Re:Nuclear energy is a vital part of solving the climate crisis
by walterstucco666 on Friday November 08, 2019 @11:25AM
(#21483716)
> That's what's happening at the moment in the Western world whether we like it or not.
that's what will happen to the current generation of solar and wind power plants
Re:Nuclear energy is a vital part of solving the climate crisis
by typeformer on Friday November 08, 2019 @01:25PM
(#21485152)
Yeah and it's a thousand times easier to quickly replace those because their key components are not the most dangerous substances on the planet!
Re:Nuclear energy is a vital part of solving the climate crisis
by xyzzyz on Friday November 08, 2019 @01:30PM
(#21485199)
There are a lot of much more dangerous substances on the planet, and many of them are likely used in the manufacturing process of photovoltaics.
Re:Nuclear energy is a vital part of solving the climate crisis
by beat on Friday November 08, 2019 @02:39PM
(#21485914)
Cite?
Have fun with the googling. Feel free to check out the toxicity of plutonium (separate from radiation) while you're at it.
Re:Nuclear energy is a vital part of solving the climate crisis
by xyzzyz on Friday November 08, 2019 @02:48PM
(#21486004)
Well, hydrogen cyanide is more dangerous, it is used to produce cyanide salts (potassium and sodium), which are also extremely toxic, and are commonly used in electroplating
Re:Nuclear energy is a vital part of solving the climate crisis
by beat on Friday November 08, 2019 @02:50PM
(#21486029)
And is hydrogen cyanide not used in nuclear plant construction?
Re:Nuclear energy is a vital part of solving the climate crisis
by 08-15 on Friday November 08, 2019 @02:36PM
(#21485892)
> Nuclear isn't a good match for PV and wind, as those are cheaper when they're on. So you have a huge capital investment but only a low realized capacity factor.
That's the wrong conclusion. In a grid made of unreliables and nuclear power, electricity is worthless during the day and priceless at night. If you assume[^] cheap batteries, electricity is worthless in summer and priceless in winter.
[^] But remember, if you assume, you make an ASS out of U and ME.
* What you mean, but conveniently left out, is that nuclear reactors that are written off are competitive. Until they get too old to fix, then they're closed. That's what's happening at the moment in the Western world whether we like it or not.
When you talk about newer reactor designs, you are not talking about commercial reactors, but research reactors, for which the true cost/potential is unknown.
Nuclear isn't a good match for PV and wind, as those are cheaper when they're on. So you have a huge capital investment but only a low realized capacity factor.