• AbsolutelyNotABot@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    it’s just not something you can extract easily in countries that care about their citizens so it’ll always come from a shitty place

    First two countries for known reserves are Australia and Canada, together they hold around 40% of all the uranium reserves of the planet. Uranium could also be extracted from seawater, obviously at a much higher price.

    It’s just that it’s easier to extract it where exploitation rights for land is cheap. But that’s unfortunately also true for many materials we need for renewables

    • hh93@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah but even though we’re using the cheapest Uranium possible atomic power is STILL much more expensive than renewables - I wonder how insane the prices would be if you only took Uranium from good sources.

      Also those costs almost never include the cost of securing the waste for thousands of years since you can’t just leave the waste laying around out of fear of dirty bombs.

      Sure it looks decent in a vacuum but with all the factors playing into it from Uranium being a limited resource that costs a lot to the waste-management it’s just much more expensive than just spending the money you’d need to buy one plant on renewables and energy-storages that are also ready to go a lot faster…

      • uint8_t@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        the price of atomic energy is like 10% coupled to the price of uranium. the equipment, the salaries, the security measures, all those things are so much more expensive compared to the fuel.

        people rarely grasp what 4 magnitudes of energy density increase mean.

        • hh93@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          yeah but how much more is Uranium if it’s mined in Canada compared to the one from Niger or Russia?

          sure it’s not the main cost-driver but it’s not irrelevant either.

          Also: an installed solar-panel is very cheap in maintenance - and most of the running costs of are heavily influenced by inflation, too It just doesn’t make sense to push for building more atomic reactors - keeping the ones already there running IS making sense but building new ones that may start producing energy in 10 years AND are massively expensive is just not a reasonable investment

          • uint8_t@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            solar alone is never going to cover your needs. the moment you add the cost of battery storage, nuclear is definitely cheaper. yes, even new construction. for now. when the cost of batteries go down to 1/10th of what it’s today, this might change of course.

          • AbsolutelyNotABot@feddit.it
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            yeah but how much more is Uranium if it’s mined in Canada compared to the one from Niger or Russia?

            Consider the cost from fuel is not mainly for uranium ore, but for fuel manufacturing and processing. Like taking the ore and transformer them in pellets fuel.

            May uranium ore double in price the increase of cost for nuclear would be less than 0,005€/kWh

            start producing energy in 10 years AND are massively expensive is just not a reasonable investment

            How can Japan build a reactor in 36 month but we can’t? How can other countries finance favouribly nuclear power (nuclear is the energy source that most of all the others suffer discount rated) but we can’t?

            Nuclear gave France one of the cheapest electricity price in Europe, but we don’t want to retry because we don’t feel we can achieve it?

            Side note, solar panels have problems too as their carbon footprint could be 3 times higher than expected

            • albert180@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              French electricity prices are not real prices. Look at the debt levels of EdF

              • AbsolutelyNotABot@feddit.it
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                You mean the company the french state squished for profit for 2 decades and that during the pandemic has been forced to subsidized electricity prices for everyone?

                • albert180@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yes, that was my point. The electricity prices they charge are not representative of their costs

                  • AbsolutelyNotABot@feddit.it
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Ok but in the opposite direction you suggested

                    You alluded to the fact it has been subsidized, but it’s the opposite, probably the program would be much better if EDF hadn’t been treated like a cash cow