Hacker News Reader

Comment by DeathArrow | Hacker News Reader

>That’s cheaper than a brand-new nuclear power plant would cost, but it’s a hefty premium over wind, solar, and geothermal, according to a comparison of energy costs from Lazard.

Nuclear is more expensive because there are extensive regulations. "Green" energy not only does not face so many regulations but it benefits from incentives.

Also, when comparing nuclear with "green" energy, most studies don't take into account the costs of energy storage.

View on HN

Studies also don't take into account that by subsidizing solar you're subsidizing an industry that's already subsidized by the Chinese gov, it's cool in the short term but we're making the same mistake we've been making for the last 50 years

Home grown nuclear programs will always be better than solar propped up by foreign entities.

That seems excessively defeatist.

Just because the USA squandered its early advantage in solar tech doesn't necessarily mean that it can never hope to regain a leading position.

Running away from the challenge now will all but guarantee defeat in the long term, so it's probably the wrong strategic decision to make.

75%+ of all batteries/panels/windmill blades are made in China. And if you decide to make them locally they'll be 5-10x more expensive and much less competitive because you don't have:

- super low wages and borderline slave labor

- easy and cheap access to rare earth

- the CCP boosting your industries to flood the world

But what proportion of the cost of a solar panel is actually made up of rare earth minerals or labour? My understanding was that the cost of installation dominated the cost of manufacture for both wind and solar.

And, sure, plenty of rare earths are needed both for the drivetrains in wind turbines, and for the power electronics used by solar farms. But they'll also be needed for the steam turbines and power electronics in nuclear plants. Seems like it's pretty much a wash to me.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but it seems deeply weird for America to be refusing to even try to meet the challenge.

China has 26 nuclear reactors in construction. Worldwide there are 61. Let's not build nuclear reactors because China dominates industry.

Reading comprehension must not be your forte, or you're arguing in bad faith. American nuclear reactors aren't built with Chinese tech or by Chinese engineers as far as I can tell.

If you give up your sovereignty on topics like defence, energy or agriculture don't come crying in 20 years when you're someone else's bitch. Ask German's how it's going with the cheap russian gas lmao

US doesn't have any nuclear constructions. Those who built existing reactors retired or died long time ago.

None of those are the reasons that Chinese solar panels are cheap. They don't use rare earths. They don't use much labor.

They're cheap because they're made in massive "lights out" highly automated factories.

Access to cheap capital and automation. Those are supposed to be American strengths, and China is beating America at its own game.

Frankly, the reason China is the last man standing on solar was their aggressive subsidy in the 2010s. Killed all of the American and European manufacturers, then the subsidy ended and they were the last man standing.

The other things you are said are also true, I just wanted to provide a little historical context.

Chinese subsidies were smaller than European and American subsidies on a relative basis. (but not absolute). The difference was that European and American subsidies also subsidized Chinese panels.

Interestig, so you could say that the European and American governments share blame in this development. A shame.

Depends what your goals are. We're sitting in a fabulous position now. Solar is by far the cheapest energy available, which is and will continue to accelerate our transition away from fossil fuels. China is essentially giving the panels away for basically no profit, and supporting very few jobs doing so. America & Europe are getting huge benefits for those subsidies.

Never thought of it that way. I like the positive framing.

Oftentimes I worry about industrial pollution, unsafe and unfair working conditions, and a loss of relevance in high technology.

But in this case, the factories are not widely staffed - so there's reduced chances of accidents.

The future is now, and I'm the old man.

Solar panels are a low margin commodity. Low margin commodity manufacturing does not add significant value to an economy, be that China or the US.

OTOH, cheap energy enabled by cheap solar panels is a huge benefit to any economy.

The smart thing to do is take advantage of China's subsidies and import every solar panel they have on offer. It's like they're handing out free money.

They stop selling? No problem, the ones you have will work for the next 2 decades. You'll be lucky to build one new nuclear plant in that much time.

What costs on the nuclear side of the equation should we add for the backup when 50% of the nuclear fleet is unplanned offline?

Like happened in Sweden twice this year and in France at the peak of the energy crisis.

As of 2025, even accounting for the costs of storage, solar and wind are cheaper than nuclear.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com