• abraxas@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    With initial cost of deployment being the biggest obstacle to nuclear, I’m not sure it will ever be the best green option for developing countries.

    This is doubly true since it’s lifetime cost-per-kwh is much higher than that of solar.

    • مهما طال الليل@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      “Nuclear for me but not for thee”.

      The optimal temperature for solar panels to operate efficiently is typically around 25°C (77°F).

      It is 34°C (93°F) at night.

      • sandbox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        In hot countries, thermal solar is a great opportunity - Imagine big mirrors that concentrate the sunlight on one particular spot.

        But Photovoltaic is used just fine - one of the largest solar farms is near Dubai, and Saudi are planning on being a massive provider of solar power in the future - Saudi Arabia launches world’s largest solar-power plant

        So, no, sorry, nuclear power isn’t relevant anymore. I know it’s tempting to cling to outdated technologies sometimes, I enjoy using a typewriter for example, but when it comes to solving climate change, I think we should use the best tools available, which nuclear is definitely not. It’s just too expensive and slow to provision.

          • sandbox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            DOE Announces $2.7 Billion From President Biden’s Investing in America Agenda to Boost Domestic Nuclear Fuel Supply Chain

            Wow, some industry lobbyists got government funding, amazing. Global fossil fuel subsidies are at $7 trillion, so I guess those are really relevant to our future as well!

            I don’t want developing countries to waste their money on nuclear power when they can get much more cost effective renewables.

            • مهما طال الليل@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Wow, some industry lobbyists got government funding, amazing.

              Not just in the US, China too is building nuclear reactors faster than any other country

              Global fossil fuel subsidies are at $7 trillion, so I guess those are really relevant to our future as well!

              No of course not. The subsidies at this point at a crime against humanity.

              I don’t want developing countries to waste their money on nuclear power when they can get much more cost effective renewables.

              If the renewables are cost effective and provide stable power then I too want them to be priority -near zero risks-, but more importantly industry and business will seek them on their own. I just hold that nuclear power should be part of the mix. Take the UAE for example it is investing in both nuclear and solar.

      • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Solar is so much cheaper than Nuclear and the efficiency sway is so reasonable, it’s still the better option in non-ideal circumstances.