News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Meta announces nuclear energy projects. Parent comment

Re:Meta announces nuclear energy projects by citeitpls on Sunday January 11, 2026 @05:03PM (#46580739)
tbh i don't think either the original or improved language post is presenting effectively because they both just give a conclusion without any nuance, explanation or support. "cheap" cheaper who cares? $/kwh matter. transmission costs matter.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Meta announces nuclear energy projects by caminante on Sunday January 11, 2026 @07:04PM (#46581957)
Who doesn't say nuclear is more expensive?

The lowest LCOE for nuclear is to the right of the most expensive solar plus storage.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Meta announces nuclear energy projects by fc417fc802 on Sunday January 11, 2026 @09:55PM (#46583453)
If you have credible figures then present them with citations. Otherwise you're just hand waving.

I don't think anyone will dispute that the initial build out for solar is far far cheaper. That much is self evident to everyone. The devil is in the rest of the details.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Meta announces nuclear energy projects by caminante on Monday January 12, 2026 @12:11PM (#46591334)
No.

>I don't think anyone will dispute that the initial build out for solar is far far cheaper.

OK.

>The devil is in the rest of the details.

Now, this is "hand wavy" instead of answering my question and pointing to sources who refute the up thread claim that nuclear will be "cheap" v. alternatives.

Do you have an LCOE study showing nuclear as "cheap"?

[ Parent | on HN ]