3 ms·
> Nuclear theoretically should be much, much cheaper than it is if it were not for the regulatory costs thrust upon it Solar and wind theoretically would also
by triceratops 9mo ago
> Nuclear theoretically should be much, much cheaper than it is if it were not for the regulatory costs thrust upon it
Solar and wind theoretically would also be much, much cheaper if not for the regulatory costs. [1]
Everything is regulated and all regulations have costs. I'm not morally opposed to nuclear energy. Is there a comprehensive study on which specific safety regulations are unnecessary and the LCOE if they were removed?
1. https://www.volts.wtf/p/how-to-make-rooftop-solar-power-as https://www.volts.wtf/p/how-to-make-rooftop-solar-power-as
- bryanlarsen 9mo agoYou can do a thought experiment. A nuclear plant and a coal generator are very similar. They heat water to turn turbines to generate electricity. So best case scenario a nuclear plant costs the same as a coal plant, and has negligible operating costs in comparison. A coal plant costs $5B/GW to build, vs the > $20B/GW a nuclear plant costs. Those massive turbines are really expensive. OTOH solar + batteries is well under $1B / GW.