|
|
|
|
|
by ntsdav561
1463 days ago
|
|
Looking at the levelized cost of energy Page 19 (which should give a reasonable apples to apples comparison), operating nuclear looks more competitive than coal, and even competitive with combined cycle, but with 0 CO2 emissions. Two major issues with nuclear seem to be: + safety risk + capital cost & build process There is an interesting book about how the perception of nuclear risk is not necessarily warranted by the actual risk - Atomic Obsession: https://www.amazon.ca/dp/B00F8CWE4U/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_... This is related to cost because the risk framework drives regulation and regulation drives capital/operating cost. It seems there are efforts to solve the capital cost/build delay problem by designing new generating plants to be built in shipyards - https://thorconpower.com/production/ |
|
The book you mention talk about nuclear weapons
New nuclear technologies will probably reduce the delay and decrease the cost. But 1) design are not ready and tested yet 2) there is a huge uncertainty about how much it will cut time and price.
This happen while 1) we have proven cheap and working renewable energies, and proven storage technologies (electrical, and thermal) with fast decreasing cost 2) We are sure that wind, solar and storage will see their cost continue decreasing