The time of nuclear energy has come and gone. We missed it.
Both however are so much cheaper than Nuclear and especially than oil/drilling fuels that its hard to see much real investment in those older technologies.
I keep telling people that the economics of nuclear - especially new plants - just doesn’t work, but here and on Reddit it seems to be a very bitter pill that many are not ready to swallow.
The time of nuclear energy has come and gone. We missed it.
0x0@programming.dev 1 year ago
vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
Yes really.
They are not significantly cheaper to build own or operate, on the contrary. I’m making an economic argument here.
0x0@programming.dev 1 year ago
If you put economics before the environment then sure, nuclear’s not viable, never was.
And oil’s only viable because of mass subsidies and tax exemptions.
vzq@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
If you put economics before the environment then sure, nuclear’s not viable, never was.
Wait what? Surely nuclear gets less viable if you factor in the cost of cleaning up after yourself.
And oil’s only viable because of mass subsidies and tax exemptions.
That, and massive externalization.
jose1324@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Is it though? I rather would have renewables. But if you look at the LCOE then it isn’t that bad at all
frezik@midwest.social 1 year ago
Yup. The pro-nuclear lot have gotten stuck with talking points that were valid against Greenpeace in the 90s. I argued the same way for many years. However, I also saw how the numbers have changed over the decades. There’s a reason nobody with money to invest in the energy sector wants to bother with nuclear at all. Nor is there any reason to subsidize it when those same subsidies could go towards storage for solar and wind.
The places we maybe want to subsidze it is in non-traditional places (ships) and reusing our old nuclear waste. Not the grid as a whole, though. The opportunity cost would be terrible.