/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10742562
This.

Renewables are a meme and will never be cost competitive Against nuclear.
That's why BP and the fossil fuel industry shills for them and makes 'strategic business forcecasts' showing how they will be the the future and they are 'an active player in it'.
Nuclear is the only future we have to replace all other forms of energy production. Fission could replace the world's energy right now.

Renewables are a total meme
>untold amount of space to implement it globally
>limited life span of 10-20 years, constantly needs to be manufactured and replaced
>reliant on batteries (5-10 year span) that need to be constantly mined and replaced
>every large solar and wind farm has backup LNG plants.

They need to be built fairly close to where the power is going to be delivered. We cannot just build a megafarm in the middle of the Sahara or Atacama and deliver it thousands of miles away, as the losses in efficiency would be so severe it wouldn't even make it worth it.

Nuclear is the only green form of energy aside form hydroelectric. Renewables are a pipe dream and are controlled opposition.

>>10634154
Renewable energy is a meme.

>>10635433
Renewables are a meme
>waste enormous swaths of land
>shit-tier life expectancy (10-20 years)
>need for batteries with even worse life expectancy
>plagued by intermittency
>mining needed to support all of this
>create shit paying jobs
>photovotiac panel waste is toxic
>need for backup (always gas or coal fired plants)
>much more expensive per kWh than fossil fuels, making them non viable competition, so shit that they're opportunistically shilled for by big oil when nuclear power plants are being discussed because they know that's a real threat to their bottom line

>>10568730
Renewables are a meme:
>require hundreds of square miles for the equivalent of the less than 1 square mile needed for nuclear
>are plagued by intermittency (you'll need a backup power source, which no surprise is almost always coal or natural gas)
>photovotiacs are extremely toxic and polluting yet are thrown out like regular trash
>limited life of 10-20 years generally
>require batteries which last 5-10 years
The whole renewable industry is extremely polluting and very poor compared to nuclear. It also is not viable to provide cheaply.
Also
>very high real world electricity costs; from 15-50 cents per kWh on the bill
Which is why fossil fuel industry shills for renewables when nuclear is being discussed because they know it will never be able to out-compete them, and regardless, already have a stake in it.

>>10532829
He's right.
>Is nuclear energy the only actual future we can hope to achieve?
Yes.