Nuclear Energy vs. Variable Renewable Resources

Reader Mike Carpenter asks:  Craig:  Please look at NuScale Power in Corvallis, Oregon.

Thanks very much, Mike.  Unfortunately, I’m not qualified to evaluate the merits of individual approaches to nuclear energy.  Having said that, I acknowledge that the concept of SMRs (small modular reactors) has merit, if they’re built using a fuel/decay technology that is safe and offers the other advantages of what is generally called “advanced nuclear.”  In fact, here’s a piece I just wrote on the subject generally.

NuScale doesn’t make it clear exactly what technology they’re using, but that’s understandable; they’re certainly not obligated to give away their ideas.

I have to say that I’m leery of the pro-nuke people who seem too quick to put down wind and solar.  In the video on the home page, the NuScale spokesperson refers to these technologies as “unreliable.”  While it might sound like splitting hairs, there is a big difference between a resource that is “variable” versus one that is “unreliable.” The former is a fact that we can (and do) work with; the latter is just an inaccurate pejorative.