Renewables remain cheapest, but cost reductions on hold

Re:Renewables remain cheapest, but cost reductions on hold by defrost on Monday July 11, 2022 @06:17AM (#32054273)

They're specifically signalling an interest in Small Nuclear Power Reactors [1] which are less accident prone, deferring cost analysis until Dec 2024 [2], and looking for more of a global uptake to bring costs down [3]

[1] https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fu...

[2] https://www.iaea.org/projects/crp/i12007

[3] "Achieving the lower end of the nuclear SMR range requires that SMR is deployed globally in large enough numbers to bring down costs available to Australia." (linked GenCost Report, page 58)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Renewables remain cheapest, but cost reductions on hold by Gwypaas on Monday July 11, 2022 @07:18AM (#32054631)

> which are less accident prone.

All nuclear powerplants are cheap and free from accidents when they only exist as Powerpoint reactors. Reality has had a tendency to change that.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Renewables remain cheapest, but cost reductions on hold by defrost on Monday July 11, 2022 @07:44AM (#32054808)

Ditto all technology - Bhopal disaster, collapsed dams, Texas power grid failures, etc. etc. etc.

Not all reactor designs are Chernobyl, Fukishima killed far fewer than the Tsunami that triggered it.

Small reactors have a long less than public reactor in submarines and elsewhere and have failure modes that are less destructive than larger scale early generation nuclear plants.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Renewables remain cheapest, but cost reductions on hold by pydry on Monday July 11, 2022 @11:14AM (#32057233)

They're signaling open mindedness to what is currently vaporware.

If those small reactors are cheap and the industry agrees to assume full liability for whatever goes wrong Id be impressed but I could see nuclear fusion taking off before that ever happens.

[ Parent | on HN ]