3 ms·
It shouldn't be surprising that the US can't build nuclear reactors in a reasonable time or budget. We can't do it for subways or high-speed rail either. Meanw
by DennisP 4y ago
It shouldn't be surprising that the US can't build nuclear reactors in a reasonable time or budget. We can't do it for subways or high-speed rail either.
Meanwhile, as of May 2022 there were 53 nuclear reactors under construction worldwide.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/513671/number-of-under-construction-nuclear-reactors-worldwide/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/513671/number-of-under-c...
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A1B_reactor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A1B_reactor
- pfdietz 4y agoWe can build solar or wind fields just fine though. They typically come in with 10% of the projected cost.
- DennisP 4y agoYes, and we should do a lot of that, though bearing in mind that we're also terrible at building long-distance transmission. Some projects have languished for decades. For countries with worse wind/solar resources and better ability to build large infrastructure, nuclear is a decent option, which is why 53 reactors are under construction.
- Schroedingersat 4y agoEven if all of those reactors were on time and on budget (23 are behind schedule), that's still less net generating capacity each year than just the wind power of just the US (who are almost as bad at building wind as they are nuclear). It's not a US problem. It's just that nuclear reactors are not a good way of making electricity.