• capital
    link
    fedilink
    English
    288 months ago

    Not who you asked but look at France’s energy mix compared to the US.

    Imagine where the US could be today regarding emissions if we had kept up with nuclear this whole time.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        3
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        Perhaps a bad example because most people undermine them, but China has still decided to move forward with 4 different nuclear facilities this year despite having an ABUNDANCE of solar manufacturing. If they found that decision worthwhile I would think the opposite, assuming most of the reasoning is current battery tech can’t sustain dark periods at a massive scale, but I’m not an expert.

        Also just saw you mentioned nuclear costs in another comment, I suggest you look at South Korea and China’s cost per facility compared to the US, they’re able to build and maintain facilities at about half the US does.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          28 months ago

          Literally every source I’ve come across has nuclear being massively more expensive than renewables + storage, at least in the West.

          The market decides what to invest in in a capitalist economy and they will tend to go for the thing that makes them the most money in the shortest time possible and that’s why new nuclear isn’t happening much.

          If you’re advocating for public ownership of utilities so there’s central planning and long term thinking instead of profit chasing, that’s an interesting debate to have.