4 ms·
seems like a similar narrative to EV's back in the 90's - battery tech is not there, the economics don't work, no charging infra etc. Cut to now and that narrat
by tiberiusg 1y ago
seems like a similar narrative to EV's back in the 90's - battery tech is not there, the economics don't work, no charging infra etc. Cut to now and that narrative has flipped. We might be in the same adoption curve cycle with nuclear.
- Herring 1y agoEven if that's the case, we don't have 30 years to figure it out. I'd keep a little money for continued research, but otherwise go all-in on solar.
- ViewTrick1002 1y agoLook at the cost per GW for the Bruce and TVA ”SMR”. They are in line or worse than Vogtle, and they haven’t even started building. Nuclear power has been experiencing negative learning by doing for half a century. It is a known entity. All in all an extremely complex coal power plant. New built regular coal power plants are not competitive in 2025 either. Now make it even more complex.
- chermi 1y agoYou're judging a new technology on the cost of a damn pilot? Again, no to the negative learning. The learning curve theory has requisite conditions. They aren't met, except maybe in China and south Korea, where it seems so far to apply, if modestly.
- ViewTrick1002 1y agoHow can a 70 year old mature technology be a ”pilot”? Lovely that it takes an enormous corruption scandal for nuclear power to ”work”. South Korea’s latest plants have only taken 10 years with correspondingly increased costs. https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/04/22/136020/how-greed-and-corruption-blew-up-south-koreas-nuclear-industry/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/04/22/136020/how-greed...