664
Nuclear isn't perfect, but it is the best we have right now. (lemmy.world)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/memes@lemmy.ml
578 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

Perhaps making the highest monetary ROI isn't the only thing to consider when it comes to energy generation during a climate crisis?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Then we just move the problem. Why should we do something that's going to take longer and use more labor? Especially skilled labor.

    Money is an imperfect proxy for the underlying resources in many ways, but it about lines up in this case. To force the issue, there would have to be a compelling reason beyond straight money.

    That reason ain't getting to 100% clean energy in a short time. There is another: building plants to use up existing waste rather than burying it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Wdym skilled labor? I mean, nuclear mostly take bog standard constructions and the experts cannot be "repurposed" for renewables as well.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (2 children)

    Nuclear is nothing bog standard. If it was, it wouldn't take 10 years. Almost every plant is a boutique job that requires lots of specialists. The Westinghouse AP1000 reactor design was meant to get around this. It didn't.

    The experts can stay where they are: maintaining existing nuclear power.

    Renewables don't take much skilled labor at all. It's putting solar panels on racks in a field, or hoisting wind blades up a tower (crane operation is a specialty, but not on the level of nuclear engineering).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago* (1 child)

    I mean, it seems normal for big structure constructions to take 5 years at least..

    About bog standard construction, I meant not standardized nuclear, but that many parts of it is just constructions

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    And 5 years is what nuclear projects have promised at the start over the years. Everyone involved knows this is a gross lie.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I guess you are talking about US, since 5 years is standard from beginning constructions.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    China built a few Ap1000 designs. The Sanmen station started in 2009 with completion expected in 2014 (2015 for the second unit). It went into 2019. The second, Haiyang, went about the same.

    This is pretty similar to what happened in the US with Volgte.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •