Re:Google Funding Construction of Seven U.S. Nuclear Reactors
by dalyons on Monday October 14, 2024 @09:11PM
(#41843944)
Sort of - nuke plants are fundamentally phenomenally complicated compared to true economies of scale technologies like solar. You won’t reap 100x cost savings in nukes, no matter how many you build
Re:Google Funding Construction of Seven U.S. Nuclear Reactors
by throw0101d on Tuesday October 15, 2024 @10:27AM
(#41848988)
Every widget has a price floor since there's parts/materials and labour costs. This is even true for solar.
One simply has to be careful about what something "costs" when you look at the first unit versus the nth unit.
Re:Google Funding Construction of Seven U.S. Nuclear Reactors
by iknowstuff on Tuesday October 15, 2024 @07:24PM
(#41854137)
did you see France raising their cost estimate for 5 reactors to $73B? France, the shining beacon of nuclear energy.
by the time they build it, the cost of renewables will halve, and their actual cost of nuclear will have doubled again.
Vogtle 4 was (IIRC) 30% cheaper than Vogtle 3.
The problem with nuclear in Georgia, and in the US, was that no one remembers/ed how to do it, and so all the lessons of yore had to be relearned, and the supply chain had to be stood up.
If you put in an order for several reactors, the very first one (especially of a new model, like Vogtle 3 was) will be expensive AF. The second will be expensive. All models after that will be at a more 'reasonable' cost.
Nuclear reactors are just like any other widget: the cost goes down with economies of scale. If you order 4 or 8 reactors at one sites they'll get progressively get cheaper (there is a floor of course). If you then put in an order at a second site, and move the workforce (or a portion) there, the lower costs will still be present.
If you start and stop construction, or order a whole bunch of different models/types, then there economies of scale goes out the window.