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

Why is the nuclear power industry stagnant?

austinvernon.site

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 672 posts

Re: Why is the nuclear power industry stagnant?

#391

Post by pfdietz »

ZeroGravitas wrote: post #387

This is a good summary article. It appears many commenters haven't read it so here's the key paragraph: "Even if you think that natural gas should be banned or taxed away, nuclear will still end up uncompetitive. By the time you finish a single LWR, investors will build enough solar and storage to eat high daytime electricity rates. If you assume current nuclear plant operating costs and a very optimistic OCC then on…

I will add that using just batteries for 24/7 solar is also not the cheapest way to get to 100% renewables. Solar + wind + batteries + hydrogen reduces the overall cost of providing "synthetic baseload" (in Germany, modeling using historical weather data, the inclusion of hydrogen there cuts the optimum cost nearly in half.)

Re: Why is the nuclear power industry stagnant?

#392

Post by freemint »

dsnr wrote: post #278
croes wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gas has more use cases than just electricity. These can't easily be replaced by nuclear power.

Actually, gas heating can _easily_ be replaced with heat pumps assuming cheap electricity is provided.

You can't make precursors for CoViD vaccines from heat pumps, you can't make steel using heat pumps.

Re: Why is the nuclear power industry stagnant?

#393

Post by legulere »

ohgodplsno wrote: post #317
brazzy wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other way round, actually. France recently had massive problems because they had to switch off multiple nuclear plants for unexpected maintenance issues, and bought lots of power from Germany

1 event does not make a rule. French nuclear reactors were turned off for maintenance, yes, but over the past 30 years, it is clearly Germany depending on French power

Germany is a net electricity exporter: https://www.bmwk.de/Redaktion/EN/Infografiken/stromaustausch...

Unplanned shutdowns are a increasing occurrence in France because of aging reactors and overheating/freezing rivers

Re: Why is the nuclear power industry stagnant?

#394

Post by cycomanic »

jhgb wrote: post #307
oceanplexian wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Recent events in the Ukraine are cutting off cheap Russian supply of both coal and gas This is not the impression I have gotten from recent events. The reason Germany hasn’t experienced blackouts is because they are funding the Russian Federation’s war in Ukraine in exchange for energy. Germany has advocated for the continued purchase of Russian gas and has pushed back against the EU admitting Ukraine to the union.…

You're confusing German gas consumption and German electricity consumption. It couldn't escape my attention that many people especially from the US make this fatal mistake (presumably because of the prevalence of natural gas electricity generation in the US - almost 40% in the US, compared to ~15% in Germany). In Germany, the vast majority of gas is being used for heating or for industrial purposes (chemistry etc.).…

The other aspect of the Ukraine war used for advocating for nuclear, which the nuclear proponents like to omit is that 25% of European uranium comes from Russia, so Europe's dependence on Russia is even stronger for Uranium than for gas. It's simply dishonest to use the current situation as an argument for nuclear. If anything it shows that we should have invested into renewables much more strongly, but nuclear proponents were strongly arguing against it because it would have made nuclear even less financially viable.

Re: Why is the nuclear power industry stagnant?

#395

Post by legulere »

superlopuh wrote: post #390
ZeroGravitas wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1290224/carbon-intensity... This graphs shows the carbon intensity of their electricity dropping for years. There's a small uptick in the estimated number for the most recent year, but even with that it's a massive drop, so where is the recarbonization you mention?

That site doesn't mention whether it's the intensity of electricity consumed or produced, when Germany imports electricity it tends to be from countries with higher carbon-intensity production[0] [0]: https://app.electricitymap.org/zone/DE

But Germany is a net-electricity-exporter

https://www.bmwk.de/Redaktion/EN/Infografiken/stromaustausch...

Re: Why is the nuclear power industry stagnant?

#396

Post by freemint »

ohgodplsno wrote: post #312
arinlen wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apparently , wind+solar don't work at night (...) This line of argument is either disingenuous or ignorant. https://m.dw.com/en/new-energy-storage-facilities-in-high-de... https://www.iea.org/reports/energy-storage

A whole 5GW in the entire world? Crazy, it almost matches the 400GW of just nuclear output, and the many more of every other power source. Wind + solar isn't a reliable energy source, period. You need a base load, whether that comes from hydroelectric, nuclear or, unfortunately, fossil fuels. Wind and solar are great at topping off things and should be deployed as much as possible for individuals to reduce the demand…

The sun shines 24/7.

Re: Why is the nuclear power industry stagnant?

#397

Post by sputr »

vrfvr wrote: post #309
ulfw wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany has one of the highest electricity costs on the planet. That leads to reduction of use (as people just can't afford it) and this is before the Russian corrupt cheap gas deals. Who knows what it'll look like with higher gas and oil prices.

> That leads to reduction of use (as people just can't afford it) I consider this a good thing. Wasting energy ain't good, especially when it isn't completely climate neutral

View your comment from the POV of the majority of the population, who aren't rich IT sector workers.

There's energy poverty in Germany. A lot of it. You don't even have to go to any “3rd world” areas of the world to see it.

Cheap energy is CRITICAL for the elimination of poverty and suffering. I know that single-mindedly obsessing about the single goal of climate change is currently popular, but please, let's not throw the baby out with the bath water.

Re: Why is the nuclear power industry stagnant?

#398

Post by freemint »

mixermachine wrote: post #348
seydor wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. They need 2-3x renewable capacity to charge 2. You need to buy the batteries

Aren't batteries at something like >90% efficiency? Were does the 2-3x energy come from?

I suspect he means production energy capacity to account for the charging when energy is being produced.

Re: Why is the nuclear power industry stagnant?

#399

Post by freemint »

emteycz wrote: post #258
jillesvangurp wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Germany Actually, Germany did not have a long term increase in coal/gas due to the nuclear shut down but a decrease. Coal has been in a slow but steady decline in Germany (mainly due to cost); which is on track to decline all the way to 0 as Germany is committing to getting rid of coal based production completely by 2035 or so. Gas production did grow but mainly to offset decli…

Germany doesn't have blackouts only thanks to Czech and French nuclear energy ;-)

Trade is not bad?

Re: Why is the nuclear power industry stagnant?

#400

Post by Emma_Goldman »

legulere wrote: post #379
Emma_Goldman wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Actually, Germany did not have a long term increase in coal/gas due to the nuclear shut down but a decrease" > "Gas production did grow but mainly to offset declines in coal" This is dishonest at two levels. First, nuclear power fell and, at the same time, renewables and gas sharply rose in Germany's energy mix. Power is fungible. It is not as if power generated by renewables substitutes for nuclear, but power gen…

I think we're discussing semantics there. Coal use fell, coal and gas combined fell, but gas alone has risen. Which goes against predictions that coal would replace nuclear, that somehow some people claim have come true when there is obvious data that shows the opposite. I agree with the point that we should have phased out coal before nuclear, but you have to state it like that and not cling onto some dream that nuc…

> "Actually, Germany did not have a long term increase in coal/gas due to the nuclear shut down but a decrease"

Arguably this is semantics. But that's because the semantics of your claim is unhelpfully ambiguous. In absolute terms coal and gas make up approximately the same share of Germany's capacity as it did in 2010. In relative terms, because the total output has increased, it's share has fallen. But I say it is unhelpful because one has fallen, the other increased.

> "Gas production did grow but mainly to offset declines in coal"

I don't think this is semantics. For the reasons given, it's just wrong.

The statements together make it look like you're trying to misrepresent the facts to support a particular view about nuclear energy.

Post reply on HN