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.
Yeah but we are su subsidizing so much stupid stuff in the world, that dont need to be. Safe and clean energy is on top of my list of things i am very much ok with.
At the current cost in France for building a new nuclear power plant, renewables would be much cheaper. The existence of legacy plants there doesn't change this. Realize also that much of the cost of those plants was off the books, involving subsidized financing. That a government can fund something at lower interest rates doesn't mean that isn't a subsidy; it's just that the subsidy is concealed.
Yeah, because all the costs on coal and renewables is priced. All the externalities for enviroment and health of the people, price of putting the land back together and recycling...
jacquesm · · focus · HN ↗
kvgr · · focus · HN ↗
rightnutwingjob · · focus · HN ↗
If safe is your metric, nuclear power kills fewer people than roof top solar.
pfdietz · · focus · HN ↗
kvgr · · focus · HN ↗
also great fosil things happening with backup plants
pfdietz · · focus · HN ↗
kvgr · · focus · HN ↗