top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 37 points 5 months ago (16 children)

Let's see if those nuclear fanboys are showing up in this thread

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 5 months ago (8 children)

    I'm fairly convinced nuclear fanboys on reddit are either paid astroturfers or LLM bots paid for by the oil and gas industry to derail renewables

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (3 children)

    I am a nuclear fanboy, because it is a clean and safe form of energy. But the EPR costs and building time are a tragedy for the entire sector and I have no problem in admitting that. But there are good third generation reactor like the hitachi abwr that are fast to build (less the 48 months) and relatively cheap (less than 5 billions).

    The real problem is the amount of safety changes required to gen3 design after Fukushima (that was a gen2 reactor that suffered the worst earthquake and tsunami ever in the history of Japan and caused maybe a 1 single death after 4 years, just to put things in prospective).

    But this is a problem in general for European nuclear. An APR-1400 costs 4.5 billion in Korea and 9 billions in Europe.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 5 months ago (14 children)

    Surprising absolutely nobody...

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] [S] 24 points 5 months ago (13 children)

    Nononono, nuclear power is cheap and safe!

    Also, nuclear plants can't explode!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    And don't forget the simple matter of sourcing, enriching, using, possibly reprocessing, storing, and then disposing. Simples!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    No, you don't understand. Uran and the tech to enrich and process it is widely available and they all are totally not dependent on Russia. Why so many still import from Russia then and fight sanctions year after year, you ask? Well... it's because... Look! There! A squirrel!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • [–] 24 points 5 months ago (6 children)

    That's the cost of around 20 GW in wind turbines btw.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 19 points 5 months ago

    If only someone could have foreseen this..

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 5 months ago
    [+] 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (6 children)
    load more comments (6 replies)
    [–] 7 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    Makes you think how any of the old plants were ever built. Is it just mismanagement and corruption?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

    I live not that far away from a (now decommissioned) nuclear power station, and from what I keep hearing from old people who lived through the time of its construction, there was a lot of lenience and looking the other way involved. For instance, (A very persistent) Rumor has it, that many houses built in the nearest town around that time, had their foundation, cellar walls, and floors poured with the heavy anti-radiation concrete intended for the power station, because quite a number of the concrete trucks destined for the containment building (which is made of an awful lot of concrete) did conveniently take a wrong turn and ended up at the wrong construction site for some odd reason. (Maybe the drivers getting a case of beer for every detour they took might have been a factor)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago (2 children)

    Makes you think how any of the old plants were ever built.

    Experience. The first one you build will have massive teething problems, but then the second one will just be a copy of the first.

    The problem nowadays is that we in the west go "Oh no, learning stuff was expensive! Lets not use any of that and instead never do this again!" then, ten years later we start over again.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    We're talking about a country that spent Β£40.5 billion on a high speed rail, had to cut the scope because estimated cost rose 200% and reached Β£100 billion and still doesn't know when and if it will be finished. Of course they are not able to build a nuclear plant.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago (7 children)

    Chinas reactors are build for 3.5 billion and are more or less on time.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    I beg to differ. For a start the 3.5 billion figure is for the reactor alone. The whole project was calculated to cost 8 billion and of course it got more expensive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 5 months ago* (2 children)
  • [–] 1 point 5 months ago* (1 child)

    Well, let's start with the obvious: Why is the second Chinese bar not burgundry?

    Next: Why are specific projects listed against an average for China? That's the cheapest trick in the book for skewing statistics. Compare specific instances against averages.

    Finally: Sources? Trust us, bro!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    load more comments
    view more: next β€Ί