The renewable energy is getting cheaper than nuclear and fossil-fuel. See the cost comparison of electricity sources in KW/h
The cost of energy varies among countries depending on which technology they use and from which power source it comes. It also ranges from one year to another as the technological advances progress. In China and Korea, it is a third of the cost of energy in the UK and the EU and in the USA, it is 25% cheaper than in the EU. Although oil and gas may compete with all other energy sources, it is very detrimental to the environment and continuously produces more CO2 and N2O than any other energy sources.
However, pretty soon, renewable energy will be cheaper than energy from fossil fuels, such as crude oil, coal and natural gas and nuclear energy. The oil producers know these facts and therefore they are trying to reduce petroleum prices to compete with the cheaper, renewable energy sources, but politicians always make things more expensive to please their lobbyists.
Let us take an example of building a nuclear power station in a few countries. The cost of building a nuclear power plant in the UK is about £90/MW h; the Chinese can construct it for £24/MW h and Norway will supply electricity in the year 2020 that will cost £18/MW h. In the USA, it is more expensive than in China and Korea, but it is 25% less than in the UK and the EU. The cost comparison for various sources of energy is very conflicting and depends on the technologies used, tax levies, capital costs and many other factors.
The electricity cost from nuclear sources is cheaper than gas and coal, but when the petroleum prices dropped it was no longer the case and, in time, renewable energy sources will be cheaper, safer and better for the planet; the others will be things of the past.
No matter what the economic argument presents, the trend is going towards renewable energy sources that are free from harmful environmental pollution. Renewable energy from natural and cleaner sources avoid the risk of nuclear radiation and the prohibitive cost of investing in it. The excessive cost of getting rid of nuclear waste is neither economical nor environmentally friendly.
It is wiser and more civilized to pay a higher price for renewable energy to protect the environment and ensure the longer existence of this planet.
The renewable energy sources will become cheaper than nuclear energy if the latest technologies are implemented and mass-produced and will have much lower overhead costs. It becomes more achievable when building one million Eco-homes for an Eco-city and everything is locally manufactured by cheaper workers.
In the Eco-city, we should create renewable-energy factories to employ thousands of the locals instead of paying the Chinese, Koreans or the French to build a nuclear power plant.
However, as the nuclear energy cost goes down if constructed by the Chinese and Koreans, the efficiency of solar photo-voltaic cells and wind turbines is going up. So, the cost of renewable energy becomes lower than nuclear and fossil-fuel energy.
The technologies are explained later in the Eco-energy zone section. However, it is pure mathematics: the efficiency of solar-energy production is increasing from 15% to 45% and the advanced multi-junction technology makes it nearly 98% efficient, which makes it very competitive to nuclear and fossil fuel energy.
In simple terms, instead of paying off the cost of investing in renewable energy in 18 years, it will be paid off in less than six years. It will also provide us with free electricity for at least 25 years maintenance-free. The cost to the consumer will be as low as $0.04 (US) for each KW/h, which is much cheaper than what electricity companies charge.
The technical description of the renewable-energy technologies might not be appealing to some readers, but it is necessary to enrich people’s knowledge and prove that nuclear and fossil-fuel power stations are not needed and can be replaced by renewable energy sources at a more competitive cost.
The petroleum and electricity companies might not like the idea of replacing nuclear/fossil-fuel energy with renewable and will use their influence on politicians to delay the use of renewable energy to keep the status quo of their business. The ethical suggestion to them is to change their line of business and invest in renewable energy. However, we live in a world of greed and short-term profits, not ethics.