this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
569 points (97.7% liked)

World News

32286 readers
571 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So why not modernize or replace the nuclear plants? Battery storage isn't anywhere close to being able to store baseline energy for a full renewable grid.

I agree it's a perception issue, but that doesn't mean nothing can be done about it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Most plants are to old to modernize and building new ones is expensive, takes decates and dosn't solve the dependency on uran and the nuclear waste problem. Renewables were always the longtearm goal and gas for shortages. Nuclear cant be easy switched on or off, so they aren't a good solution to help with energy lows.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Exactly, just look at Olkiluoto in Finnland. 11 Billion Euros. For comparison, right now, 1 MW in an offshore wind park is about 4 Million Euros. Meaning, for 1600 MW, that's 6400 Million, or 6,4 Billion. That's nearly HALF of Olkiluoto's cost.