Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

sustainability-times.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 256 posts

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

#91

Post by kergonath »

onli wrote: post #41
fcantournet wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

So the people you want to oversee the safety of nuclear installations are people who do not know reactor physics or civil engineering?

Also, universities are quite far from the political elite in France, none of which actually know about anything related to nuclear power plants. Engineer at the ASN are just that: engineers. They don't take decisions.

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

#92

Post by Kuinox »

vladletter wrote: post #57

They don't talk about nuclear waste highly toxic that is buried in the north east of France and that they don't know what to do with. Nuclear is good for environment temporarily, but on the long term, if we don't know how to reuse nuclear waste, it will be worse.

Would be cool if you sourced your statements like the article did. Like "we don't know what to do with it" which is a lie.

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

#93

Post by temac »

mlyle wrote: post #70
steeve wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?...

Renewables and nuclear -both- have the problem that you can't control when you get the generation. Nuclear wants to be constant-- both because ramping isn't super fast and because you want to recover large capital costs. Renewables ... produce varying amounts pseudo-periodically and unpredictably, which is even worse. Neither matches conventionally to demand. The only way around this is technologies that store (hydro…

If I'm not mistaken nuclear in France is actually pilotable quite fast, it is not instantaneous but it is really fast. You cover the risk of shortest term high variance with other means, but they basically already exist (hydro, gaz) and you don't need much.

This is not necessarily the case for all nuclear power plant, it has to be designed for that.

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

#94

Post by onli »

twic wrote: post #79
onli wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The statistics i've seen do include resource extraction (which is pretty safe for nuclear power, because you need so little fuel). I have not seen them refuted on HN. I would be interested to see a refutation - and if a refutation is posted every time, it should be easy for you to find.

I'm hesitant to argue more than I already did against that straw man argument. It's just a propaganda talking point, it's not actually an argument pro nuclear energy. And it's indecent.

But if you are honestly interested, read the greenpeace criticism of these studies to understand how the statistic might be false and how it can be disputed, https://wayback.archive-it.org/9650/20200415093014/http://p3.... Sure, it's easy to ignore that by looking at where it's coming from, but that goes both ways.

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

#95

Post by Kuinox »

hamilyon2 wrote: post #64

Please don't forget increased reliance on natural gas from Russia. Uranium is so abundant, it does not give anyone any power in negotiations. But fossil fuel has to be imported. Natural gas, for example, flows only through pipes.

Sadly there is no uranium in France.

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

#96

Post by AceJohnny2 »

_ph_ wrote: post #34
_iyig wrote: post #16

Reminds me of the German government’s decision, made in the wake of the Fukushima disaster, to phase out all German nuclear power: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_phase-out An immediate effect of this decision was to increase Germany’s reliance on fossil fuels, including “brown coal” which is strip-mined in an extraordinarily environmentally-destructive process. Another effect was to increase the German g…

The German grid does not rely on nuclear power from France. Germany is a net exporter. Of course, with an European electricity network, there is a lot of electricity moved around every day, often reversing directions in a few hours, depending on local needs and production.

Source (because I didn't trust): https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/features/electricity-export...

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

#97

Post by Kuinox »

cptskippy wrote: post #54
baq wrote: post #2

answer: short term political gain

Why is sensible behavior suddenly political? The owner/operator of the facility, EDF, envisaged a 40 year life for all 2nd generation reactors. That would have meant the reactor would have been shut down 2 years ago. It's in a flood zone and a 2011 commission found that it didn't have necessary redundant cooling in place should the canals around it fail. It's in a seismically active area. It's on a river over an aqui…

As stated in the article, the 40 year lifespan is a lie from 'les verts'. The facility was built for 40 year with minimal maintenance. This is not the lifespan if the facility was well maintained.

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

#98

Post by [deleted] »

kergonath wrote: post #88
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…

OK, there are several misconceptions here. 1) It's not one of the first French reactors by a long shot. It's actually a licensed American design. 2) More modern designs being better does not mean that previous ones are unusable, particularly when they've been built and are just sitting there. Stupid car analogy: a better car being sold with better crash test ratings does not mean you're going to die if you drive last…

[deleted]

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

#99

Post by kergonath »

morsch wrote: post #35
Mirioron wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the consequences of the inevitable natural gas or coal power plant that will replace it? There's always a lot of talk about renewables, yet it seems that we still end up with a fossil fuel based powerplant. It's not like France is building new nuclear plants to replace the ones that are shutting down.

> There's always a lot of talk about renewables It's odd to pretend that renewables are all talk when at the moment I'm writing this France's power grid is 28% renewable[1]. And France still has lots of opportunities to expand, both solar and wind. You'd think with >4000km of coast line there'd be lots of space for offshore wind. [1] https://www.electricitymap.org/zone/FR and 60% nuclear, but the point still stands

The bulk of French renewable is hydro, which is not going to grow, and has been there for ages. It's actually a very good complement to nuclear plants.

It's disingenuous to point at 28% renewables as if it's a sudden victory of good wind and solar against bad old nuclear.

Particularly when we know that gas power plants will be built to partially replace Fessenheim.

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

#100

Post by _ph_ »

AceJohnny2 wrote: post #96
_ph_ wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The German grid does not rely on nuclear power from France. Germany is a net exporter. Of course, with an European electricity network, there is a lot of electricity moved around every day, often reversing directions in a few hours, depending on local needs and production.

Source (because I didn't trust): https://www.nsenergybusiness.com/features/electricity-export...

One also has to carefully observe, that while France very often exports to Germany, most of the time, the elektricity is passing through Germany towards the south and eastern neighbour states.
Post reply on HN