With the ever-ongoing ‘progress’ of the proposed UK nuclear power plants, I wonder if this is the best course of action (not just in the UK, but across other nations also)?

  • psud@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Wind, solar, and big batteries is the least costly by far

    Even cheaper is if you can convince the general population to buy batteries and be in virtual power plants

    • SirLeToet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Thats just false.

      Per MWh a windmill (on land) costa about 30℅ more concrete and rare earth metals than a nuclear power plant. It’s almost double for windmills at sea (although it is mostly a whole lot more concrete)

      For windmills you need to build out 3 times the required capacity for any baseload usage, due to how wind power works.

      The Netherlands spend 12± billion euro a year for the past 15 years in to wind and solar energy.

      And we’re only just now matching the Windmill energy production of 1 nuclear power plant.

      The Netherlands couldve build at least 10 nuclear power plants for the same money and then we would have most of our base load covered by non greenhouse gas producing methods.

      But the Netherlands is now reliant on Norway and the US for its power production.

      Solar energy is fucking amazing btw, but without storage best used as a load reducer.

      Greenpeace did more harm to our planet than they did good.

      • psud@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        It takes days to erect a wind turbine. It takes more than a decade for anyone outside China to get power out of a reactor.

        Wind turbine waste is a problem, the blades are fibreglass. They take up a fair bit of space and they’re hard to use for order stuff

        Nuclear plants produce radioactive waste throughout their lives and then are themselves radioactive waste when they go out of service

        Wind turbines are not a terrorism target unlike nuclear plants

        And every analysis I have read says nuclear is far more expensive than renewables

        (I didn’t down vote you)

        • SirLeToet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          By not building nuclear power plants since the 80s, barring France and China. And continue to rather build fossile fuel power than nuclear.

          We polluted this planet with so much radioactive waste we couldve powered our civilization with dirty nuclear power for a 1000 years.

          And we humans solved the nuclear power waste. The majority of that waste loses its radiation within decades and that last bit we can store under the earth, rather than putting it our atmosphere.

          Wind power has its benefits of course, but like solar, it cant power our civilization without storage and when you throw storage in the mix, it favours nuclear power in every measurement.