(Replying to PARENT post)
1. The facility is not accepting new deposits but it is operational. Regardless, this is a political fearmongering challenge, not a scientific one.
2. This is absolutely false because you are not including the costs of STORAGE. Without massive storage, they are useless in providing year-round baseload.
3. Gen III+ reactors are built to international standards. Racism is not an adequate argument.
👤koheripbal🕑5y🔼0🗨️0
(Replying to PARENT post)
2. Even stripping away regulations and environmental requirements, wind and solar are still cheaper at sub 2 cents/kwh utility scale, having no marginal fuel cost. China has set their nuclear price floor at 6.49 cents/kwh [2].
3. I do not want nuclear reactors built to Chinese standards in my first world country.
4. Storage and renewables aren't an investment, operational, or proliferation risk.
EDIT: Transmission losses are minimized with renewables, as generation occurs closer to load centers. Not so with nuclear. Also, storage costs will continue to decline as EV battery manufacturing scales up (see: Tesla's Hornsdale Power Reserve). Nuclear is a solution looking for a problem, when renewables, transmission, storage, and demand response can meet market needs faster.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yucca_Mountain_nuclear_waste_r...
[2] https://www.reuters.com/article/china-energy-nuclear/update-...