• zephyreks@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ah yes… The classic primary source of an op ed from CU Boulder, which isn’t exactly known for having a great Asian Studies program.

    • Arcturus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      And yet, it’s backed up by studies showing that nuclear is faster for decarbonisation, S&P Global’s estimates for the massive growth of renewables vs nuclear indicating China’s preferences. But really, this is all part of China’s infrastructure push. The funding is going to renewables, but China is keeping a foot in the door for nuclear. At best, nuclear would work, in a majority renewables grid if they cut about 25% off the cost.

      • zephyreks@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        And this relates to China in particular, how? Chinese infrastructure is substantially cheaper than abroad because NIMBYs get fucked.

        • Arcturus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          This relates to China because they’re literally by far have invested the heaviest in renewable energy. A good amount of their nuclear reactors are experimental and for research, some are looking at military applications for ships. Renewables growth in China far outstrips their nuclear efforts. As per what the original article I mentioned indicates. China isn’t serious about their nuclear plans, it’s a combined research, military, national pride thing. Unlike their renewables investments, which you can see outstrips nuclear today, and in the future from sources given, backed by scientific papers also given.