• FishFace@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      In the alternative universe we’d have been building fission power for decades when it was cheaper than renewables, and it would still be running today.

        • FishFace@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          We were talking about power strategies from the 1980s and the person above said it would just be the “cheapest”. If countries really were just building the cheapest, it would not have been renewables back then.

          We were already talking about a counterfactual.

          • IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            11 months ago

            I guess. If we’re in this hypothetical alternative universe then those plants built in the 80’s would be at the end of their lives and we’d be looking to spend a fortune to replace them with new nuclear or we’d be saving money by building renewables.

            I’m still not sure what this line if discussion is accomplishing though.

            • FishFace@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Probably nothing - though I do think it’s worth remembering that renewables were much more expensive in the past than they are now. It’s one reason why government action has been so slow - other reasons apply to nuclear power. I think people who are switched on to the crisis are all too aware that renewables are now easily the best source of power, but forget too easily that it was only through significant investment that we’ve ended up here.

    • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      Maybe cheaper than renewables and grid scale batteries over the lifetime of the reactor. Perhaps you could correct me, but my understanding is that grid scale battery facilities don’t even exist yet. Given the current state of battery technology, you’d need to replace the batteries at that facility in, what, seven years? Ten is really pushing it, right? That’s not going to be cheap.