@Sine_Fine_Belli to World NewsEnglish • 2 months agoNuclear Power Was Once Shunned at Climate Talks. Now, It’s a Rising Star.www.nytimes.comexternal-linkmessage-square122arrow-up1280arrow-down132cross-posted to: [email protected][email protected]
arrow-up1248arrow-down1external-linkNuclear Power Was Once Shunned at Climate Talks. Now, It’s a Rising Star.www.nytimes.com@Sine_Fine_Belli to World NewsEnglish • 2 months agomessage-square122cross-posted to: [email protected][email protected]
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish5•2 months agoyeah maybe because only the most cost effective ones remain? (natural selection)
minus-square@[email protected]linkfedilinkEnglish1•2 months ago…and because the older plants are simply written off already. If you already recouped the building costs, you can charge based on just the running cost.
minus-square@finitebanjolinkEnglish-5•2 months agoAre you saying newer facilities aren’t more efficient but instead a random chance which coincidentally leads to anual efficiency gains?
minus-squareSolacefromSilencelinkfedilink4•2 months agoIf that were true, we wouldn’t need to guess. We could just look at the data showing that new plants provide cheaper electricity.
minus-squareSolacefromSilencelinkfedilink1•2 months agoIt just presents data without going into detail. You’re making unsupported assumptions.
yeah maybe because only the most cost effective ones remain? (natural selection)
…and because the older plants are simply written off already. If you already recouped the building costs, you can charge based on just the running cost.
Are you saying newer facilities aren’t more efficient but instead a random chance which coincidentally leads to anual efficiency gains?
If that were true, we wouldn’t need to guess. We could just look at the data showing that new plants provide cheaper electricity.
Thats why I linked the data.
It just presents data without going into detail. You’re making unsupported assumptions.
Feel free to present counter-data, then.