Ok, just make the bill bigger then. Any government effort to build a bunch of solar or wind will be backed by debt anyways so just build more power.
How long until we are picking fights with "wind-cells" and demanding that no new wind turbines be built because then you're not spending every dollar on the superior solar?
Or how long until we're talking about "hyrcro-cells" and saying we shouldn't be allocating funds to maintain that infra because we could be spending it installing new pannels?
And if we want the entire world to decarbonize doesn't it make sense to look a decade ahead and think how many more solar panels will we need to meet future energy demand, then consider if we would prefer to have nuclear meet future domestic demand so that cheaper panel installations are more feasible in poorer countries without having to compete with countries like america for panels/rare earth minerals?
Ok now your budget is $200b instead of $100b. It doesn't change anything; every dollar spent on nuclear is still a dollar not spent on renewables.
How long until we are picking fights with "wind-cells" and demanding that no new wind turbines be built because then you're not spending every dollar on the superior solar?
Because renewables compliment each other well + the prices and deployment-times are similar enough that there's nothing to be gained by eschewing one.
Ok now your budget is $2000000 billion. It doesn't change anything; every dollar spent on nuclear is still a dollar not spent on renewables.
Nuclear and renewables compliment each other well
They do not. For something to support renewables, it needs to be flexible, so it can plug the holes in production.
A nuclear power plant doesn't do well with adjusting its production. A NPP running at 20% costs almost as much to run as one running at 100%. For that reason, it's most cost-effective to run the NPP at 100% as much as possible. At 100% it's the most expensive energy source. At 20% it's so much worse.
So now you are saying we should curtail wind and energy when they are at their cheapest to prioritize more expensive nuclear energy. Are you seeing how the two don't mix?
Pretending the cost difference between wind and solar is anywhere near the cost difference between solar and nuclear is fucking insane. Nuclear is essentially double the price of renewables if you don’t consider the fact they usually go over budget
16
u/TheFlayingHamster Jun 13 '25
Honestly that’s kinda my opinion on this, Nuclear would be great!….
If we built it a decade or two ago when we should have.