[legitster]

> Building a lot more nuclear power plants is the key thing that doesn't really seem to be happening right now

I mean, this is the clear and obvious one. Nuclear theoretically should be much, much cheaper than it is if it were not for the regulatory costs thrust upon it.

It also harrows out people who are legitimately concerned from "moralist concern junkies". You'd think climate change being a global existential crisis would make people open to nuclear energy or more drastic measures like geo-engineering, but the frequency with which people refuse to compromise undercuts the their legitimacy.

[triceratops]

> Nuclear theoretically should be much, much cheaper than it is if it were not for the regulatory costs thrust upon it

Solar and wind theoretically would also be much, much cheaper if not for the regulatory costs. [1]

Everything is regulated and all regulations have costs. I'm not morally opposed to nuclear energy. Is there a comprehensive study on which specific safety regulations are unnecessary and the LCOE if they were removed?

1. https://www.volts.wtf/p/how-to-make-rooftop-solar-power-as

[bryanlarsen]

You can do a thought experiment. A nuclear plant and a coal generator are very similar. They heat water to turn turbines to generate electricity. So best case scenario a nuclear plant costs the same as a coal plant, and has negligible operating costs in comparison.

A coal plant costs $5B/GW to build, vs the > $20B/GW a nuclear plant costs.

Those massive turbines are really expensive.

OTOH solar + batteries is well under $1B / GW.