Looking forward Nuclear isn’t moving the needle. Solar grew more in 2023 alone than nuclear has grown since 1995. Worse nuclear can’t ramp up significantly in the next decade simply due to construction bottlenecks. 40 years ago nuclear could have played a larger role, but we wasted that opportunity.
It’s been helpful, but suggesting it’s going to play a larger role anytime soon is seriously wishful thinking at this point.
History is a great reference, but it doesn't solve our problems now. Just because hydro has prevented more CO2 until now doesn't mean that plus solar are the combination that delivers abundant, clean energy. There are power storage challenges and storage mechanisms aren't carbon neutral. Even if we assume that nuclear, wind, and solar (without storage) all have the same carbon footprint - I believe nuclear is less that solar pretty much equivalent to wind - you have to add the storage mechanisms for scenarios where there's no wind, sun, or water.
All of the above are significantly better than burning gas or coal - but nuclear is the clear winner from an CO2 and general availability perspective.
That just goes to show how incredibly short sighted humanity is. We new about the risk of massive CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels but just ignored it while irrationally demonizing nuclear energy because it is scawy. If humans were sane and able to plan earth would be getting 100% of all electricity from super-efficient 7th generation nuclear reactors.
Retric|1 year ago
Looking forward Nuclear isn’t moving the needle. Solar grew more in 2023 alone than nuclear has grown since 1995. Worse nuclear can’t ramp up significantly in the next decade simply due to construction bottlenecks. 40 years ago nuclear could have played a larger role, but we wasted that opportunity.
It’s been helpful, but suggesting it’s going to play a larger role anytime soon is seriously wishful thinking at this point.
dylan604|1 year ago
done harm to the ecosystems where they are installed. This is quite often overlooked and brushed aside.
There is no single method of generating electricity without downsides.
mbernstein|1 year ago
All of the above are significantly better than burning gas or coal - but nuclear is the clear winner from an CO2 and general availability perspective.
UltraSane|1 year ago
masklinn|1 year ago
Hydro is not evenly distributed and mostly tapped out outside of a few exceptions. Hydro literally can not solve the issue.
Even less so as AGW starts running meltwater sources dry.
porphyra|1 year ago
ivewonyoung|1 year ago
Teslas run great on nuclear power, unlike fossil fuel ICE cars.
mbernstein|1 year ago