[tigershark]

Nuclear can’t simply be built as cheaply and fast as solar.

https://www.iea.org/energy-system/electricity/nuclear-power# “ Nuclear energy, with around 413 gigawatts (GW) of capacity operating in 32 countries”

So the total global nuclear capacity ever built is now producing 413GW. Eerily the same as the solar capacity installed just last year.

Whoever is pushing for nuclear instead of solar in 2023 either doesn’t have the slightest idea about the current energy market or simply wants to help the fossil fuels to survive given how long would it take to build a nuclear power plant and at what cost.

[sokoloff]

> So the total global nuclear capacity ever built is now producing 413GW. Eerily the same as the solar capacity installed just last year.

Peak power isn’t the right measure of comparison here, I don’t think. Average power and guaranteed power on a 24- hour basis seems a more logical comparison.

“Can it run my heat pump at 5 in the morning on a cold winter day?” matters a lot to people.

[tigershark]

Why not? You don’t need always peak power, in the night when there is no solar production the peak power consumption is much lower. And even accounting for average generation, using the capacity factor of 20% for solar and 90% for nuclear it means that you would need 4 years and half at current production level to deploy the entire average energy produced by all the nuclear power plants in the world. But given how the solar deployments are increasing YoY it will be probably closer to 2y 1/2 or 3y.

[sokoloff]

When comparing a plant that typically makes energy equivalent to its rated power 24 hours per day to one that typically makes energy equivalent to its rated power times 4-5 hours per day, comparing plants by their rated power is far from telling the most useful comparison.

[troupo]

> And even accounting for average generation, using the capacity factor of 20% for solar

The capacity factor of solar at night is exactly 0%.