Post #4229587

2026-07-29 21:18 UTC

Watching a video on Small Modular Reactors. And whilst I consider myself generally pro nuclear. I can't help but thinking, £1.8bn for a 470MWe SMR install seems a lot when 32 15Mw wind turbines give the same name plate capacity. Throw in a 50% load factor, build 64 of the wind turbines, you're still gonna have a lot of budget left over for a grid scale battery... Wind and solar is just so much more economical than any other energy generation method.

Replies (2)

@OhWeh@climatejustice.social 2026-07-30 07:55

I agree. For 1.8 billion euros/pounds, you can build onshore wind turbines with a peak output of 1.8 GW. At 20 per cent of full load, these will generate around 360 MW. This is roughly equivalent to the output of the SMR at 80 per cent of full load. However, the wind turbines will not cost any more; they can be ordered off the shelf. The SMR will cost at least three times as much as predicted. Wind turbines will be supplying electricity in three years at the latest if you order them today. The SMR will take a further 10 to 15 years. No costs for the final disposal of nuclear waste. No risk of environmental pollution. No risk of a ‘nice little bomb’ from Putin or anyone else.

Open ##4237303
@BashStKid@mastodon.online 2026-07-29 22:08

@quixoticgeek@social.v.st And they’ll blow right past that £1.8b with no provision for dumping of successive cores, or decommissioning, or the inevitable change orders on their defective, untested, design. Unlike the wind turbines and grid batteries that are ready to go.

Open ##4237322