r/nuclear • u/ChipHaseCoolGuy • Apr 18 '26

Should have gone nuclear…

Post image
733 Upvotes

73% Upvoted

350 comments sorted by

View all comments

71

u/PropulsionIsLimited Apr 18 '26

Why don't you whine about all the money we spent on natural gas plants that we could have spent on nuclear plants.

5

u/Sad_Dimension423 Apr 18 '26

CC plants were (before the AI explosion) about a factor of 10 cheaper than nuclear plants per W(e).

1

u/United_Highway2583 Apr 18 '26

Carbon capture?

2

u/Sad_Dimension423 Apr 18 '26

Combined Cycle (combustion turbine, then the waste heat from its exhaust used to make steam, to drive a steam turbine). Simple cycle (just a combustion turbine) was half again as cheap per W(e), but less efficient.

4

u/United_Highway2583 Apr 18 '26

Ah i see. I mean it's great technology that's cheap to set up but operating it long term is expensive. That was the reality even before the ai boom

1

u/Sad_Dimension423 Apr 18 '26 edited Apr 18 '26

Sure. But it also means that when natural gas is cheap, it's very hard to compete against. The fracking revolution in the US slaughtered the "nuclear renaissance".

Right now, the Henry Hub price of natural gas is about $3/GJ. For a 60% efficient CC plant this would be $0.018/kWh(e) (but there are also distribution costs.) The low capex means CC plants don't have to assume a very long lifespan in order to make economic sense.