• narp@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    “In the short term”

    The main problem is that all this theory doesn’t track with reality.

    The mean construction time for nuclear reactors worldwide is 9.4 years and the US seemingly only finished one reactor (Watts Bar 2) in the last ten years which took 42.8 years to complete and ended up costing more than 12 billion. Watts Bar 1 was finished after 23 years and two others were abandoned, one by TVA after 47 years.

    Correction: Unit 3 of the Westinghouse AP1000 reactor (Vogtle) was finished in 2023 in only 14 years costing 34 billion, while Unit 4 is still in construction.

    The reason why China was able to build 39 reactors in a short amount of time is because they are using them to increase their nuclear arsenal. Projects like this tend to go faster if a dictatorship wants it to be done no matter the cost, public opinion and safety concerns.

    • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      It sounds like you’re suggesting that the reason the US takes longer to build nuclear plants is because of more rigorous safety requirements or something. I’m not convinced though, considering the US’s track record on the rest of its power infrastructure.

      I think there are a ton of reasons why the US is so slow to build nuclear reactors, most of which have nothing to do with the technology itself.

      Obviously the problem needs addressed though, and we know it’s a solvable problem - the chart you posted says as much.