23
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FiendishFork@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It is unfortunate how deep anti nuclear sentiment goes with many people. Modern and future reactors are so different from old designs

[-] iridaniotter@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Even the old designs aren't that bad all things considered. Even including all exclusion zones, nuclear probably still uses the least amount of land per TWh per year...

Note on data:

spoilerBased on real-world data, except for CSP which uses expected data of existing sites. Only electricity production and not direct use of biofuels. Dedicated biomass includes only woody biomass from willow, poplar, and spruce trees. Residue biomass refers to using a coal plant to burn extant biomass, requiring no feedstock land use but using more space than coal plants because biomass is less efficient. American nuclear power plants use more space than most countries because of less reactors per plant. Factors in nuclear exclusion zones (area divided by total historical power generation) even though partially inhabited. Includes fuel production as "indirect land use", part of "total land use". Excludes run-of-the-river hydroelectric projects. "Spacing" includes space in between wind turbines and fossil gas well pads even if empty of any infrastructure. Excludes land needed to mine materials or other upstream land use, land needed for energy transmission, and offshore area impacts and underground impacts.

[-] Sir_Osis_of_Liver@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago

Olkiluoto-3 Started construction in 2005, was supposed to be in service by 2009. It entered service this past year, somewhere around €7B over budget. It would have been more but for specific liability clauses in the contracts.

Flammanville-3 started construction in 2007, was supposed to be in service by 2012. Currently, they're predicting that it might come online in 2024. Initial estimate of €3,3B has bloated to €20B, for only a single 1660MW EPR.

Hinckley Point C is already £10B over budget and years late, currently estimate in-service date is 2027.

It's no different in North America, with V.C Summer 2&3 project being cancelled while under construction, when the budget bloated from $9B to $23B. Vogtle 3&4 went from $12B initially to $14B, then to somewhere around $30B.

Nuke supporters love the "Green" strawman. The reality is the utilities wouldn't touch one with a ten ft pole if they have any alternatives at all, and it's strictly due to the economics.

Sweden has a solid base of existing nukes and hydro. The buildout of wind/solar even geothermal would be far faster and cheaper than additional nukes.

[-] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

This video explains why every single engineering project ever has gone over the initial budget.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dOe_6vuaR_s

When you factor in that a nuclear project will face additional hurdles, you get an idea why every reactor build these days is over budget.

Because that initial budget was the back of the napkin calculation before any site surveys or permitting or anything else, because in order to get the permits for those site surveys and such, you need an initial budget.

The press then reports these napkin numbers as if they were the final budget.

As another note here, nuclear projects tend to face massive regulatory sabotage from people who are ideologically opposed for various reasons. (usually tracing back to money from fossil fuels). This drives up the cost considerably as well.

this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2023
23 points (100.0% liked)

World News

38949 readers
1536 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS