this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
104 points (96.4% liked)

Green Energy

2282 readers
3 users here now

Everything about energy production and storage.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The point is that it's simply impossible to build enough nuclear reactors in time to have a meaningful impact on climate change. Even if somebody read crazy enough to put up the money for it. Which nobody is, so the whole discussion is pointless anyway.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

It's less about building new and more about not shutting down old. But building new nuclear would also be a great deal better for the environment than building more coal- and natural gas-burning power plants, even if deployment is over a longer timespan. Solar panels only last a few decades, by the time the nuclear plants are done being commissioned the first waves of solar panels being installed today will already be too old. We don't need enough built to singlehandedly cover our energy needs, we just need enough to price out fossil fuels for good. Nuclear is supplemental to renewable.

And about putting up the funding, the whole point is to sway public opinion so public funds get used how the public wants them to be used. Nobody is relying on private investors to make the change carbon-free electricity while coal is still the cheapest option for reliable power.