• 0 Posts
  • 52 Comments
Joined 4 months ago
cake
Cake day: July 22nd, 2024

help-circle









  • Nuclear is only competitive if you don’t factor in the negative externalities ( it has that part in common with fossil fuels) and the massive amount of government guarantees and subsidies that go into each and every plant.

    Nuclear accidents are not insurable on the free market, that should tell you everything. If they were and owners had to factor in a market based insurance price, that alone would be so astronomically high that no investor would ever touch nuclear.

    So governments guarantee to pay for damages in case of nuclear incidents. Governments bear the cost of waste disposal. Governments bear the cost of security (as in military /anti terrorism measures, because these things are awesome targets). Governments pay huge amounts of direct subsidies or take on debt via government owned companies to cap consumer prices. None of this is factored into electricity prices, none of this is factored into most studies.

    If small nuclear plants are so impractical, why is Google funding seven of them?

    Because, again, google won’t ever have to foot the actual bill. Also, google has a history of investing into things that don’t work out, so I wouldn’t necessarily cite them as an authority.

    Edit: We don’t even know if google is actually “investing” anything here. They only say they agreed to buy power.

    It’s unclear how Google and Kairos set up the deal — whether the former is providing direct funding or if it just promised to buy the power that the latter generates when its reactors are up and running.




  • So if taken on a specific case the financial perspective alone of a particular application of renewable vs conventional energy the numbers don’t add up then likely the renewable is less green.

    Renewables are more climate efficient and cheaper. Today. All this included. A wind turbine, depending on size, position etc, generates the amount of power used in it’s construction within 2.5 - 11 months. Over it’s life cycle it generates about 40x the energy you put in. There is no valid excuse to keep burning stuff because it appears cheaper short-term.




  • I keep hearing about micro nuclear reactors

    They are not becoming a thing and they are an asinine idea from the start. It’s basically decentralizing something that can only profit from centralization as it requires massive amounts of infrastructure for safety and security reasons in each location.

    Nuclear is the most expensive way to make electricity and that will not change anytime soon.

    So, basically like a massive UPS with some physical, local energy storage. Here’s hoping these will become practical in the near Future.

    They are practical, and they are already being built.



  • I drive by 3 different pickup stations during my commute and there’s one in walking distance from home. I invest maybe 5 minutes of my time to pick something up. For that I never risk having anything stolen, damaged or misplaced and no driver has to look for parking in my street and climb the stairs to my door.

    No idea what you’re doing in your precious time that that seems like such a bad investment to you. That sounds even more ridiculous when I think about how much my parent’s time was “disrespected” when they had to go to a store to get their stuff.

    The fact of the matter is that home delivery is not a sustainable model in a world where everybody orders so much stuff online. Drivers are overworked and underpaid, and if that were fixed you would be the first to complain about higher shipping rates.