4 ms·

There is definitely a use case for nuclear, but the discussion absolutely should not be renewables vs. nuclear, but renewables and nuclear vs. fossile fuels. Nu

There is definitely a use case for nuclear, but the discussion absolutely should not be renewables vs. nuclear, but renewables and nuclear vs. fossile fuels. Nuclear advocates should celebrate every advance in renewables and vice versa.

stavros 3y ago
I find it very suspicious that the debate has been framed as "renewables vs nuclear" while we keep burning fossil fuels.
- karmakurtisaani 3y ago
  I wouldn't be surprised if the FF industry was driving this narrative, but I can also see it happening organically. A lot of the "green" people, especially in Germany are fanatically anti-nuclear. At the same time, the right-wing populists seem to have adopted the position that climate change can only be countered with nuclear power. I'm not sure why that is, probably because it's an easy answer and positions them against the green parties - after all, they cannot agree with their perceived enemies.
  - starwatch 3y ago
    I think the German "green" case (to a degree) comes from the Chernobyl meltdown happening relatively nearby. It is in living memory for those power so it's understandable that they shy away from it. I should add that meaningful advances have been made in nuclear power station design. But unfortunately these advances can't withstand other problems e.g. Russia putting operational power stations at risk as they invade Ukraine.
Gwypaas 3y ago
The problem is that renewables and nuclear are economically incompatible. They compete for the slice that is the cheapest and most inflexible, both requiring dispatchable power to fill the gaps. Renewables easily win this battle as the cost for new built renewables are in the same range as operations and maintenance for paid off nuclear plants. For nuclear this inflexibility comes from pure economics. It is economic suicide to build a new plant and operate it at 100%, now try operating it at less than 50% on average.
- karmakurtisaani 3y ago
  Yep, and that's what we are currently seeing unfold. However, there must be use cases for nuclear as base load or some kind of supplementary power with mini reactors. I only hope these options get considered as viable alternative, rather than being dismissed ideologically.
  - Gwypaas 3y ago
    The ideological perspective would not exist if nuclear was economic. It is simply an easy boogeyman to blame. SMR are not looking that hot either, looks like the prevalent truth from the 70 years of nuclear construction: that bigger is better due to the large fixed costs, stays true even in 2023. https://www.wired.com/story/the-dream-of-mini-nuclear-plants-hangs-in-the-balance/ https://www.wired.com/story/the-dream-of-mini-nuclear-plants...
    - karmakurtisaani 3y ago
      That sounds very reasonable. However, where I've seen this ideological aspect is for example in Finland where the permits for nuclear plants are very difficult to obtain. So once a permit is granted, they want to make as massive plants as possible, leading to big risks in construction (see Olkiluoto 3 for example, one of the most expensive constructions in history).
      - pyrale 3y ago
        > see Olkiluoto 3 for example, one of the most expensive constructions in history Dimensioning of Olkiluoto 3 is unrelated to Finnish regulation, the reactor was designed by France and Germany based on economies of scales, not specifically for a local project.
        karmakurtisaani 3y ago
        Yes, but only 1 permission for a plant was given in what, 20 years?

stavros 3y ago

I find it very suspicious that the debate has been framed as "renewables vs nuclear" while we keep burning fossil fuels.

karmakurtisaani 3y ago
I wouldn't be surprised if the FF industry was driving this narrative, but I can also see it happening organically. A lot of the "green" people, especially in Germany are fanatically anti-nuclear. At the same time, the right-wing populists seem to have adopted the position that climate change can only be countered with nuclear power. I'm not sure why that is, probably because it's an easy answer and positions them against the green parties - after all, they cannot agree with their perceived enemies.
- starwatch 3y ago
  I think the German "green" case (to a degree) comes from the Chernobyl meltdown happening relatively nearby. It is in living memory for those power so it's understandable that they shy away from it. I should add that meaningful advances have been made in nuclear power station design. But unfortunately these advances can't withstand other problems e.g. Russia putting operational power stations at risk as they invade Ukraine.

Gwypaas 3y ago

The problem is that renewables and nuclear are economically incompatible. They compete for the slice that is the cheapest and most inflexible, both requiring dispatchable power to fill the gaps. Renewables easily win this battle as the cost for new built renewables are in the same range as operations and maintenance for paid off nuclear plants. For nuclear this inflexibility comes from pure economics. It is economic suicide to build a new plant and operate it at 100%, now try operating it at less than 50% on average.

karmakurtisaani 3y ago
Yep, and that's what we are currently seeing unfold. However, there must be use cases for nuclear as base load or some kind of supplementary power with mini reactors. I only hope these options get considered as viable alternative, rather than being dismissed ideologically.
- Gwypaas 3y ago
  The ideological perspective would not exist if nuclear was economic. It is simply an easy boogeyman to blame. SMR are not looking that hot either, looks like the prevalent truth from the 70 years of nuclear construction: that bigger is better due to the large fixed costs, stays true even in 2023. https://www.wired.com/story/the-dream-of-mini-nuclear-plants-hangs-in-the-balance/ https://www.wired.com/story/the-dream-of-mini-nuclear-plants...
  - karmakurtisaani 3y ago
    That sounds very reasonable. However, where I've seen this ideological aspect is for example in Finland where the permits for nuclear plants are very difficult to obtain. So once a permit is granted, they want to make as massive plants as possible, leading to big risks in construction (see Olkiluoto 3 for example, one of the most expensive constructions in history).
    - pyrale 3y ago
      > see Olkiluoto 3 for example, one of the most expensive constructions in history Dimensioning of Olkiluoto 3 is unrelated to Finnish regulation, the reactor was designed by France and Germany based on economies of scales, not specifically for a local project.
      - karmakurtisaani 3y ago
        Yes, but only 1 permission for a plant was given in what, 20 years?