• Argonne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    4 hours ago

    In which case they would choose Nuclear over Solar 9/10 times. I’m onboard

    • Crashumbc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 hours ago

      They would probably use nuclear for base load, until something better is found. But it won’t “replace” solar.

    • absGeekNZ@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Nuclear has few advantages over solar.

      Solar + batteries.

      Image from this article

      ~$1000/kW vs $6 - 10,000/kW in 2018, it is cheaper today; projected costs to drop to as low as $560/kW in 2050.

      Add in the ~$150/kWh of grid scale storage with the associated switchgear to connect it to the grid.

      For a 10MW + 20MWh solar system; you are looking at approx $13,000,000 + install costs of probably $2-3,000,000.