The opening of the European Pressurized Reactor in Flamanville comes 12 years late on the initial schedule.

Summary

France’s Flamanville 3 nuclear reactor, its most powerful at 1,600 MW, was connected to the grid on December 21 after 17 years of construction plagued by delays and budget overruns.

The European Pressurized Reactor (EPR), designed to boost nuclear energy post-Chernobyl, is 12 years behind schedule and cost €13.2 billion, quadruple initial estimates.

President Macron hailed the launch as a key step for low-carbon energy and energy security.

Nuclear power, which supplies 60% of France’s electricity, is central to Macron’s plan for a “nuclear renaissance.”

  • Argonne@lemmy.worldEnglish
    115·
    2 days ago

    Perovskite uses rare earth metals too, so while they increase efficiency they are just as destructive

    You can fit all the nuclear waste jn the world in one football field. It’s not alot.

    • mosiacmango@lemm.eeEnglish
      146·
      2 days ago

      Perovskite are iterating through many different materials as the science settles on them, but one of the positives is that the materials aren’t nearly as rare.

      you can fit all the nuclear waste in the world in one football field

      This is not true because of radioactive waste water, containment vessels and spent fuel rods, all of which are highly radioactive along with your football field of actual spent fuel, but okay.

      If we could do this or something like it, why haven’t we? Is it because no one on earth wants that football field? Is it because we tried this at sites like Hanford, Washington and its been a half century of ecological disaster?

      People undersell just how destructive the entire radioactive waste cycle is. Nuclear is way, way better than coal and oil, but solar/batteries kick its teeth in here.

      • Argonne@lemmy.worldEnglish
        107·
        2 days ago

        Again, your hostility to Nuclear is completely misguided. Even the UN admits that Nuclear is needed to solve climate change https://news.un.org/en/interview/2024/06/1151006

        China is building dozens of new Nuclear reactors while being the capital of solar panel manufacturing. There is no teeth kicking necessary. Nuclear kicks teeth out of everything in terms of reliability. Solar kicks teeth on speed and cost. Don’t be a propaganda machine

        Reminds me of this comic. Seeing it first hand with people like you

        https://i.redd.it/9o6czv4wa58c1.jpeg

        • mosiacmango@lemm.eeEnglish
          136·
          2 days ago

          Ha, uses a modified stonetoss comic to reply to me and doesn’t address any issues I just brought up in the previous comment. Neato. Glad to know you dont have any answers to nuclear waste either. Youre in good company.

          Im pro nuclear, but I am also pro basic math. Solar/battery are cheaper and way faster to build, and designed correctly, offer equivalent baseline loading as nuclear. It’s a no brainer to back burner any nuclear project for solar/battery, and that’s exactly what’s happening.

          Im glad this reactor finally got finished. Im also glad China is building nuclear. With its directed economy, total disregard for local and global ecology and totalitarian government, they can streamline nuclear deployments in a way that makes them viable. When they are done and they offline all the coal and oil plants they have also built, it will be a good thing. For the rest of the world, and especially the US with its wide open and near endless federal land, solar/battery makes the most sense.

          The only real competition is “Enhanced geothermal.” There is a 400MW plant that is being built in Utah right now that should come online in 4 years. If they can stay on target, then nuclear is really fully dead.

          • Resonosity@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            5·
            1 day ago

            Can’t wait to see enhanced geothermal take off tbh. I know that the drilling tech couldn’t really get us to the depth we need to see the right energy gains, but you are right that there are companies out there looking to make strides.

          • Argonne@lemmy.worldEnglish
            41·
            2 days ago

            Geothermal is not viable in many places such as earthquake prone areas and also the east coast where the mantle has cooled significantly compared to the west coast which still has a hot, fresh plate in comparison. There are not too many viable places in the US for large scale geothermal power. Utah is in the sweet spot of a fresh plate in the west but far from major fault lines

            • mosiacmango@lemm.eeEnglish
              64·
              2 days ago

              This is “geothermal anywhere”, not bog standard geothermal. They use drilling tech developed by the oil and gas industry to dig far past normal thresholds, making geothermal way more viable.

              It’s a pure baseload tech with no nuclear downsides. Current projections are that it could supply roughly 20% of all US power. A perfect compliment to solar/battery, and still faster and cheaper than nuclear, SMR or otherwise.

              Still nothing to say about Hanford, huh?