195
submitted 10 months ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

Nuclear energy is more expensive than renewables, CSIRO report finds::Renewable energy provides the cheapest source of new energy for Australia, a new draft report from the CSIRO and energy market operator has found.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Nuclear power and cognitive dissonance. That's why people are still touting SMRs as the future, except they cost even more than traditional nuclear. Also, they don't exist.

[-] Zoboomafoo@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Ah yes, "X Technology doesn't exist yet, so it's stupid and useless and people that support its development are dumb"

You see it so often

[-] dgmib@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Both China and Russia have built operational SMRs. (Not to mention the fact that the nuclear reactors we’ve had for decades in military submarines and ship are SMRs). They exist.

We don’t have enough data about the economics or SMRs to say for sure, most (but not all) economic models put LCOE for SMRs at half the cost of traditional PWR nuclear reactors.

It’s hard to judge from the current smr projects what the costs will be. The largest cost in building nuclear power is all the regulatory oversight. Every PWR plant is different and needs to go through the entire process from scratch. But once we have some successful and proven SMR designs. They can be mass produced from the same vetted and approved designs without needing to go through the massively expensive design process again.

SMRs are simpler too. Which makes them cheaper. They don’t need as many layers of redundant safety systems like traditional reactors do. Even in the worst case scenario, an SMR can meltdown and a person living next door would be perfectly safe.

All of that adds up to the a lot of potential cost savings if we mass produce them.

If we can build enough solar or other renewable power to replace fossil fuels without nuclear, great.

But most people have no idea just how much it’s going to take. We need to not only replace all the fossil fuels on the grid today. Plus have extra capacity to charge storage for use when its night and cover the added demand of all the electric cars, trucks, furnaces, everything else that needs to become electric.

We need to be building nuclear too. We can’t build enough solar and wind fast enough.

this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2023
195 points (90.5% liked)

Technology

59197 readers
918 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS