
China is losing its taste for nuclear power - zeristor
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/612564/chinas-losing-its-taste-for-nuclear-power-thats-bad-news/
======
woodandsteel
"Reactors built with extra safety features and more robust cooling systems to
avoid a Fukushima-like disaster are expensive, while the costs of wind and
solar power continue to plummet: they are now 20% cheaper than electricity
from new nuclear plants in China, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
Moreover, high construction costs make nuclear a risky investment. "

So much for the argument that nuclear is cost-efficient if your country just
does things the way the Chinese do them.

It seems that if your country is going to invest a given amount of money in
replacing fossil fuels, then you get more carbon emission reduction if you put
it all in renewables as compared to part renewable and part nuclear.

~~~
Gibbon1
I think often under appreciated is that nuclear and coal plants are complex
integrated machines. And a lot of the components are expensive one off parts,
have long lead times, and have to fit together with mating parts perfectly or
there is hell to pay.

Where solar and wind plants are simpler flexible cookie cutter designs.

Which means solar and wind can be built quickly. From a cost perspective
building something in 2 years has a lot less overhead than building something
over 10 years.

~~~
beerlord
It also suggest that coal power will enter a death-spiral, where coal plants
will become increasingly expensive to build and maintain due to a lack of
scale.

~~~
Gibbon1
Thing that surprised me is from the IEA, coal fired plants aren't cheap to
build. What's cheap to build are combined cycle natural gas plants.

If you want to know where combined cycle natural gas is going in the future,
look at GE's stock price.

~~~
toomuchtodo
GE laid off 12k people from its power division last year [1] due to lackluster
outlook on nat gas generation. Also, GE's stock price is a poor indicator of
future outlook of power generation, due to their financials unraveling [2].

[1] [https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/12/07/ge-job-
cuts/...](https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/12/07/ge-job-
cuts/929888001/)

[2]
[https://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?stor...](https://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=654138984)

------
woodandsteel
"They knew that if a similar accident occurred in China, the damage wouldn’t
be limited to the explosion and nuclear fallout. Such an event would call into
question the government’s competence.

There is also the enormous, decades-long expense of the cleanup.

------
benj111
I'm not sure they're quite making the case for it being bad news. From the
article, the current reactors aren't being used to full capacity. And China
seems to be focussing on renewables rather than falling back on coal.

~~~
ArchTypical
> China seems to be focussing on renewables rather than falling back on coal.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_China)

China adds renewables as they expand their population, where it makes economic
sense.

Unfortunately (for most), this is not a change from the existing course:
[https://www.bbc.com/news/science-
environment-45640706](https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-45640706)

At least they are getting out of nuclear, so yay? I think it's just
backpedaling due to the low standards and high operational risk of many
Chinese industries.

~~~
woodandsteel
But with renewable electricity costs falling, these plants are going to be too
expensive to compete, and will likely be shut down in the not-too-distant
future. This isn't sound financial investing, it's local governments wasting
funds to keep up employment, as they so often do in China.

