Germany is closing half of its reactors before the end of the year • Hacker News Board

Re: Germany is closing half of its reactors before the end of the year

#171

Post by scotty79 » Wed, Dec 22, 2021, 9:11 PM UTC

KingMachiavelli wrote: post #154

scotty79 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if we raise price of energy to the level where mining cryptocurrency is barely profitable and even that only in times of peak production from renewables and subsidize consumers directly so they can purchase reasonable amount of energy priced that way for their own use?

Who is a reasonable consumer? Industries like steel refinement are basically just energy cost arbitrage just like Bitcoin but you get steel instead of Bitcoin. Plus crypto dynamically changes the mining difficulty.

Not sure if you can rampup/rampdown steel refining quickly enough to provide on demand buffer load for renewables.

Re: Germany is closing half of its reactors before the end of the year

#172

Post by AstralStorm » Wed, Dec 22, 2021, 9:11 PM UTC

animal_spirits wrote: post #147

elcapitan wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Primary energy consumption looks quite a bit different though: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/g... Also worth noting that "biomass" often gets hidden in the "clean energy" part, but that just means burning something other than oil/coal/gas.

In my opinion I think biomass can be considered cleaner since the burning of it releases only recently stored carbon as opposed to taking huge carbon reserves from fossil fuels that might not have ever seen the atmosphere again. In my mind biomass is "carbon neutral" where fossil fuels are "carbon positive"

It is not neutral, it takes tens of years for standard sources of biomass to accumulate to useful amounts. Fast biomass would use something like hemp or other grass but it's still problematic.

And it does increase CO2 and NOx levels when burned, not to mention soot - it's dirtier than quality coal. The growth itself does not capture nearly enough to cover for it.

Re: Germany is closing half of its reactors before the end of the year

#173

Post by Krasnol » Wed, Dec 22, 2021, 9:11 PM UTC

cmarschner wrote: post #93

this_user wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She didn't, her predecessor did.

She changed course when she took over and supported nuclear first, then changed her assessment after Fukushima.

She did not support nuclear...she did not stop the exit before Fukushima. She just moved it a few years back. Something she took back after Fukushima.

Re: Germany is closing half of its reactors before the end of the year

#174

Post by RaitoBezarius » Wed, Dec 22, 2021, 9:11 PM UTC

fsh wrote: post #156

RaitoBezarius wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, according to your own links. > Uranium-235 is a finite non-renewable resource.[1][3] > As of 2017, identified uranium reserves recoverable at US$130/kg were 6.14 million tons (compared to 5.72 million tons in 2015). At the rate of consumption in 2017, these reserves are sufficient for slightly over 130 years of supply. The identified reserves as of 2017 recoverable at US$260/kg are 7.99 million tons (compared t…

They calculate 130 years of supply at current consumption rates . Nuclear power supplies something like 5% of the global primary energy, so scaling this to 100% would deplete the estimated reserves in a few years. Breeders would help, but have so far not been very successful. For example, the German Thorium breeder THTR-300 is considered one of the greatest technological failures in postwar history.

Scaling nuclear power supplies to 100% of global primary energy would change the economics of extraction, do you claim you can predict these things? BTW, scaling it to 100 % is not necessary.

AFAIK, THTR-300 is only one of the different breeder models, CEFR from China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Experimental_Fast_Reacto...> seems to be working, as a new model https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFR-600> is being built since 2020, sure, recycling uranium is not needed at the moment, so you could argue this is not demonstrating the interest of breeding though it seems to be working to a certain extent.

Re: Germany is closing half of its reactors before the end of the year

#175

Post by Krasnol » Wed, Dec 22, 2021, 9:12 PM UTC

GravitasFailure wrote: post #99

DavidKarlas wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People keep saying that but looking at https://app.electricitymap.org/zone/FR it seems reverse... That is probably happening in summer at nights...

Oh, interesting. I wonder if Germany is more reliant on France for providing a baseload when renewables dip while France relies on Germany for peaking and supplementing daytime loads. Thanks for the website. It'll definitely come in handy. Edit: With Germany shutting down their nukes, I'm curious if them being a net exporter remains true.

Nuclear is only 12% of the whole mix in Germany.

Re: Germany is closing half of its reactors before the end of the year

#176

Post by jhgb » Wed, Dec 22, 2021, 9:12 PM UTC

AstralStorm wrote: post #155

jhgb wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very good argument for the need to build much more renewable capacity in Germany, since that would substitute the burning of natural gas that caused this price increase.

Sure, we'll see it when it happens. Renewables are like a trickle at best, all the low hanging fruit there is taken, and the required battery capacity is huge....

There is no battery capacity required for the simple effect of substituting gas power plant operation. Any MWh generated by another source will simply remove the need to generate that MWh from gas, where the price of gas is the dominating component.

Re: Germany is closing half of its reactors before the end of the year

#177

Post by YinLuck- » Wed, Dec 22, 2021, 9:12 PM UTC

yosito wrote: post #54

The obvious reasons this is bad are that it increases German dependence on Russian oil and burning fossil fuels for energy. What are the arguments in favor of it, from the point of view of the German politicians and/or activists that are pushing for it? It has to be more thought out than "Nuclear bad". I'm just trying to understand.

No post body was provided.

Re: Germany is closing half of its reactors before the end of the year

#178

Post by kevin_thibedeau » Wed, Dec 22, 2021, 9:13 PM UTC

speeder wrote: post #83

gadflyinyoureye wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t understand this move with Putin shutting off gas to flex. It’s going to be a very cold, very expensive winter for the Germans.

If Putin was shutting off gas to flex it would been great, but he isn't, what is happening is Russia is not having enough gas even for themselves, if this was just diplomatic strategy, diplomacy would convince him to supply more gas, the real fact is, there is not enough gas in first place, you can do whatever you want, there won't be more gas.

He already did it a few years back.

Re: Germany is closing half of its reactors before the end of the year

#179

Post by dougmwne » Wed, Dec 22, 2021, 9:14 PM UTC

sam_lowry_ wrote: post #82

_Microft wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We experienced fallout from Chernobyl (radiation levels of wild boar meat and some mushrooms are still under surveillance today) and we were designated nuclear ground zero in case that the Soviets tried to invade Europe. What attitude towards all things nuclear do you expect to arise from that?

Oh, come one! I spent most of my childhood in Minsk, 380km north-west to Chernobyl. Now in Europe my only worry is the blackout plan in case of power shortages, not the nuclear plant 60km on the east. I am always amazed how Germans are irrational about nuclear while nearby countries have a mostly pragmatic attitude. Even in Belgium the nuclear phase out is fake and every politician knows it can not be enforced until…

Nearly all the people I know in Poland who were children at the time of Chernobyl have thyroid issues, including my partner. It’s not accurate to say that it had zero health impact. Of course, coal has plenty of health impact, just not a good look to be so flippant about a major nuclear disaster.

Re: Germany is closing half of its reactors before the end of the year

#180

Post by pzo » Wed, Dec 22, 2021, 9:14 PM UTC

adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #143

polote wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't decide when the wind blow and when the sun shines. And you can't either decide when people turn on their washing machine. So it is obvious there is a problem

So the thing about the earth is that it's big. If you have a big enough grid, it will be sunny and windy over a fairly consistent portion of that area.

transmitting energy from other half of the earth (where is daylight when you are sleeping) is probably not best idea (not sure if even economically or technically possible). Also would be wise to turn off nuclear energy once you have this 'big enough grid'.