nuclear power plants

Why are nuclear power plants so expensive to build? I would assume at least 500mill for the structure etc, and probably that much for the nuclear elements needed and testing - but 8 billion or more? Seriously?

a huge portion of that is just safety systems; containment, backups, backups of backups, design approval, tests.

another big part is probably licensing as well as legal fees to get the thing built (nobody wants one nearby, but they'd gladly live next to a natural gas plant)

>>2
It's natural, and therefore good for the enviroment

living within 25 miles of a nuclear power plant is the equivalent of smoking one cigarette or the cocks of seven full grown stallions at your birthday party

basically, they have to be 100% failproof, because otherwise you're not allowed to build them, and that costs money

>>5
whereas a coal plant or a natural gas plant can blow fucking sky high all it wants and nobody cares, because that happens all the time. it's a classic conformational bias

Thank your local birken-stock wearing, tree-hugging vegetarian hippie.

You seem to be quoting arbitrary figures OP. How much for a conventional coal powerplant ?

>>6
what is the worst that can happen when a coal power plant blows fucking sky high, and how long do you have problem from that, and how much does that costs? (accident costs completely paid by insurance from company)

what is the worst that can happen when a nuclear power plant blows fucking sky high, and how long do you have problem from that? Wait... you don't want that to happen... trying to prevent that costs buttloads of additional money! (accident costs paid by taxpayers, like 0.005% paid by insurance from company)

what is the worst that can happen when a windmill blows fucking sky high, and how long do you have problem from that? wait... that can't happen, the worst thing that can happen is that it falls down, (accident costs completely paid by insurance from company or other entity.)

what is the worst that can happen when a solar panel blows fucking sky high, and how long do you have problem from that? wait... that can't happen, and anyone who has placed it, can replace it for no more than the initial cost. (no need for insurance above initial costs)

>>9
You struck a curious nerve in me.  Has there ever been a nuclear reactor that's actually "blown[n] fucking sky high" outside of SimCity?

Bar what just happened in Japan, that is; it'd be too easy to list and would ignore the real problem: the difficulty of safely enduring a 9.0 earthquake.

>>10
I'm almost positive it's impossible for a nuclear reactor to "blow sky high", i.e., create a mushroom cloud.  It's very easy for them to release stupid amounts of radiation that make the area uninhabitable for hundreds of years.  The reason that the reactors like the one in Japan and Chernobyl were so disastrous was because they were being run using incredibly unsafe procedures.  So, I wouldn't say it's easy to make it safe, because that implies that anything about applied science is easy, but it is certainly reasonably doable.

>>9
How many people are killed by inhaling coal dust, mining accidents and such

How much power can both solar panels and wind mills realistically produce?

How often can a nuclear power plant blow up?
how many plants use unsafe procedures?
How many of the ones that do cause damage were slated for decommission anyways?