Jeff, I realize the answer to this question is probably more complex than a simple answer via an internet forum can facilitate but can you elaborate?Removing some of the regulatory barriers on nuke construction and decommissioning would help with costs, but not enough to make them work.
No worries. A nuke plant even putting aside regulatory costs is just big and complicated and very very expensive. Plus, off shore wind, on shore wind and solar cost per kW hour is dropping.Jeff, I realize the answer to this question is probably more complex than a simple answer via an internet forum can facilitate but can you elaborate?
If I take the decommissioning costs out (which I realize are massive) and the waste problem out (which is huge) what are the key drivers of cost? I have seen a few articles on new Nuke plants which we have not been able to build due to regulatory roadblocks they appear, albeit via an article, something that is better to run. Is it heavy labor cost to operate? Fuel costs? All of the above?
Genuinely interested, thank you
My adjustment aboveWhat is it with the..... fascination with shitting on renewables?
I remember reading about these new types of plants but I don't remember if the cooling requirements change although I would assume they would.One thing I havnt heard on the nuke side.Sure you can build it on 12 acres but I believe you need quite a water source to cool it.Something like a major river ocean or gulf. That kind of limits nuke sites.Please correct me if Im wrong but all the plants I remember have been on a major water(cooling) source.IE Vermont Yankee on Conneticut river.I beleive theres one in Fl on the gulf. The manatees go there to get warm in the winter.
Roger on the market.