• 31337@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’m pretty sure I’ve read that nuclear power plants are the most expensive source of electricity. Might as well just use solar + wind + storage for cheaper?

    • baked_tea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Is it to build or operate?

      In my country, we already have 2.5 plants active. The problem now with this anti nuclear stance is:

      We have found a significant deposit of uranium, but we can’t use it because uneducated activists and politicians protested when we tried to mine it so they banned ourselves from mining it because “radioactivity”.

      It could power us for close to no cost for 50+ years but noo we will continue to buy expensive gas and electricity. Great

    • ammonium@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s not so simple. Often these costs are without storage and we currently don’t even have the capacity to create so much storage.

      Most of the cost for nuclear is designing and building the powerplant. Keeping working plants open is not so expensive. Building new ones will get cheaper if we build more of them.

    • WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Coal is generally still far worse per kwh, solar is the best with wind not far behind

      Who’d have thought just leaving something out in the sun or wind would be cheaper than digging polluting nonsense out of the ground?