SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Joe NYC who wrote (353274)10/2/2007 6:39:28 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 1575775
 
Nuclear has high upfront cost and very low fuel cost. Solar is similar to nuclear.

Except that solar has much higher up front costs (per megawatt-hour), but you do gain the advantages of 1 - Less political opposition, 2 - Fewer regulatory hurdles, 3 - No radioactive wastes, and 4 - The ability to be used on a very small scale (down to solar powered calculators and such).

With nuclear the initial construction costs and the cost of all the political and regulatory battles you have to fight (both direct costs, and the cost of the time delay), often makes it more expensive in terms of total cost per megawatt hour over its life time than say coal, even with the fuel cost of coal.

OTOH the political climate might be improving, and some new designs might be both safer and cheaper. Also costs for fuels is presumably going to go up if we continue to rely on them. We have a lot of coal but it isn't a limitless resource.

And then if anything like a carbon tax is ever introduced than it greatly benefits nuclear vs. coal.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News