avatar
qm61.bsky.social @qm61.bsky.social

Actually no - the most limiting factor for widespread adoption of renewables is political. When you look at the environmental and health costs of coal, gas and nuclear energy production the economic benefits of renewables (including economic loss from health, environment etc) wins.

aug 23, 2025, 4:24 am • 4 0

Replies

avatar
Sean @thefirstsean.bsky.social

Also did you lump nuclear with coal and gas? They ain't the same. Nuclear is the future.

aug 23, 2025, 7:29 am • 0 0 • view
avatar
qm61.bsky.social @qm61.bsky.social

If you think nuclear is the future you’re not looking at $/MWh cost of production or at the international trend (that is market driven)

image image
aug 23, 2025, 7:39 am • 3 0 • view
avatar
Sean @thefirstsean.bsky.social

The fear mongering over nuclear fission aka political is the other thing keeping nuclear down. ;)

aug 23, 2025, 7:51 am • 0 0 • view
avatar
Sean @thefirstsean.bsky.social

I'm not. Because neither of those are relevant in terms of nuclear fusion. Once achieved and becomes more capable, the demand for others will die down (other renewables will be fine) Especially fossil fuels. Given all the fear over nuclear fission though, are you really surprised by that data?

aug 23, 2025, 7:49 am • 0 0 • view
avatar
qm61.bsky.social @qm61.bsky.social

Nuclear fusion is a minimum of 20 years away. Its costings are in excess of fission. China installed 93 GW of solar capacity in May 2025. It’s simply not economically feasible against utility sized renewables

aug 23, 2025, 7:57 am • 1 0 • view
avatar
Sean @thefirstsean.bsky.social

I'm not against renewables either here. I think they all have a future, one with zero fossil fuels. We need them all.

aug 23, 2025, 10:34 am • 0 0 • view
avatar
Sean @thefirstsean.bsky.social

China A) has a state sponsored economy B) has far more land to put solar on C) is heavily investing in nuclear reactors right now as well. 29 being built currently, over 150 planned by 2035. If nuclear was heavily more invested in, it'd be far cheaper per GWH as well. Plus the development of SMRs.

aug 23, 2025, 10:32 am • 0 0 • view
avatar
qm61.bsky.social @qm61.bsky.social

A) Internationally solar is the fastest growing sector (including the US) - it has nothing to do with state sponsored economy (though the US is now doing the same eg Intel) that argument is mute. Further, Chinese state support of solar ceased in 2020.

aug 23, 2025, 12:32 pm • 0 0 • view
avatar
qm61.bsky.social @qm61.bsky.social

B) few countries in the world lack renewable energy land or sea acreage C) China has added 11GW of nuclear power from 2020-1025. It added 510GW in renewable capacity in 2023 alone.

image
aug 23, 2025, 12:32 pm • 0 0 • view
avatar
Sean @thefirstsean.bsky.social

It doesn't matter how much political will there is if the technology simply isn't there. Last I checked batteries were still the limiting factor for....literally everything electric. You don't typically see electric aircraft for a reason - batteries aren't quite there yet.

aug 23, 2025, 7:28 am • 0 0 • view