this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2023
89 points (97.8% liked)

Europe

8484 readers
1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡บ

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out [email protected]

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah but even though we're using the cheapest Uranium possible atomic power is STILL much more expensive than renewables - I wonder how insane the prices would be if you only took Uranium from good sources.

Also those costs almost never include the cost of securing the waste for thousands of years since you can't just leave the waste laying around out of fear of dirty bombs.

Sure it looks decent in a vacuum but with all the factors playing into it from Uranium being a limited resource that costs a lot to the waste-management it's just much more expensive than just spending the money you'd need to buy one plant on renewables and energy-storages that are also ready to go a lot faster...

[โ€“] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

the price of atomic energy is like 10% coupled to the price of uranium. the equipment, the salaries, the security measures, all those things are so much more expensive compared to the fuel.

people rarely grasp what 4 magnitudes of energy density increase mean.

[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

yeah but how much more is Uranium if it's mined in Canada compared to the one from Niger or Russia?

sure it's not the main cost-driver but it's not irrelevant either.

Also: an installed solar-panel is very cheap in maintenance - and most of the running costs of are heavily influenced by inflation, too It just doesn't make sense to push for building more atomic reactors - keeping the ones already there running IS making sense but building new ones that may start producing energy in 10 years AND are massively expensive is just not a reasonable investment

[โ€“] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

yeah but how much more is Uranium if it's mined in Canada compared to the one from Niger or Russia?

Consider the cost from fuel is not mainly for uranium ore, but for fuel manufacturing and processing. Like taking the ore and transformer them in pellets fuel.

May uranium ore double in price the increase of cost for nuclear would be less than 0,005โ‚ฌ/kWh

start producing energy in 10 years AND are massively expensive is just not a reasonable investment

How can Japan build a reactor in 36 month but we can't? How can other countries finance favouribly nuclear power (nuclear is the energy source that most of all the others suffer discount rated) but we can't?

Nuclear gave France one of the cheapest electricity price in Europe, but we don't want to retry because we don't feel we can achieve it?

Side note, solar panels have problems too as their carbon footprint could be 3 times higher than expected

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

French electricity prices are not real prices. Look at the debt levels of EdF

[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You mean the company the french state squished for profit for 2 decades and that during the pandemic has been forced to subsidized electricity prices for everyone?

[โ€“] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, that was my point. The electricity prices they charge are not representative of their costs

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Ok but in the opposite direction you suggested

You alluded to the fact it has been subsidized, but it's the opposite, probably the program would be much better if EDF hadn't been treated like a cash cow

[โ€“] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

solar alone is never going to cover your needs. the moment you add the cost of battery storage, nuclear is definitely cheaper. yes, even new construction. for now. when the cost of batteries go down to 1/10th of what it's today, this might change of course.