3 ms·
The difference is the cost coming from handling it. The latest figure on the cost to handle Fukushima is $190B from 2016. The great thing today is that we don'
by ViewTrick1002 2y ago
The difference is the cost coming from handling it. The latest figure on the cost to handle Fukushima is $190B from 2016.
The great thing today is that we don't need to accept radioactive releases from either nuclear power or coal. Simply build the cheap scalable option instead: renewables.
- TheGamerUncle 2y agowhile cheaper in some contexts and somewhat scalable, renewables are nowhere near being as scalable or effective as nuclear, specially as tensions with China rise
- ViewTrick1002 2y agoNuclear power which currently has zero new commercial reactors under construction in the US while backsliding as an energy source due to cost and construction timelines now apparently is "effective" and "scalable".
- pfdietz 2y agoRenewables are vastly more scalable and effective than nuclear. You mentioned China. Last year, China brought more than 100x more PV on line than they did nuclear (on a rated power basis; levelized basis maybe 30x as much.)
- pvaldes 2y agoRenewables can be destroyed by a war, but it will not take ten years to rebuild and connect it again to the grid when the war is over. Is not only cheaper, but allows a gradual recover of the electric supply. With nuclear a recover is much more rigid and rushing it is potentially catastrophic.
- Moldoteck 2y agoyou replace nuclear waste (that can be reduced with purex or reused with fast reactors) with non recyclable toxic renewable waste in much greater quantities For accidents - just need to build newer reactor models. ap1000 is a marvel of engineering
- natmaka 2y ago> reused with fast reactors Please name an industrial ready-to-deploy fast reactor. AFAIK there it doesn't exist, therefore its (after decades of expensive R&D in many nations) just a vague hope, not a potential part of the solution.
- Moldoteck 2y agomany proved it worked, including the Phenix and Superphenix, but were closed due to political reasons. Now russia is the leader with bn-600 and india/china are catching up
- acdha 2y agoDoes “catching up” mean this is actually working somewhere it can be measured - like we have been with renewables - or is this still theoretical?
- Moldoteck 2y agohttps://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Fuel-loading-begins-at-Indian-fast-breeder-reactor https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Fuel-loading-beg... https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Fuel-for-Chinese-fast-reactor-dispatched-from-Russ https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Fuel-for-Chinese... I mean, google is free
- acdha 2y agoGoogle is free but you linked to a prototype and a “will be” article rather than proven results.
- Moldoteck 2y agothey did build the stuff, so 'catching up' is a pretty correct statement. I didn't say they catched up, for that they'll need much more time and effort, but they do have progress