4 ms·

I feel like most people I know who push Nuclear are already arguing for the use of both, and it’s the renewable side that argues that Nuclear is too dangerous t

I feel like most people I know who push Nuclear are already arguing for the use of both, and it’s the renewable side that argues that Nuclear is too dangerous to use or not necessary. Or have you come across a lot of Nuclear proponents arguing that we shouldn’t be using solar energy at all?

wolfram74 3y ago
I was very pro nuclear a few years ago, at this point solar is so far up the learning curve and experiences so many economy of scale benefits, it's really hard imagining what kind of regulatory framework would be able to make it economically competitive. We collectively in the form of consumers and governments decide how expensive a thing is, and for 50 years, thanks in part to a lot of coal lobby money, decided nuclear should be more expensive than coal, so we got all the radiation /and/ all the CO2 associated with coal power plants, we can't change that history at this point.
- Gwypaas 3y ago
  The thing missing from your conclusion is simply combined cycle gas plants. Take an airplane engine, benifiting from that huge industry and add a tiny steam side and you have something way smaller, cheaper and more efficient than any coal plant. Nuclear is a super complicated coal plant regarding how the thermal engine works. Pure steam plants have simply been obsolete the last 30 years, and renewables are making it even worse by outcompeting gas plants.
runarberg 3y ago
The author of this article for one is someone who does not believe renewables should coexist with anything. Preferring continued use of coal over expanding renewables: > Possibly, wind, solar, and utility-scale batteries can play some role in consistent electricity. Until that takes place coal, natural gas, and nuclear are the only sources of energy to electricity that provide this benefit for grid stabilization and human longevity. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/coal-versus-wind-renewables-and-electrical-grids-who-wins-179430 https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/coal-versus-wind-rene...
epistasis 3y ago
The only people I meet who argue in favor of nuclear also spend a ton of time arguing against solar, wind, and storage. They also actively promote outdated incorrect knowledge of these technologies. YMMV, of course! For an example in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35658964 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35658964
- NineStarPoint 3y ago
  I do find it pretty crazy that anyone would argue against solar (and wind where it’s viable) at this point, it’s just way too cost efficient. (The feasibility and cost of grid scale storage is where my concerns lie)

wolfram74 3y ago

I was very pro nuclear a few years ago, at this point solar is so far up the learning curve and experiences so many economy of scale benefits, it's really hard imagining what kind of regulatory framework would be able to make it economically competitive. We collectively in the form of consumers and governments decide how expensive a thing is, and for 50 years, thanks in part to a lot of coal lobby money, decided nuclear should be more expensive than coal, so we got all the radiation /and/ all the CO2 associated with coal power plants, we can't change that history at this point.

Gwypaas 3y ago
The thing missing from your conclusion is simply combined cycle gas plants. Take an airplane engine, benifiting from that huge industry and add a tiny steam side and you have something way smaller, cheaper and more efficient than any coal plant. Nuclear is a super complicated coal plant regarding how the thermal engine works. Pure steam plants have simply been obsolete the last 30 years, and renewables are making it even worse by outcompeting gas plants.

runarberg 3y ago

The author of this article for one is someone who does not believe renewables should coexist with anything. Preferring continued use of coal over expanding renewables: > Possibly, wind, solar, and utility-scale batteries can play some role in consistent electricity. Until that takes place coal, natural gas, and nuclear are the only sources of energy to electricity that provide this benefit for grid stabilization and human longevity. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/coal-versus-wind-renewables-and-electrical-grids-who-wins-179430 https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/coal-versus-wind-rene...

epistasis 3y ago

The only people I meet who argue in favor of nuclear also spend a ton of time arguing against solar, wind, and storage. They also actively promote outdated incorrect knowledge of these technologies. YMMV, of course! For an example in this thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35658964 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35658964

NineStarPoint 3y ago
I do find it pretty crazy that anyone would argue against solar (and wind where it’s viable) at this point, it’s just way too cost efficient. (The feasibility and cost of grid scale storage is where my concerns lie)