/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11144421
There is a future. You will be busy decommissioning nuclear plants and take care of nuclear waste.

>>10992666
Many atomic power plants will be shut down over the next years. It's not because "muh environmentalists" It's because these aged plants are no longer competitive. Same for coal and oil fired plants. Natural gas, wind and solar is cheaper. That's capitalism.
There is a way to save atomic power, ironically it's something environmentalists demand. I's called carbon price. This would make coal, oil and natural gas more expensive. As a result atomic power would be competitive again. For decades.

>>10397906
>When did you realize that nuclear power is dead?

When I found out every other kind of power plant is cheaper and faster to build. That's why almost no new atomic power plant has been build for decades. Now most are in retirement age and atomic age will end in a few years.

>>10332417
>Last I checked, there were quite a few nuclear plants still around.
many will be shut down within the next decade

>>10332417
>but maintenance and fuel costs are lower.
maintenance is more expensive because you need high paying specialists and most nuclear plants are now very old and need more repairs then new plants. Fuel costs had been low because there was lot of uranium from nuclear disarmament. This is no longer the case.

>>10290836
no, power companies shut down old nuclear nuclear plants and no new plants are build

atomic age is over

>>10179085
>Need to decommission our nuclear power plants first though.
this is already happening

>>10133177
fission is dead for decades because it's not competitive, it's also dangerous, no new plants are build and old are shut down

>>10116354
nuclear is not competitive, it never was and never will be, that's why almost no new plants have been build for decades and many old plants will retire soon.

quite some nuclear plants will retire soon and probably be replaced by renewable