It will be up to the governments to subsides the costs.
- pfdietz 4y ago
  > There is no path to clean energy without nuclear. Stop this lying, please. There's clear paths to clean energy without nuclear. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9837910 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9837910 > With every iteration in the research and with every technological breakthrough in these areas, 100% RE systems become increasingly viable. Even former critics must admit that adding e-fuels through PtX makes 100% RE possible at costs similar to fossil fuels.