Talk:Nuclear renaissance

Nuclear is widely misinterpreted as expensive

I found this article interesting. http://observer.com/2016/04/nuclear-power-not-electric-cars-will-change-our-world-sorry-elon/ Quote:

In twenty years nuclear power will be rapidly expanding around the world. Already in 2016 many top environmentalists are embracing nuclear as a necessary part of slowing and stopping global warming; these include James Hanson and Stewart Brand. ... Nuclear is widely misinterpreted as expensive: the cost is in construction, and in the US those construction costs are artificially inflated by regulatory delays; the cost of a nuclear power plant in South Korea is ⅓ that in the US.

Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 22:55, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

It's interesting because of the way the author seems to believe one propagates ideas: Simply writing "will be", "will come", "will whatever"; never considering the contradicting evidence and known problems; never clearly distinguishing between what has actually been accomplished and what not (yes, many Gen IV designs have been drawn and even detailed over the last 15 years; but many have been dumped, heavily modified, scaled back to moderately changed variants of existing reactor designs etc.). Let's make a bet, now and here in 2018 (2,5 years after that article): Nuclear power will at most be slowly expanding (say 3..5 reactors / year) 17,5 years from now; but more probably still losing reactors. To the first dozen people who meet me at the Oktoberfest at Munich in 2030, 2031, etc.: I'll pay everyone of you (those first dozen) a beer for each "net" nuclear reactor that has been connected to the grid in that year ("net": subtracting all those that are disconnected from the grid in the same year) ... (a Maß may be 20€ by then; 5 newly connected reactors in 2030 would cost me 20 €/reactor/person * 5 reactors * 12 people = 1200€ if y'all manage to meet me then ;-) ). See you! --User:Haraldmmueller 14:54, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Virgil C. Summer units 2 and 3

The article says: "Locations of new US reactors and their scheduled operating dates are:... South Carolina, Virgil C Summer unit 2 operational 2019 and unit 3 operational 2020 ... it is expected a way forward to completing the plant can be agreed." Isn't this, as of today, simply wrong? --User:Haraldmmueller 11:48, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Views and opinions

This section has citations up to 2011. Is there anything newer? --User:Haraldmmueller 20:27, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Feel free to edit the article Chidgk1 (talk) 17:44, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

That was it! I thought about my problem, for years and years (since 2020), considering how in heaven and on earth I might, magically, make the text on this - what's it called? Wiki...; ahem ... ah, here it is: Wikipidi - no, Wikipedia - on this website change so that it would include some newer references than those from 2011 - who would've thought that simply by feeling free - free! FREE!, as in freedom! - that change would happen, all by itself? What a magical invention, an inventinve freedom, mind-freeing magic ... ... ... but then, my chin drops, tears welling up, seeing that - that - that they want those changes to be based on, on, you wouldn't believe it, on documents - documents, from those middle ages between 2011 and 2023, where nothing, nothing, nothing has surfaced about that nuclear renaissance we are craving for, all dark, black, vanished, hidden ... and so, for another three (or even more!) years, nothing will be edited here, at least by me, nothing will come from this suddenly proclaimed freedom, this promise to humankind, this light in the stars and on those servers ... (leaves the stage, sobbing) User:Haraldmmueller 18:27, 19 December 2023 (UTC)