Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by yawaramin | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

yawaramin

What do you think would be the cost of depending on Russia for energy?

View on HN

Yup. Energy independence is a cost that’s not factored in. (Then again, solar/wind could serve both factors well)

> solar/wind could serve both factors well

Not 24/7.

Sure, but let's build 150% of total needed capacity as renewables, and burn coal for the 5 days a year we still need to.

You start to understand the issue of comparing the raw cost of kWh of renewables to stable energy like nuclear, if you have to build N times the capacity, the cost per kWh is just N times more expensive.

But unlike nuclear, solar/wind is constantly getting cheaper. Nuclear is, frankly, doing the opposite.

Doesn't matter if you can't build a grid with only those and still need gas or nuclear aside. The real cost of renewable in a functioning grid is probably 5 times higher of what's advertised when including externalities.

When you do the 2-3x (minimum) for wind and solar + keep the coal plant around and ready to go at a moments notice, including stockpile fuel and maintain it, it starts getting really expensive really fast.

Gas plant. Coal is much more expensive than gas, by every measure, and is much less adjustable to immediate requirement. The only reason any coal is still being used is installed base and market and political inertia.

Political, because it should already be banned.

If you store it then it can be 24/7.

Sure. And if the Moon were made of green cheese and we had regular transport from a mining operation there we could all eat as much green cheese as we want.

Where are the uranium mines?

A single shipment from wherever can last a looooong time. It's not like gas or oil where you need continuous supply. And there're deposits in civilised world.

I think Australia has plenty.

https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-pr...

not many left operating.

still cleaning up mess at ranger (which has impacted on a dual-listed world heritage national park) and rum jungle (there's a class action of the few surviving workers + their families whose cohort have suffered cancers)

notably still operating is olympic dam, where the huge volumes of radioactive tailings literally spill out on the surrounding land, representing an entirely unmanaged environmental hazard.

uranium mining is unclean unsafe and unwanted

Kazakhstan (under Russia's sphere of influence) is the largest producer at 36% of the global supply (5% from Russia itself.) It can be purchased from countries like Canada (15%) or Australia (12%). The next two are Namibia and Niger, each producing 8% of the global supply.

The US also has very large stocks on states like Utah and Arizona. Generally hasn’t been considered economically worthwhile since WW2 however.

Solar is not a viable solution in the north. The energy usage goes up when solar generation goes down.

For wind, we're too small country - there are always days without any wind. There are even days without any wind in nearby countries included.

The benefit is that it’s likely quite cheap. Can you really not think of a downside?

Can you think of a downside that's not fear-mongering?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com