I've seen quite a few SMR proposals over the last couple of years and not a single one that dared to address the whole cycle from deployment to eventual decommission as a function of the total revenues - costs to operate. Most of these projects seem to be made to bilk investors or governments rather than to actually produce power. The day Italy produces the first KWh that is net profitable to the operators without counting subsidies I will be highly amazed, and that's assuming they get to operational in the first place.
I agree, I tell everyone who will listen that no country, not Russia, China, Japan, France, USA etc has ever made nuclear power profitable. And you can't blame it on the environmentalists in China and Russia.
That being said, many countries consider it a national security issue not to be held hostage to foreign oil.
But many nuclear power plants in europe are running on russian uranium - so I don't get the argument that you are "hostage" to foreign oil just to become "hostage" of foreign uranium.
Something like wind and solar combined with batteries would be a more sovereign form of energy generation that is (as a bonus) more decentral and less prone to attacks.
It should be in the national interest. But every nation is determined to let Russia have the last resources in 30 years by boycotting Russian oil and gas.
As we hear downthread though, we'll have warp drives by then.
there is a strong environmental reason for this without even considering that there are plenty of alternatives to nuclear energy that do not require destroying the environment, because everything has consequences. destroying entire ecosystems puts many species at risk, mining requires huge amounts of water, money, and often involves legal slavery. plus, the extraction and processing process releases significant amounts of CO2 due to heavy machinery and refining. So thankfully, your country took a good decision
Slavery is obviously not an issue in a country like Spain, but any kind of mining operation here seems to be heavily opposed by the people that live around the potential sites, for environmental reasons.
Mining isn't a great argument against nuclear. Uranium fuel has an incredibly high energy density so a relatively small amount of high grade ore can be converted into a large amount of electricity so even when compared to the one time input from mining required to produce all of the components that go into making a PV installation it can still perform favourably. Uranium mining is also transitioning away from open pit mines to using in-situ recovery where a liquid solution is injected into a uranium ore formation to dissolve the uranium before recovering the solution, about 55% of current uranium production uses this method already.
Again bullshit. Nuclear requires least mining vs any alternative <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/low-carbon-technologies-need-far-less-mining-fossil-fuels" rel="nofollow">https://ourworldindata.org/low-carbon-technologies-need-far-...
And in situ mining is one of the best environmentally
canada has raw uranium. russia runs the centrifuges, im pretty sure on canadian uranium, too
has fossil fuels been profitable? or just had most of the costs externalized? same with solar and wind - the negatives have been written off as free, whereas the environmentalists from russia have pushed to make sure that nuclear has every possible cost counted against it
Canadian reactors don't use enriched uranium. Also many countries have centrifuges - Germany, Netherlands, Japan, Brazil, and of course all the nuclear armed states. Further, enrichment plants can be built anywhere.
Nuclear fuel is available from lots of countries, including Canada and Australia, plus deposits in Europe that aren't being minted because uranium is very cheap.
Refueling nuclear power plants only happens fairly rarely. You hold your customer hostage a lot less if you say “ha! Next time in 8 years time when you need to refuel, we won’t sell the goods to you!” as compared to literally turning off the gas tap.
Many is how? Why are people spreading such bullshit? Only a subset of plants, mainly VVER are dependent on Russia, albeit that'll change too.
Russia is ore importer itself and Orano+Urenco have enough capacity to satisfy most of Europe, both expanding.
Decentralized is not guaranteed. You mostly deploy ren in productive areas, see northern offshore, or that most of Ukraine's ren were in the South. Guess what happened to that. France has a decentralized grid too- many plants scattered around the country, each with multiple units
jacquesm · · focus · HN ↗
asmodeuslucifer · · focus · HN ↗
That being said, many countries consider it a national security issue not to be held hostage to foreign oil.
ndr42 · · focus · HN ↗
Something like wind and solar combined with batteries would be a more sovereign form of energy generation that is (as a bonus) more decentral and less prone to attacks.
ink_13 · · focus · HN ↗
FWIW Russia produces less than either Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan
LtdJorge · · focus · HN ↗
kccqzy · · focus · HN ↗
31aHgd · · focus · HN ↗
As we hear downthread though, we'll have warp drives by then.
succo · · focus · HN ↗
rebolek · · focus · HN ↗
the_gipsy · · focus · HN ↗
pigpop · · focus · HN ↗
afiori · · focus · HN ↗
Or starting with solar more 20 years ago.
Moldoteck · · focus · HN ↗
And in situ mining is one of the best environmentally
8note · · focus · HN ↗
has fossil fuels been profitable? or just had most of the costs externalized? same with solar and wind - the negatives have been written off as free, whereas the environmentalists from russia have pushed to make sure that nuclear has every possible cost counted against it
jjk166 · · focus · HN ↗
looofooo0 · · focus · HN ↗
ceejayoz · · focus · HN ↗
XorNot · · focus · HN ↗
That's plenty of time to source alternative uranium supplies presuming you haven't stockpiled.
Plus: Australia has an absolute ton of the stuff.
dukeyukey · · focus · HN ↗
Plus you can stockpile it super easy.
rich_sasha · · focus · HN ↗
pm3003 · · focus · HN ↗
Moldoteck · · focus · HN ↗
Russia is ore importer itself and Orano+Urenco have enough capacity to satisfy most of Europe, both expanding.
Decentralized is not guaranteed. You mostly deploy ren in productive areas, see northern offshore, or that most of Ukraine's ren were in the South. Guess what happened to that. France has a decentralized grid too- many plants scattered around the country, each with multiple units
harrouet · · focus · HN ↗
Russia's is just cheaper.
But it accounts for 5% of the cost of a produced MWh, so if it had to be generated otherwise, we'd know how to do it.