I'm a US expat living in Germany, and boy is the anti-nuclear sentiment real here. There have even been fights - physical altercations - between Green Party members at rallies for having differing viewpoints about nuclear. Unfortunately, it seems those who are against are working with very outdated information and 'tropes' w.r.t. nuclear safety and whatnot. Quite unfortunate.
Everyone thinks the next gen of reactors will finally solve the issues the last 3/4 didn't. This is one of those generational issues because young people (I'm 37) hear promises and old ones have heard them before...
Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online
151–160 of 399 posts
Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online
#152The view I share with a majority of Germans: Costs of nuclear energy are very much a burden that future generations will have to carry. A hundered thousand years of safe storage is not part of the calculation of the energy price. It is also clear now that the the companies running the plants will not pay for the deconstruction of the plants after they reached their end of life. Tax payers have to pay for this, and a…
The Germans have switched from nuclear to coal. Can you cut this "future generations are going to have to carry the cost" when the alternative is literally helping destroy the whole planet's ecosystems? Not to mention they spew up significantly more radioactivity in the air than nuclear powerplants. A 30x30m pool of radioactive fuel is nothing compared to what their powerplants are doing to the future of young genera…
The switch was from nuclear to renewables. Coal was stable for a long time, and is now decreasing. Coal is currently scheduled to be phased out by 2038.
Source: Quick Google image search for the power sources over time plots.
Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online
#153It's worth noting that nuclear is really expensive when factoring in insurance and disposable, a lot more so than wind and solar. >The cost of generating solar power ranges from $36 to $44 per megawatt hour (MWh), the WNISR said, while onshore wind power comes in at $29–$56 per MWh. Nuclear energy costs between $112 and $189. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-energy-nuclearpower/nucle...
We've literally just been through an entire energy crisis in Europe that was exacerbated due to inconsistent wind. https://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Europes-E... The UK is suffering the most from the drop in wind power output, caused by mild weather. The country, which prides itself on its wind capacity and whose Prime Minister last year said wind farms could power every home by 2030, produced less t…
:)
Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online
#154https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zsSswlxThqo
One of the blocks was really old so I'm glad to see it go. I'm in favor of building new, safer reactors. Bill Gates is an investor in a startup that developed such a design, but it will probably be hard to get it tested.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/TerraPower
China apparently also has made advances.
Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online
#155It's worth noting that nuclear is really expensive when factoring in insurance and disposable, a lot more so than wind and solar. >The cost of generating solar power ranges from $36 to $44 per megawatt hour (MWh), the WNISR said, while onshore wind power comes in at $29–$56 per MWh. Nuclear energy costs between $112 and $189. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-energy-nuclearpower/nucle...
The cost to keep a reactor that's already been built going is low.
Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Right now the choice is between a nuclear power plant during these moments, or a natural gas one. Well, gas and coal. Germany is still ~26% coal in 2021[1]. Edit: Maybe 50% coal if you look at consumption, not just generation, per 'incrudible[2]. [1]: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/g... (Lignite is a kind of coal) [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28857398
I would expect that in most places this will shift to natural gas, given that natural gas is more economically viable than coal for new plants. But still, both are fossil fuels, so neither option is great.
Or using Swedish, Norwegian hydro and wind together with German, British and Danish wind. These links are on the same scale as nuclear reactors.
Germany Norway (2021) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NordLink
UK Norway (2021) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Sea_Link
UK (Scotland) Norway (On hold by Norway, cleared on Scottish side) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NorthConnect
Denmark Norway (1977) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skagerrak_(power_transmission_...
Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
The wind also ceases to exist at night right?
I think you’re being glib, but the issue is that you can’t guarantee the alignment of sun and wind to match demand. Sometimes the wind blows at night, yes, but sometimes it does not. On a pure renewable grid, no wind at night means rolling brownouts or blackouts. This is particularly problematic during the summer when people want to run AC in order to sleep, and will also be an issue when people move to electric heat…
Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Right now the choice is between a nuclear power plant during these moments, or a natural gas one. Well, gas and coal. Germany is still ~26% coal in 2021[1]. Edit: Maybe 50% coal if you look at consumption, not just generation, per 'incrudible[2]. [1]: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/g... (Lignite is a kind of coal) [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28857398
I would expect that in most places this will shift to natural gas, given that natural gas is more economically viable than coal for new plants. But still, both are fossil fuels, so neither option is great.
Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online
#159It's worth noting that nuclear is really expensive when factoring in insurance and disposable, a lot more so than wind and solar. >The cost of generating solar power ranges from $36 to $44 per megawatt hour (MWh), the WNISR said, while onshore wind power comes in at $29–$56 per MWh. Nuclear energy costs between $112 and $189. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-energy-nuclearpower/nucle...
It’s worth noting that you are confusing system costs and levelized costs of electricity. Cheap wind and solar electricity is absolutely useless if it cannot be produced on demand. Nuclear produces electricity 24/7, independent of weather with no backup required. The kWh costs 30 cents in Germany, but 15 cents in France.
Not true.
> The kWh costs 30 cents in Germany, but 15 cents in France.
International comparisons are useless without comparison of pricing structure. That includes for example the tax regime, fees mandated, etc.
Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online
#160One generally underappreciated aspect to nuclear energy opposition is the intrinsic link to nuclear weapons. Some of it is scientifically illiterate nonsense (a lot of people seem to think power reactors can have a nuclear explosion). And some of it is just historical association. But some of it is a lot harder to dismiss. A world without nuclear reactors or enrichment facilities is a world without nuclear weapons. A…