1

No paywall at moment

22 Countries Pledge to Triple Nuclear Capacity in Push to Cut Fossil Fuels

The group, including Britain, France and the United States, said the agreement was critical to meeting nations’ climate commitments.

By Jenny Gross
Reporting from COP28 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates

Dec. 2, 2023
Updated 5:49 a.m. ET

The United States and 21 other countries pledged on Saturday at the United Nations climate summit in Dubai to triple nuclear energy capacity by 2050, saying the revival of nuclear power was critical for cutting carbon emissions to near zero in the coming decades.

Proponents of nuclear energy, which supplies 18 percent of electricity in the United States, say it is a clean, safe and reliable complement to wind and solar energy. But a significant hurdle is funding.

Last month, a developer of small nuclear reactors in Idaho said it was canceling a project that had been expected to be part of a new wave of power plants. The cost of building the reactors had risen to $9.3 billion from $5.3 billion because of increasing interest rates and inflation.

Britain, Canada, France, Ghana, South Korea, Sweden and the United Arab Emirates were among the 22 countries that signed the declaration to triple capacity from 2020 levels. . . . .

2

Germany apparently is not on the list
it may or may not be related to the fact that German participants were said to be having trouble attending the Global Climate Change conference where the initiative was announced.

Their private jets are apparently frozen on the runway in Munich and switching to commercial flights? . . . . Well that’s not the kind of people they are.

image
image685×657 73.5 KB

https://x.com/RyanMaue/status/1730955864935154140?s=20

1 Like
3

This should have been the common sense path for electric generation all along. Build plants with the intention that they will run at 70% capacity during normal operations, with the ability to ramp up when demand rises. As nuclear power is an all season, day/night system it wouldn’t matter what the weather was doing, or what time it was.

5 Likes
4

Only triple? I supposed it’s a start… :man_shrugging:

2 Likes
5

I would rather see this pan out. Be better if we could move on from central to individual power generation for many reasons.

3 Likes
6

I thought nucular is bad? Is it “renewable”? Green?

1 Like
7

Depends if you can make money and political hay off it, or not.

1 Like
8

Uranium is green! That counts. :rofl:

1 Like
9

Plant Vogtle Units 3 & 4… Georgia recently brought unit 3 online, and unit 4 in progress…

1 Like
10

This is really good to know Ken.

Are you involved in those projects?

11

Nucular is bad pronunciation. So yes, it’s bad.

12

Since the Kerry Brigade is pushing for hundreds of coal plants getting shuttered, we’re gonna need way more than two new nuke plants coming online.

13

nuclear energy is great but I can imagine all the nuclear cooling towers topped with windmills

(brings to mind a MDC song)

14

Well, why not use the steam for steam power? (wink)

15

well I for one think there are far too many stiff collars in the world as it is…

16

The funny part about that is Germany buys a lot of electricity from France which get about 70% from Nuclear.

17

Could not post a link here, but google “Plant Vogtle Units 3 & 4” and you will find the info. Interesting project as I think it is the first new reactor built in 30 years. Typical issues it seems with delays and cost overruns, but I guess that is to be expected with any project of this size. Just thought it might be an interesting read as it seems most have no clue about this project. I am not involved in the project, just benefit from it as a resident of Georgia.

1 Like
18

Well, in fairness, until recently, Germany produced much of its electricity from Russian gas. Last I heard, they were refiring some of their mothballed coal plants.