• @3volver
    link
    1328 days ago

    You know what cost they never factor in? The cost of climate change. If they actually factored in the cost of emissions then nuclear power would be one of the cheapest forms of energy alongside solar.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      428 days ago

      Another thing a lot of people fail to mention about nuclear power, is the lifespan of a reactor. We have reactors from the 70s still running at full power, it’s pretty insane. I’m wondering what the TCO per kWh is for a nuclear reactor compared to other sources of energy.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        428 days ago

        A solar farm in Switzerland from 1982 is also still providing power at 80% of original spec. Even today solar companies give 25 year warranty on new panels.

        So this is not really an advantage of nuclear. In fact after 50 years a lot of them become a lot less reliable. We recently saw that in France.

      • @waddle_dee
        link
        128 days ago

        I don’t remember, but nuclear is the highest operating cost of electricity, until the reactor is paid off by rates, in which it becomes very cheap. Natural gas is the cheapest starting and maintaining and is reaching better efficiencies. However, it’s killing the environment.

        • @3volver
          link
          328 days ago

          Methane (natural gas) is cheap because they don’t factor in the cost of climate change caused by methane emissions. Methane would be one of the most expensive if they factored in the leaks and its strong ability to trap heat in the atmosphere.