‘Uncle Bob’ is that proverbial character who shares at family gatherings all he believes to be true about solar and why it just isn’t a good idea. Dan Shugar, founder and CEO of Nextracker, has had this experience. Based on his 33 years in the solar industry, he offers short, fact-based responses to Uncle Bob’s assertions, which range from “solar is taking coal jobs” to “solar is unreliable”.
In this part three of the series, Shugar debunks myths about nuclear energy.
The proverbial Uncle Bob asks, “What about nuclear? That’s reliable runs all the time. Why don’t we do more of that?”
You could say, “Listen, Uncle Bob, there are things we like about nuclear. We know you don’t believe in global warming. But we like that nuclear is a zero-carbon option.”
Then explain that there are only two problems with nuclear. First, there’s radioactive waste, and second, it’s too expensive.
Let’s ignore the radioactive waste that is around for hundreds of years. Let’s talk about money.
A new nuclear plant today is about $180 a megawatt hour. A new solar plant today is $60 a megawatt hour. That’s about a third of the cost. And if you add batteries, it’s about $75 a megawatt hour. That’s well under half the cost rather than dollars per megawatt hour.
Now let’s just talk about money of real plants. When I started in my career, in 1985, the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant was just finishing the original budget of that plant was $380 million. And the plant was actually completed at five and a half billion dollars, half of PG&E’s net income was being absorbed by the interests of the plant.
In more modern history, the two Vogtle units, one of which is operational in Georgia and the other is supposed to come on online shortly, were under construction for over 10 years and had an original budget of about $14 billion. They came in at about $30 billion, which is very expensive.
Speaking as an environmentalist, I really hope nuclear can have a resurgence, including the modular nuclear power plant designs that have been under development for decades. But I want to underscore the bar keeps going up because solar and wind costs are going down. While reliability keeps improving nuclear power is just too expensive Uncle Bob.
Episode three: What about nuclear?…
We’ll continue this series with fact-based responses to additional myths such as: Solar takes too much land–there’s gonna be no room for farms if we have solar panels…
Stay tuned as we unpack these objections, so you’re ready for your next dinner party with Uncle Bob.
View earlier episodes:
Part one, “All panels come from China” here.
Part two, “Solar is unreliable” here.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are the author’s own, and do not necessarily reflect those held by pv magazine.
This content is protected by copyright and may not be reused. If you want to cooperate with us and would like to reuse some of our content, please contact: editors@pv-magazine.com.
Hi Dan,
Long time no see. I agree with your comments about current nuclear plants and believe that they also apply to SMRs. I doubt we’ll see the day that they are cheaper than solar and batteries and for me, they’re far more dangerous. Wouldn’t want to have one close to my home or city. Wouldn’t trust the company that tells me there will never be a problem with it. Let alone that we’ll still be left with the nuclear wastes, that can’t just be ignored. I don’t think we need nuclear to address climate changes, there is enough renewable energy sources coupled with better and energy uses and efficiencies to respond to everyone’s energy need. (Some of us are using too much). Keep up the good work. Regards, Jimmy Royer
Bravo!
Shakin’ Shugaree (with apologies to dead heads).
I am glad to see you are still bringing your perspectives to the the public.
I agree with your cautionary, balanced view on Nuclear energy. As you know, the state of our grid at all scales, is problematic, I think that small modular nukes may provide a bridge to a better grid and storage developments that render the mini-nukes obsolete.
Still remember sitting with Amory Lovins at a commonwealth club panel (you were a panelist) about 20 years ago. In a reversal of panelist/audience roles , you responded to a question then asked for Lovins to respond as well.
I hope you will be attending the 50th anniversary of the Northern California ASES chapter in Oakland this spring.
Best,
John Raphael, former NCSEA VP and Board member
Mr. Shugar,
You are correct to say that nuclear power is too expensive and no solution to the disposal of nuclear waste has been found. However, the third problem is the possibility (and past reality) of accidental release of nuclear radiation. Our ill-sited but aptly named Diablo Canyon plant in California is right where more than one fault line is located, and we are one good-size earthquake away from having all of Southern California contaminated. It was very short-sighted of Gavin Newsom to have pushed through an extension of this plant’s permit. There is a reason no private company is willing to insure nuclear plants, leaving insurance to the public’s dime. These installations are also vulnerable to terrorist attacks and potentially the disruption of a major solar flare. In addition, uranium mining contaminates the surrounding areas. We need to close all nuclear reactors as soon as possible!
As for reducing carbon in the atmosphere, I recommend the brilliant book by Albert Bates and Kathleen Draper, Burn – Using Fire to Cool the Earth, which explains how biochar can sustainably store huge amounts of carbon in the soil as a beneficial amendment. Biochar can also be used to replace asphalt roads and a large amount of the Portland cement in concrete. This proven technology is giving me hope for the future!