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.
Solar and wind aren’t profitable either if you count the entire lifecycle including bill of materials, production, transportation, maintenance, and teardown for replacement.
At least it is greener and cheaper. Especially Solar cells have become incredibly cheap now. Combined with battery storage, it's far safer and cheaper than nuclear.
And in a territory affected from seismic activities, I would avoid nuclear at all
jacquesm · · focus · HN ↗
simianparrot · · focus · HN ↗
madduci · · focus · HN ↗
And in a territory affected from seismic activities, I would avoid nuclear at all
simianparrot · · focus · HN ↗