Why is the Fessenheim 2 nuclear power plant closing in France? • Hacker News Board

Re: Why is the Fessenheim 2 nuclear power plant closing in France?

#41

Post by onli » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 5:46 PM UTC

fcantournet wrote: post #28

freeflight wrote: post #12

It's weird of the article gives plenty of direct citations from nuclear operators, while at the same time acting like French 40+ year old fission tech doesn't have any issues [0] or sustainability problems, and how the French could dare to shut down one of their first reactors. Particularly in the context that most discussions surrounding nuclear fission power generation lead with "modern designs and reactors being s…

We have a independent national authority (ASN ~ Nuclear Safety Authority) which is tasked to assess the security of all nuclear power plants and certifies them for periods of 10y. The plant that is being closed was certified by the ASN. The 40y lifespan was the MINIMUM certified lifespan of the power plant. It could very well run for another 40y. These kinds of equipment are modernised every 10 years during the shudo…

You have a very focused elite building system in which the big universities creating the future members of the elite are heavily financed and influenced by pro-nuclear organizations. That goes especially for politicans, but includes engineers. The pro-nuclear propaganda repeated by the people that go through this is frightening, many of them are completely brainwashed.

In no way can the ASN be really independent, as it is staffed with the people that went through this system.

Re: Why is the Fessenheim 2 nuclear power plant closing in France?

#42

Post by steeve » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 5:48 PM UTC

exabrial wrote: post #24

> Put differently, in 2019 Fessenheim Unit 1 and 2 generated more electricity than all the solar panels in France combined I learned a term recently called "base load supply". Essentially, something like a nuclear plant is hard to ramp/up down with changing grid demands, but it great at steady-state operation and can run like that for years. This takes care of the minimum load placed on the grid which is fairly predi…

Actually, in France, nuclear has to give way to renewables. And because they are intermittent, has to rapidly ramp up/down.

See https://twitter.com/TristanKamin/status/1247460245460443138?...

Re: Why is the Fessenheim 2 nuclear power plant closing in France?

#43

Post by joss82 » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 5:48 PM UTC

dv_dt wrote: post #21

freeflight wrote: post #12

It's weird of the article gives plenty of direct citations from nuclear operators, while at the same time acting like French 40+ year old fission tech doesn't have any issues [0] or sustainability problems, and how the French could dare to shut down one of their first reactors. Particularly in the context that most discussions surrounding nuclear fission power generation lead with "modern designs and reactors being s…

It's moving slow, but France does have planning working through how to manage nuclear going forward. Replacment with renewables as studied by the French gov't seems not only promising but cost effective. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-10/french-po...

This article is misleading.

You can NOT replace nuclear with wind and solar. Because you can't choose when the sun shines and when the wind blows.

Hydro in France is already built-up everywhere it was feasible. There are no more spots to build meaningful hydro power capacity. Too bad since hydro is the only renewable that can really replace the nuclear power plants.

Re: Why is the Fessenheim 2 nuclear power plant closing in France?

#44

Post by zzzcpan » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 5:50 PM UTC

eqvinox wrote: post #9

scohesc wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in other words, Germany (with some the most serious "green tech" laws) is basically forcing France to shut down their plant, even though it's been operating mostly fine and has been actually helping fight climate change for a long time already.

I have no idea whether it's even possible to find out how the different reasons have factored into the decision; it might as well just have been due to the age or seismic activity and nothing else... But, in reality, it was probably a mix of all 3 and some more.

It's more like a mix of solar and wind energy investors with fossil burning energy investors, both benefit from shutting down nuclear reactors. Solar and wind investors just want to have their huge returns with nothing wasted, as each kWh is pretty expensive, but lacking nuclear power most of the energy generation will still go to burning fossils, who will profit massively from it. Happened in other countries too, like Ukraine, which was recently forced to temporary stop some reactors to benefit those two groups and of course make things worse for the climate.

Re: Why is the Fessenheim 2 nuclear power plant closing in France?

#45

Post by throwaway43234 » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 5:50 PM UTC

WilTimSon wrote: post #17

sleazy_b wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A review of the plant’s page on Wikipedia shows that it did indeed have a number of low level incidents. Do you have any sources about those being the true cause of the shutdown?

I feel like, regardless of what the cause is, having numerous low-level incidents means it's not exactly "safe" as the title of the article suggests. Another user has commented that the plant is nearly 100 years old while the reactors are supposed to last only 40 years before being replaced.

Do you trust the service with the statuspage that is 100% green for all of history or the one that reports the occasional degradation?

Re: Why is the Fessenheim 2 nuclear power plant closing in France?

#46

Post by onli » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 5:51 PM UTC

Reedx wrote: post #19

> The saddest part of this story is that there is no new renewable plant being built overnight to replace Fessenheim. It will be replaced almost entirely by fossil fuels. > It’s worth noting that, as Fessenheim closes, Germany is commissioning a new coal-fired power plant, in Datteln Exactly. Why are so many people ignoring what happens in step 2? When nuclear is shut down, it gets replaced with something worse. Ofte…

Nuclear is not safer than renewables. These statistics are false, they do not include everything involved with running the plants and gathering the ressources. They get repeated every time in these threads here and are refuted every time.

