The most recent European nuclear plants took close to 20 years to build. Even if everything goes according to plan, and in Italy it won’t, they take around 10 years to build.
It is a great way to funnel money to your friends, let them get billions for doing some digging and pouring some concrete and then scrape the project claiming the science wasnt there yet.
The strategy focuses on advanced technologies, including Small Modular Reactors (SMRs), microreactors, and fourth-generation fission technology. The plan also includes investments in nuclear fusion, reflecting a long-term commitment to sustainable energy development.
You’re missing an important part that I highlighted. It doesn’t mean that they expect to have fusion up and running by 2030.
Last time I saw the ITER roadmap 20 years ago, it was large scale commercial fusion for 2100 and I really doubt that was a game changer which would shorten this roadmap.
Sure US move forward with some startup perfectly knowing that 90% of them will bankrupt (and sell %some patents), 5% will bend to a different field (If you have a patent on better supra-conducing magnet, you can also build MRI and particle accelerators) and may-be 5% will stay on the “fusion research field”. But I doubt they’ll have a commercial fusion powerplant soon.
I’m fairly convinced that the main proponents of nuclear energy is the construction industry. 20+ year construction jobs in a highly regulated area (a perfect excuse for any sort of delay)? You don’t get those very often.
This goes doubly for Italy, where a significant part of that industry has a mafia issue.
Nuclear is also great news for the oil/gas industry that is worried how comparatively very quickly solar/wind power can be rolled out: states heavily into ideas that give very little bang per buck, take a very long time to realize, and which are usually fairly inflexible in their production.
The reason the reactor in Finland took a long time was due to having to build up suitable competence amongst contractors again. That’s now done, and those same contractors will work on building other reactors in Europe.
The most recent European nuclear plants took close to 20 years to build. Even if everything goes according to plan, and in Italy it won’t, they take around 10 years to build.
It’s worse: they are banking on fusion and SMR, which are pipe dreams even at twice the time scale:
I hope they are lying knowing they are lying.
It is a great way to funnel money to your friends, let them get billions for doing some digging and pouring some concrete and then scrape the project claiming the science wasnt there yet.
You’re missing an important part that I highlighted. It doesn’t mean that they expect to have fusion up and running by 2030.
Last time I saw the ITER roadmap 20 years ago, it was large scale commercial fusion for 2100 and I really doubt that was a game changer which would shorten this roadmap.
Sure US move forward with some startup perfectly knowing that 90% of them will bankrupt (and sell %some patents), 5% will bend to a different field (If you have a patent on better supra-conducing magnet, you can also build MRI and particle accelerators) and may-be 5% will stay on the “fusion research field”. But I doubt they’ll have a commercial fusion powerplant soon.
I’m fairly convinced that the main proponents of nuclear energy is the construction industry. 20+ year construction jobs in a highly regulated area (a perfect excuse for any sort of delay)? You don’t get those very often.
This goes doubly for Italy, where a significant part of that industry has a mafia issue.
Nuclear is also great news for the oil/gas industry that is worried how comparatively very quickly solar/wind power can be rolled out: states heavily into ideas that give very little bang per buck, take a very long time to realize, and which are usually fairly inflexible in their production.
Mafia translates to incompetence as nepotism, “higher orders”, and quid pro quo take precedence over competence.
The reason the reactor in Finland took a long time was due to having to build up suitable competence amongst contractors again. That’s now done, and those same contractors will work on building other reactors in Europe.
I completely agree.
I was just about to say, that’ll be a neat trick.