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

Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 436 posts

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#221

Post by MichaelCollins »

f1shy wrote: post #175
tomp wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So nuclear (zero CO2 emissions) isn’t “green” but gas (CO2 + methane emissions) is?! This is the reality of institutional stupidity at the highest EU political levels.

Believe it or not, the green party is one of the most hard opponents to nuclear. Of course, they suggest the alternative Wind+Solar, not gas.

> they suggest the alternative Wind+Solar, not gas.

Storage technology to support an industrialized nation with pure Wind+Solar does not exist, necessitating gas. Advocating for Wind+Solar but not gas is like advocating for building with lumber but not cutting down trees. One inescapably implies the other.

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#222

Post by MichaelCollins »

neodypsis wrote: post #209
MichaelCollins wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The solution is not obvious, The problem of relying on Russia for energy was obvious. There isn't a singular "the solution" because there were many possible solutions, nuclear energy being just one. In addition to investing in wind/solar, there are other solutions besides nuclear. Particularly, fracing and coal mining. Both of these are unpopular for obvious reasons (which is the reason everybody talks about nuclea…

> The problem of relying on Russia for energy was obvious. Indeed. Always found it strange that Germany didn't see a problem with relying on Russia for their main energy source.

Motivated reasoning. Cheap energy is extremely attractive, so seemingly obvious downsides can be swept under the rug.

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#223

Post by colinmhayes »

ch4s3 wrote: post #201
cinntaile wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LNG is more expensive than Russian gas so it makes or made economic sense to do that.

Does it make sense now that the pipeline is shut down and Russia is in conflict indirectly with Western Europe?

Hindsight is 20/20. There were plenty of reasons to be skeptical that russia would turn off the tap. There's always counterparty risk when importing things, the US could also decide to cut europe off from LNG if they wanted.

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#224

Post by [deleted] »

mrtksn wrote: post #157
scifibestfi wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people are fed up with dangerously incompetent leadership, who literally laughed when warned to not be dependent on Russia for energy. It's not a meaningless culture war. The loss of energy means lower standard of living at best and mass death and famine at worst.

The solution is not obvious, it's obvious only to zealots. It's kind of obvious that the solution is in PHV and wind energy but you can fight it to death with people who would claim that it's obvious that the solution is Nuclear energy. This is not a good discussion, this is fanatics fighting. Anytime someone suggest simple solution to a big problem %99.9 of the time they don't actually have a simple and obvious solu…

[deleted]

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#225

Post by landemva »

cinntaile wrote: post #172
landemva wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

German government published a cookbook to teach people how to cook without electricity. "Kochen ohne Strom" https://www.bbk.bund.de/SharedDocs/Pressemitteilungen/DE/202... It would have been useful to keep coal powered electric plants in use and stocked with a mountain of coal.

They will likely keep some coal plants online longer than was originally planned, so that is definitely a thing. They even restarted some plants to reduce their current dependency on Russian gas.

There have been logistics issues getting coal to the plants. It feels like energy production followed the manufacturing motto of "just in time" instead of stockpiling the input coal. This lack of resilience was unnecessary.

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#226

Post by landemva »

aiilns wrote: post #189
landemva wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> assess your energy independence before sanctioning the country you rely on for natural gas. Trump blurted that to the Germans around 2019. The press brushed it off as "highly misleading". https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/13/trump-is-exaggerating-german...

> President Donald Trump repeated a highly misleading claim on Friday that Germany will soon depend on Russia for 50 percent to 70 percent of its energy needs. Then the article spends significant time pointing out that Russian natural gas plays only a small part in Germany's total demands in energy, citing numbers like 20% & 13% and thus Trump's claim is am exaggeration. And then goes on to say: > To be sure, Russia…

He has been shown to have been correct on this. I think he was also correct to ask Europe to fund NATO on their own. As USA taxpayer, I don't want to pay for it. Europeans know where they live and their history.

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#227

Post by Huh1337 »

itsyaboi wrote: post #198
Huh1337 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apples and oranges. US is not and never was plundering Cuba, unlike Russians who plunder every single state in their sphere of influence until nothing is left. This is not about some nukes on Cuba, this is about living like a normal person and not in a corrupt, fascist despotism where you die decades prematurely and nobody cares.

I'm curious what your definition of "plunder" is, considering the USA's track record towards Cuba. https://www.reformer.com/opinion/columnists/usategui-us-poli...

Look up what the Russians did in Poland, Czechoslovakia, Lithuania, Hungary etc. That's my definition. What the US did is nowhere near that. My grandmother said she preferred the Nazis to the Russians.

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#228

Post by tick_tock_tick »

stingraycharles wrote: post #80
yrgulation wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s worse than you think. Germany blocked or was against a large number of alternative pipelines and was preparing to actively block nuclear at an eu level.

Why would they do that, what’s their motivation?

Merkel fucked loved Russia and China for some reason we'll probably never know and that's pretty much the whole story.

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#229

Post by Brusco_RF »

myself248 wrote: post #87
PragmaticPulp wrote: post #36

I see a lot of confusion in the comments about why cell towers would be impacted. Load shedding in the grid occurs across regions of the grid. The power companies don’t choose which specific sites to cut off. If cellular infrastructure is in part of the grid that gets disconnected, it will go down too (after exhausting its backup supply). The top priority for keeping power on goes to grid segments with life-sustainin…

The critical detail is that the batteries are configured for standby service, not cycling service, which means that they don't recharge quickly when power comes back on. They're set to a float voltage which maximizes battery service life (years), at the expense of cycle time (hours). The first time power cuts, you might have 8-10 hours to run on battery. But if it comes back on and then goes off again just a few hour…

You missed a critical point that by increasing the charge rate of the battery you've also increased the load on the grid, exacerbating the original problem.

Re: Europe braces for mobile network blackouts

#230

Post by MichaelCollins »

jaywalk wrote: post #99
ajross wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

You don't have to believe that every government in the West is lying about it. You just have to believe that one government (the one who did it) is lying, and the rest don't know because they weren't told.

> You just have to believe that one government (the one who did it) is lying, and the rest don't know because they weren't told.

Or the rest figure it out and independently conclude that siding with NATO is still their best choice, so they better keep up the lie and avoid the drama of calling out their ally.

Post reply on HN