Your first article is provided by a pro nuclear propaganda association. It's almost certainly also false. And ignores conveniently how much more unrecycable nuclear waste France was producing in 2016, waste we can not store safely.

Re: Why is the Fessenheim 2 nuclear power plant closing in France?

#47

Post by toomuchtodo » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 5:52 PM UTC

Mirioron wrote: post #30

dv_dt wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's moving slow, but France does have planning working through how to manage nuclear going forward. Replacment with renewables as studied by the French gov't seems not only promising but cost effective. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-12-10/french-po...

These stories are always very nice and the plants cost effective, but are they true? Pakistan had a 100MW solar powerplant built for them. It actually ended up producing 18MW and required extensive amounts of water to clean the dust off of the panels.[0] I'm sure they were also told that renewables are cheap and will be great, but somehow everyone missed this. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quaid-e-Azam_Solar_Park

There will be failures on the way to a fully renewable powered grid. India just turned up a 750MW facility successfully [1]. 70% of Texas coal plants are at risk of decommissioning as early as 2022 due to the amount of solar generation in the pipeline [2]. Spain is years ahead of schedule in coal decommissioning due to low cost renewables and pumped hydro storage capabilities being developed [3]. The UK is rapidly developing HVDC undersea cables to import clean hydro from Denmark and Norway [4]. Australia has over 130GW of renewables projects in the development pipeline (5x greater than the continent's entire fossil generation capacity) [5].

Seven countries are expected to end the use of coal by 2025: Portugal (2021), France (2022), Slovakia (2023), the UK (2024), Ireland (2025) and Italy (2025) (per Europe Beyond Coal)

Politics and entrenched interests will have no choice but to accept market forces. The sun dumps enough power on the Earth in an hour to power all of humanity for a year, and it's mostly free for the taking.

[1] http://ddnews.gov.in/business/pm-modi-dedicate-nation-750-mw...

[2] https://www.solarpowerworldonline.com/2020/07/new-report-fin...

[3] https://english.elpais.com/economy_and_business/2020-06-29/s...

[4] https://electrek.co/2020/07/14/worlds-longest-subsea-power-c...

[5] https://www.pv-magazine-australia.com/2019/10/26/australias-...

Re: Why is the Fessenheim 2 nuclear power plant closing in France?

#48

Post by eldenbishop » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 5:52 PM UTC

therealdrag0 wrote: post #8

eqvinox wrote: post #3

actual answer: it's right on the border to Germany and has a long history of low-level incidents, and the Germans were starting to get seriously pissed off at that. It's also the oldest nuclear power plant France was still running. Oh and also the Rhine valley is seismically active, even if only at a low level.

1. Can you provide a source? 2. still a problem that they’re not replacing not with green energy though right?

For what it's worth the original close order was supposed to align with bringing the newer Flamanville 3 1,650 MW plant online which would have been a nearly even swap. Unfortunately that project has gone 5x over budget with numerous time delays. Current guesstimates expected it to come online in 2022. This article seems a little disingenuous.

Re: Why is the Fessenheim 2 nuclear power plant closing in France?

#49

Post by zackmorris » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 5:53 PM UTC

I just want to point out that the headline is incorrect - there is no such thing as safe nuclear power currently. When you factor in micromorts from fuel mining and waste storage, you get a relatively low number of deaths compared to coal. But I wouldn't call nuclear power "safe". The worst part is that those deaths are delayed by years and even generations, so we feel an artificial sense of security because we aren't likely to hit those problems in our lifetime.

Yes there are some promising reactors that produce less waste, and breeder reactors that can burn waste. But those are mired in political problems unrelated to the tech itself. I think that the crux of the issue is that human fallibility approaches 100% on decades-long timescales, so some reactor somewhere will be melting down roughly every decade from this point forward. Personally that level of risk just isn't acceptable to me. That's why I'm against the construction of new reactors.

All that said, I would not have voted to retire this reactor at this time. I also find it sad that little or none of the cost of operating it will make its way to renewable energy. So even in progressive France, noble goals like sustainable non-polluting energy generation continue to face artificial hurdles created by attempts at shortsighted political gain.

Re: Why is the Fessenheim 2 nuclear power plant closing in France?

#50

Post by frogpelt » Wed, Jul 15, 2020, 5:53 PM UTC

Reedx wrote: post #19

> The saddest part of this story is that there is no new renewable plant being built overnight to replace Fessenheim. It will be replaced almost entirely by fossil fuels. > It’s worth noting that, as Fessenheim closes, Germany is commissioning a new coal-fired power plant, in Datteln Exactly. Why are so many people ignoring what happens in step 2? When nuclear is shut down, it gets replaced with something worse. Ofte…

The whole controversy around nuclear, seems to indicate people are not as worried about the climate as they claim to be.