Nuclear BTFO
No.11002250 ViewReplyOriginalReport
Quoted By: >>11002253 >>11002900 >>11002927 >>11003011 >>11003056
>Over the past decade, levelized cost estimates for utility-scale solar dropped by 88%, wind by 69%, while nuclear increased by 23%. New solar plants can compete with existing coal fired plants in India, wind turbines alone generate more electricity than nuclear reactors in India and China. But new nuclear plants are also much slower to build than all other options, e.g. the nine reactors started up in 2018 took an average of 10.9 years to be completed.
>In other words, nuclear power is an option that is more expensive and slower to implement than alternatives and therefore is not effective in the effort to battle the climate emergency, rather it is counterproductive, as the funds are then not available for more effective options.
Nuclear will not save us from climate change. It is too slow and too expensive. So can we please stop this shilling that we should invest in nuclear power?
>In other words, nuclear power is an option that is more expensive and slower to implement than alternatives and therefore is not effective in the effort to battle the climate emergency, rather it is counterproductive, as the funds are then not available for more effective options.
Nuclear will not save us from climate change. It is too slow and too expensive. So can we please stop this shilling that we should invest in nuclear power?
