[pydry]

it doesn't really make sense to scale up a form of power that's 2-4x the cost (more if you include research costs for newer designs) just because it can act as baseload. Over producing, demand shaping and storage will be cheaper.

Nuclear is only financially viable because the government subsidizes it - usually to maintain weapons technology.

[RealityVoid]

So what if it's 2-4x the cost if it's clean? I assertthe externalities of pollution are afar more than 2-4x. I also strongly doubt that it _is_ 2-⁴x as expensive.

[pydry]

I meant 2-4x the cost of equally carbon neutral technology.

Solar and wind are almost absurdly cheap. It barely makes economic sense to build anything else.

[hannob]

it's 2-4x the cost compared to other almost carbon free options.