RedditIsShit9922 t1_j6nx6gn wrote
Reply to comment by Saffra9 in Major milestone for EU energy: Wind and solar produced more electricity than gas in 2022 by Zomaarwat
Nuclear does hurt more than it helps, since its insane costs could be put into more cost-effective options.
It also cannot be used to compliment renewables because it cannot be used for dispatchable power generation. Thus it directly competes with renewables for every Dollar/Euro being spend on the energy sector.
People who are truly concerned about the climate catastrophy ought to oppose nuclear power in favor of renewables and storage.
Saffra9 t1_j6oam63 wrote
Only the up front costs are insane, reactors pay for themselves in 30 years then keep going for another 30, then get extended for another 20.
Baseline power does support renewables, if it’s not nuclear it’s more fossil fuels. You need to generate four times as much energy if you are going to store it, for example as potential energy, then turn it back in to electricity again.
RedditIsShit9922 t1_j6oqlxp wrote
They do not pay for themselves ever if you include all the externalities which currently are conveniently paid for by society. Nuclear power is a taxpayer scam where profits are privatized and costs are socialized.
>You need to generate four times as much energy if you are going to store it
Renewables are much cheaper power generators. Nuclear power costs about 5 times more than onshore wind power per kWh. Nuclear takes 5 to 17 years longer between planning and operation and produces on average 23 times the emissions per unit electricity generated.
So if you want to generate lots of energy for storage, you would be a fool to go for nuclear rather than renewables, even from a purely economical perspective.
And I rather have no electricity at all than nuclear power.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments