Let's Talk Nuclear Facts
These are the facts and data from the Nuclear Energy Association, DOE and Energy Experts
"Of the 253 nuclear power reactors originally ordered in the United States from 1953 to 2008, 48 percent were cancelled, 11 percent were prematurely shut down"
" as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, along with new tax incentives and loan guarantees. As many as 30 new reactors were planned by 2009. As of September 2017, only two new reactors are still under construction, both at Vogtle. The project has announced significant delays and budget overruns. Most of the other new builds and the equally extensive list of upgrades to existing reactors have been shelved."
Long list of nuclear plants that never got off the paper or were shut down before completed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cancelled_nuclear_reactors_in_the_United_States
These are the real numbers:
Nuclear is 4-10 times more expensive than solar or wind per KW, takes billions in up front costs, many years to build, has security and safety issues and relies on a finite resource that will run out.
Nuclear can't compete because it is too slow, too expensive , leaves toxic waste, is a target for terrorists and no one wants it near their homes.
This is your Nuscale reactor:
"Plans to build an innovative new nuclear power plant—and thus revitalize the struggling U.S. nuclear industry—have taken a hit as in recent weeks: Eight of the 36 public utilities that had signed on to help build the plant have backed out of the deal. The withdrawals come just months after the Utah Associated Municipal Power Systems (UAMPS), which intends to buy the plant containing 12 small modular reactors from NuScale Power, announced that completion of the project would be delayed by 3 years to 2030. It also estimates the cost would climb from $4.2 billion to $6.1 billion." https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/11/several-us-utilities-back-out-deal-build-novel-nuclear-power-plant
‘Nuclear power is now the most expensive form of generation, except for gas peaking plants’ The latest edition of the World Nuclear Industry Status Report
Where our uranium-comes from: Notice that the countries like US and France that use lots of uranium have to buy it from mines controlled by the Russians and other countries. That makes our energy supply for nuclear vulnerable to price fluctuations and in times of war or trade disputes.
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/nuclear/where-our-uranium-comes-from.php
"Companies that are planning new nuclear units are currently indicating that the total costs (including escalation and financing costs) will be in the range of $5,500/kW to $8,100/kW or between $6 billion and $9 billion for each 1,100 MW plant."
Nuclear is 4X more expensive than solar and 10X more expensive than wind power per KW: "Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis by Lazard, https://www.lazard.com/perspective/lcoe2020
According to the NEA, identified uranium resources total 5.5 million metric tons, and an additional 10.5 million metric tons remain undiscovered—a roughly 230-year supply at today's consumption rate in total.
That is at current consumption and if we doubled nuclear we would have less than a 100 years.
UK’s nuclear sites costing taxpayers ‘astronomical sums’, say MPs
Fukishima: The Energy Department's projected cost for cleanup jumped from $383.78 billion in 2017 to $493.96 billion in a financial report issued in December 2018. A government watchdog and DOE expert said the new total may still underestimate the full cost of cleanup, which is expected to last another 50 years"
"Cost to taxpayers to clean up nuclear waste jumps $100 billion in a year. An Energy Department report shows the projected cost for long-term nuclear waste cleanup overseen by DOE jumped $100 billion in just one year." https://www.nbcnews.com/news/all/cost-taxpayers-clean-nuclear-waste-jumps-100-billion-year-n963586
Storage of nuclear waste a 'global crisis': report "The 100-page report, compiled by a panel of experts, dissected shortcomings in the management of voluminous waste in France, which has the second largest nuclear reactor fleet (58) after the United States (about 100)." https://phys.org/news/2019-01-storage-nuclear-global-crisis.html
" The United States 9/11 Commission has said that nuclear power plants were potential targets originally considered for the September 11, 2001 attacks."
Vulnerability of nuclear plants to attack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulnerability_of_nuclear_plants_to_attack#:~:text=Attacks%20on%20nuclear%20installations,-This%20section%20may&text=Terrorists%20could%20target%20nuclear%20power,the%20September%2011%2C%202001%20attacks.
Those are the facts directly from your own Nuclear Energy Association, DOE and the energy experts.
This is my personal opinion:
Nuclear has a long history of coming up with new designs on paper and then taking millions in tax payer funding that never results in any feasible or financially practical designs. They recently got millions for paper only designs in the new US budget.
That is money that would be better spent on renewable energy and climate disaster mitigation and that misleads people to think some new nuclear is about to come along if we just keep pouring money in to that technology. It creates a false sense of security and undermines the need to be acting now and fast with the clean renewable energy we already have available.
Examples of this are the Nuscale reactor that is now 3 billion over budget and has been put off until 2030 if it ever gets built and the ITER Tokomak experiments that has cost well over $69 billion and only produced energy for 20 seconds.
We do not have time and money to waste on these theoretical nuclear designs and when your house is on fire with your kids and grandkids inside you don't waste time on theoretical ways to put out that fire.
You use what is already available and is fast and proven to work.
Submitted January 05, 2021 at 07:58AM by solar-cabin https://ift.tt/3pQCkyt via TikTokTikk
No comments:
Post a Comment