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

Led by France, 10 EU countries call on Brussels to label nuclear energy as green

euronews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 143 posts

Re: Led by France, 10 EU countries call on Brussels to label nuclear energy as green

#51

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

OnlyMortal wrote: post #24

Having grown up in the Cold War with the threat of MAD and the waste products from reactors, I do understand the hesitation of nuclear power. But, in a more practical world, there’s not much of a choice if we want an energy source that’s not killing us by air pollution. In the other hand, we seem to be yet again passing the problem onto future generations. Perhaps they’ll have the science to resolve nuclear waste but…

Bill Gates new nuclear power plant design being built in Wyoming

These things are small and cheap.

“ The project features a 345 megawatt sodium-cooled fast reactor with molten salt-based energy storage that could boost the system's power output to 500 MW during peak power demand. TerraPower said last year that the plants would cost about $1 billion.”

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/utility-small-nuclea...

Re: Led by France, 10 EU countries call on Brussels to label nuclear energy as green

#52

Post by pjerem »

foepys wrote: post #15
xvilka wrote: post #6

Given the Germany stupid move to get rid of nuclear (in favor of coal[1], as it turned out), not sure if it will support this decision. And nowadays they are dependent from one country's gas... [1] https://www.wired.com/story/germany-rejected-nuclear-power-a...

France imports a lot of gas generated power from Germany over the course of the year. Without Germany's readily available gas turbines, France wouldn't be able to stabilize their net. Same the other way around where Germany relies on France's almost always available nuclear power.

Also, we (the French) made a stupid move by closing the Fessenheim power plant although it have passed all the security checks and could have continue to work for one or more decades.

Re: Led by France, 10 EU countries call on Brussels to label nuclear energy as green

#53

Post by adt2bt »

GrumpyNl wrote: post #44
cletus wrote: post #34

This seems to be an unpopular opinion on HN but I just don't trust humans to manage fission power in the long term at scale. First, there are the issues of storage and disposal of enrichment byproducts, specifically depleted Uranium Hexaflouride ("DUJF" or UF6). Second, there's what to do with old fuel rods. Proponents argue this is a solved problem and it can be stored for the long term in geologically stable storag…

"Second, there's what to do with old fuel rods. Proponents argue this is a solved problem and it can be stored for the long term in geologically stable storage facilities." With space travel becoming cheaper and cheaper, cant we deposit that on the moon for example?

The general concern there is a rocket malfunction spewing spent fuel rods over a large terrestrial area before it gets the chance to reach the moon.

Re: Led by France, 10 EU countries call on Brussels to label nuclear energy as green

#54

Post by Ekaros »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #12
account4mypc wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is the right attitude. Even if you don't want to use nuclear power, it obviously warrants serious attention.

I saw a photo of an entire hillside covered with solar panels and it was being touted as some green energy achievement. But then I realized that those solar panels have smothered the habitat and that the actual energy output of that solar panel array is very low compared to its footprint - not to mention all the resources that went into producing all those panels. It seems obvious to me that the best possible solutio…

Then I consider that I live in cold climate with long and dark winters. I wonder where is the truly grid scale energy storage to go over winter...

Okay, currently it is Norway and it kinda works, but that really doesn't look too good just now...

Re: Led by France, 10 EU countries call on Brussels to label nuclear energy as green

#55

Post by TedDoesntTalk »

cletus wrote: post #34

This seems to be an unpopular opinion on HN but I just don't trust humans to manage fission power in the long term at scale. First, there are the issues of storage and disposal of enrichment byproducts, specifically depleted Uranium Hexaflouride ("DUJF" or UF6). Second, there's what to do with old fuel rods. Proponents argue this is a solved problem and it can be stored for the long term in geologically stable storag…

Bill Gates new nuclear power plant design is being built in Wyoming.

These things are small and cheap.

“ The project features a 345 megawatt sodium-cooled fast reactor with molten salt-based energy storage that could boost the system's power output to 500 MW during peak power demand. TerraPower said last year that the plants would cost about $1 billion.”

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/utility-small-nuclea...

Re: Led by France, 10 EU countries call on Brussels to label nuclear energy as green

#56

Post by Ekaros »

jstsch wrote: post #3

Climate change is an existential threat to humanity. To deny using an energy source that is nearly carbon neutral, whilst half the population of this planet is still living in energy poverty, is far from being the prudent choice...

And one that can supply carbon neutral energy also during winters. Which considering amount of global population that requires heating to survive is quite critical.

Re: Led by France, 10 EU countries call on Brussels to label nuclear energy as green

#57

Post by tonoto »

Very good and hopefully that will make the collective opinion strong enough to force the politicians in Sweden to scale up instead of scaling down the nuclear plants. Instead of lots of stable energy we now have more of wind mills turning big areas of nature into industrial zones which in turn have made the electricity price to become even more expensive.

Re: Led by France, 10 EU countries call on Brussels to label nuclear energy as green

#58

Post by ChuckNorris89 »

rad_gruchalski wrote: post #21
llampx wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still see "Atomkraft? Nein, danke!" stickers here and there and am sad at the ignorance displayed by the people who sport them.

Let’s see if they still sport these stickers after the coming winter…

Well maybe Germans could just vote to freeze their energy prices, like Berliners voted to freeze their rents.

/s

Re: Led by France, 10 EU countries call on Brussels to label nuclear energy as green

#59

Post by estaseuropano »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #37
cletus wrote: post #34

This seems to be an unpopular opinion on HN but I just don't trust humans to manage fission power in the long term at scale. First, there are the issues of storage and disposal of enrichment byproducts, specifically depleted Uranium Hexaflouride ("DUJF" or UF6). Second, there's what to do with old fuel rods. Proponents argue this is a solved problem and it can be stored for the long term in geologically stable storag…

It may not be popular, because it is just not very logical or pragmatic. Setting aside the vagaries of politics, as those will eventually change the same way pendulum swings, the simple reality is that we simply won't be able to dig around for coal, gas and oil for that much longer. Something has got to give.

The op gives clear and sound reasons which you dismiss as illogical without any actual argument. Your answer also misses the obvious point of renewables.

I fully agree with the op, no way nuclear is long-term safe and if we poured the trillions that have been poured into nuclear into renewables the world already would be a lot nicer. But renewables are much harder to monopolize so the big players never really wanted to support them.

Re: Led by France, 10 EU countries call on Brussels to label nuclear energy as green

#60

Post by Krasnol »

Ekaros wrote: post #49
johnchristopher wrote: post #35

I read that letter in the newspaper this morning and I had a few questions about the claims being made: - They claim nuclear could create a million of jobs in Europe. What kind of jobs ? Is that job creation or job swapping ? - Switching to nuclear power guarantees energy independence. But where is the uranium we need ? How can we guarantee delivery ? The argument I hear against building new nuclear plants is that it…

I think construction timeframes all due to complex political process and lack of proper experience. With enough political will and accepting more reactors in numbers I believe in 10 years, we could get plants up and running in 5 year timeframe.

> I think construction timeframes all due to complex political process and lack of proper experience.

Are you aware that Hinkley Point is build by the EDF a French company...they sure don't lack proper experience but the project is still all OP listed.

Fission is no solution for the crisis.

Post reply on HN