Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after Fukushima

Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by pfdietz on Thursday March 11, 2021 @08:22PM (#26431221)

Batteries for short term storage, hydrogen (stored underground and burned in turbines) for long term storage. Combined cycle is 10% of the cost of a nuclear plant of the same capacity; simple cycle just 5%, so one can back up the entire grid with hydrogen and still pay lower capital cost than for a nuclear grid.

https://model.energy/

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by credit_guy on Friday March 12, 2021 @02:02PM (#26439527)

Not according to the EIA ([1] page 8 Table 1b). The cost for 1 MWh of nuclear energy is $63 and for solar $30. The solar cost includes 4 hours of storage (no long term storage).

[1] https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/electricity_generation....

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Nuclear power looks to regain its footing 10 years after ... by pfdietz on Friday March 12, 2021 @04:01PM (#26440865)

That nuclear number has no credibility. AP1000 and the EPR were also promised to be cheaper, but were 2-3x times that.

[ Parent | on HN ]