this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
665 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

59963 readers
3495 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kethal@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Nuclear plants cost a lot to produce but electricity from a nuclear plant sells for the same as electricity from anything else. Since many other options are cheaper to produce and maintain, nuclear is less cost efficient, not highly cost efficient as you claim. That's why it's not successful.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

electricity from a nuclear plant sells for the same as electricity from anything else

The high production capacity drives down the market rate by flooding the retail market

[–] Kethal@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

It costs more to produce that electricy with nuclear than it does to produce it with other technology. Making lots of cost inefficient electricity is still making cost inefficient electricity.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It costs more to produce that electricy with nuclear than it does to produce it with other technology.

Electricity production costs of new power plants in €/MWh per the 2015 column are consistently some of the lowest across sources, with Hydro being the only serious competition.

[–] Kethal@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The other table has newer studies than 2015, where nuclear is not cheaper, but you've only pointed out the column where they found it was cheaper 10 years ago. Wind and solar have gotten cheaper to produce, and nuclear more expensive. It is not cost efficient compared to other modern options.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The other table has newer studies than 2015, where nuclear is not cheaper

The only one that's in the ballpark is the most recent stats on Photovoltaics. And we've had a decade to improve breeder reactors and molten salt reactors since then.

Wind and solar have gotten cheaper to produce, and nuclear more expensive

Nuclear has not gotten more expensive.

[–] Kethal@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

According to the article you have provided, it has... The first figure under Global Studies shows nuclear prices have increased, and the general trends of the various studies in the two tables show an increase over time.