this post was submitted on 14 May 2026
715 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

84648 readers
4299 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zurohki@aussie.zone 3 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

I'm anti-nuclear, but it's because nuclear is so much slower to build and more expensive than solar or wind so the fossil fuel industry is pushing for nuclear to delay the transition away from fossil fuels and use up all the funding.

If you have nuclear plants, you've paid to build them and you're on the hook for decommissioning costs, sure, keep running them. Starting construction on new nuclear in 2026? That's a terrible idea.

You won't be up and running before 2040 and you're not going to be competitive against 2040's renewables and batteries, never mind 2070's.

[–] Rakonat@lemmy.world 13 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (1 children)

The 20+ year time to build is at best the direct result of lobbying and NIMBY and realistically just propoganda by antinuclear. The US mean for nuclear construction to production is 8 years. Japan has it down to under 5.

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk -4 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

You want to drop safety standards on reactors?

[–] Mesophar@pawb.social 4 points 3 hours ago

I think they want to drop the lobbying red tape, not the safety standards

[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 21 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

China is building them in 5-6 years, the best time to plant a tree was 30 years ago and the second best time is now.

[–] zurohki@aussie.zone 5 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

We can't build them in China, though. Only China can do that. My country doesn't even have an existing nuclear industry.

Sure we could start building reactors now, but we can get enough solar and battery storage through the night for less than nuclear would cost.

[–] Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 1 points 23 minutes ago (1 children)

I'd like to see scientific proof of that

[–] zurohki@aussie.zone 1 points 14 minutes ago

Everyone who's looking to make money is building wind, solar and batteries. Nobody's looking to invest in nuclear. That's what the people with all the financial data and feasability studies are doing.

The only people we've got pushing for nuclear are the people who were trying to build new coal plants a few years ago.

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 3 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Props to China, but I know how long building projects take in my country. The plan will say 15 years and it will be done in 25 for 3x the price. And all that to have it produce a kWh for 0.50€. No, thanks.

[–] Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 5 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

So don't build 1-off designs, look at the most expensive parts of plant construction, and lower those costs. China's nuclear industry isn't just some construction company that commissions bespoke parts for each nuclear plant, it extends to from heavy forging capacity shared with ship-building to colleges producing construction managers.