upvote

points

by dalyons1 days ago |
comments
upvoteby mpweiher23 hours ago|
next
[-]
No it's not.

You actually have to build out intermittent renewables much faster than nuclear even for comparable generating capacity due to the much shorter lifetime of the equipment. See Little's Law

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little%27s_law

China recently signed up to the COP28 pledge to triple nuclear generation. In the same time period, worldwide electricity generation is predicted to rise by 50-100%, so the nuclear share will grow by 50% - 100%.

reply
upvoteby dalyons23 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Are you referring to the debunked idea that solar panels only last 20 years? Because yeah, bunk.

https://www.ecoticias.com/en/goodbye-to-the-idea-that-solar-...

reply
upvoteby Moldoteck20 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
china wants nuclear to provide 10-20% of their needs. If china wants that, they'll achieve it. Nuclear is extremely competitive in china.
reply
upvoteby dalyons16 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
competitive is the wrong word. It does not have to compete on price or all in lifecycle cost, because its single party state that owns everything and cant be voted out. But i do agree that if they want it, they'll make it happen.
reply
upvoteby Moldoteck7 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
it's not a wrong word. Competitive - it's in the sesnse of what price can it sell to get profits, even if the price is set by govt. Even our existing fleet of npp is competitive on the market ->

www.kkg.ch/de/uns/geschaefts-nachhaltigkeitsberichte.html

https://www.ffe.de/en/publications/merit-order-shifts-and-th...

But chinese nuclear is built faster and cheaper vs our units even during messmer in france. So their price guarantee is lower too. Probably similar to what distributed solar got there of 0.4y/kwh in the past. Albeit subsidies for solar were cut last year to stimulate a healthier growth

reply