I mean im guessing its because it may not be as profitable, or atleast at first, boycotts or directly just capitalism fucking everything up? i legit always imagine aliens seeing us still use coal while having DISCOVERED IN 1932

  • BussyCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    9 months ago

    Renewables get cheaper because we are building them… if we built nuclear at the same frequency as renewables their price would plummet as well.

    Personally see the best option as a combination, in places like LA, Las Vegas, Phoenix solar should be the number 1 power source. Build wind power in places like Wyoming, and off shore wind where it’s possible. But when you have a place that needs huge amounts of batteries to try and compensate for inconsistent wind/solar that’s where you should build nuclear.

    Nuclear is not renewable and has a lot of issues but we also shouldn’t ignore the negatives of lithium, nickel, cadmium, and cobalt mining. At the end of the day all of them are better than fossil fuels

    • aupag@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      We did build a lot of nuclear in the 60s and 70s, but prices didn’t really drop and began to increase (higher safety standards, more oversight, general cost disease as is usual for large civil engineering projects), so we stopped building nuclear. It also wasn’t sustainable to build nulear at that rate for some countries, as, well, after you built enough you don’t need more (france) for a while.

      • BussyCat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        The U.S. has an increase in energy demand, and if we consider phasing out fossil fuels then the demand for new power plants is huge.

        Arkansas nuclear one which started construction in 1968 and finished in 1974 had a total construction cost of 2.522B (2007 dollars) and produces 13555 GWh a year with a 66 year license giving it a $2.81//MWh in general initial construction represents 60-80% of total nuclear power costs so if we use the conservative value that’s still under $5/MWh using 2007 dollars and if we scale to today that’s $8/MWh. So not sure what you mean by it didn’t drop costs.

        It was expensive compared to fossil fuels that had little to no safety systems