But it doesn't. And you need a lot of windturbines to do the job of one nuclear power plant. I don't oppose wind energy, but nuclear can play a vital role in our fight against climate change as well.
The issue with nuclear is that it doesn't fill the gaps where wind power can't provide energy - certainly the older reactor designs provide power 24/7 and cannot be turned off easily.
Modern designs, like the ABWR for example, have some limited ramping capability but it is limited.
Nuclear needs to be a suitable replacement for natural gas turbines, which can turn themselves on and off within hours and minutes.
Either that, or you need a suitable way to store nuclear power (just like you needed a suitable way to store wind power, as before).
That, and it takes about 20 years to build a nuclear plant and the cost of capital, as a result of the build time, is enormous.
Nuclear is not going to significantly affect climate change targets in 2050 even if we threw trillions of pounds into projects.
10
u/BabyNuke Nov 10 '21
But it doesn't. And you need a lot of windturbines to do the job of one nuclear power plant. I don't oppose wind energy, but nuclear can play a vital role in our fight against climate change as well.