7ct per kwh vs ~50ct per kwh and a build time of 10 - 15 years just speaks for itself not even talking about the potential risk vs basically no risk with renewables
the fact that it consumes a colossal amount of resources, so if the world decides to seriously shift toward renewables, it will lead to competition for the metals and other materials needed to build them
the fact that it consumes a colossal amount of resources, so it takes a huge amount of oil to extract them (oil that we’re running out of)
the fact that they require an enormous amount of space, so current NIMBY issues will increase tenfold
the fact that we still don’t have even the beginnings of a storage solution capable of lasting more than a few hours, and therefore a 100% solar + wind scenario is science fiction
In comparison, nuclear has been proven to work reliably and cheaply for entire nations, its problems are political and therefore way easier and realistical to solve than the law-of-physics related problems solar and wind need to solve.
7ct per kwh vs ~50ct per kwh and a build time of 10 - 15 years just speaks for itself not even talking about the potential risk vs basically no risk with renewables
Oil and coal are cheap because its cost doesn’t include externalities…which in itself is a form of subsidy.
If we subsidized nuclear the same way, we could build plants faster and have cheaper energy.
Except for:
In comparison, nuclear has been proven to work reliably and cheaply for entire nations, its problems are political and therefore way easier and realistical to solve than the law-of-physics related problems solar and wind need to solve.