I've heard a lot about how cheap and effective solar + battery tech is getting, will a new nuclear plant even still be worth it to operate after the ten years or whatever it takes to construct?
this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2026
15 points (100.0% liked)
California
2032 readers
19 users here now
Welcome to /c/California, an online haven that brings to life the unrivaled diversity and vibrancy of California! This engaging community offers a virtual exploration of the Golden State, taking you from the stunning Pacific coastline to the rugged Sierra Nevada, and every town, city, and landmark in between. Discover California's world-class wineries, stunning national parks, innovative tech scene, robust agricultural heartland, and culturally diverse metropolises.
Discussions span a wide range of topics—from travel tips and restaurant recommendations to local politics and environmental issues. Whether you're a lifelong resident, a recent transplant, or planning your dream visit, /c/California is your one-stop place to share experiences, ask questions, and celebrate all the things that make California truly unique.
Related Communities:
Nearby Communities:
- California
- Bakersfield, CA
- Bay Area, CA
- Burbank, CA
- Fresno, CA
- Long Beach, CA
- Los Angeles, CA
- Oakland, CA
- San Diego, CA
- San Jose, CA
- San Francisco, CA
- Sacramento, CA
- Santa Clarita, CA
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Maybe. Depends very much on how long-duration storage costs drop and what you actually pay for the nuclear power plant.
As they should IMO. SMRs look like a good solution to a lot of power problems, including the electricity needs of Data Centers.
Not without basic safety rules in place. Things like how many guards are needed to prevent theft of fissile material and whether it is OK to have radiation leaks should not be left up to corporate profit decisions
Those laws have existed at the federal level for decades.
As long as they have the potential to do that during the lifetime of a reactor, having nuclear at all isn't ok