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

Sweden’s incoming cabinet says new nuclear reactors will be built

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 583 posts

Re: Sweden’s incoming cabinet says new nuclear reactors will be built

#151

Post by belorn »

ncmncm wrote: post #43
traceelement wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so they get compensated if they have to close it even so the government payed them to build it. this sound like a bad deal. Tax payers pay for the whole thing and the owner gets even more money if they have to close it for whatever reason. I don't think coal is the answer but germany didn't do enough for renewables during the last 10 years when we knew we would shut down the nuclear plants. So now evrybody uses bad m…

No civil nuke plant has ever been operated, anywhere in the world, without massive government subsidies, or by coercing ratepayers to pay well above market rates. Looks like the Swedish public will be on the hook for subsidies for decades more while the rest of Europe (France and Romania perhaps excepted) coasts on renewables at ever plunging prices.

EU has a yearly public report on energy subsidies that demonstrate factually where subsidies goes, how much, and for what purpose. Nuclear subsidies are a proportional small part of the subsidies, and the public get more energy per $subsidies in nuclear than from other energy sources. Some key findings from 2021 report:

"Subsidies to nuclear had varied between €3.2bn and € 4bn between 2008 and 2019 but surged to (€6.3bn) in 2020 due to payments for early closures of nuclear power plants."

"In line with anticipations in the Commission Study, the financial aid to renewables in the EU27 is increasing at a low pace since 2015 to reach €78bn in 2019. Our preliminary estimations show a slight reduction in 2020 to around €77bn. Among the 14 identified subsidy instruments, the feed-in-tariff and feed-in premium schemes remain by far the MS preferred tools to promote RES technologies. They represented 79% of the total RES subsidies, i.e. €61bn in 2019"*

Re: Sweden’s incoming cabinet says new nuclear reactors will be built

#152

Post by ncmncm »

capitainenemo wrote: post #42
ncmncm wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be stupid to spend on storage before there is enough renewable generating capacity to charge it from. In the meantime they spend, sensibly, on renewable generating capacity. By the time there is enough, storage will be massively cheaper. In the meantime, charging storage from gas or coal and then drawing it down is the same as burning gas or coal for immediate use, just with losses.

The storage should be built in conjunction with the renewable generation to avoid those excess grid damaging events which is just wasteful. Similar issue to US where constructing generation is being subsidised but not constructing storage along with it.

There are no "grid damaging events".

Re: Sweden’s incoming cabinet says new nuclear reactors will be built

#153

Post by Gwypaas »

hello1234567 wrote: post #147
otikik wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congratulations, I hope you guys are able to build them quickly. > I think massive expansion of nuclear power is the only realistic way to fix climate change. While I agree on the overall direction of this sentiment I think nuclear cannot be "the" only way but "one amongst many" ways.

well nuclear is the current cheapest way of producing electricity. doesn't stop from funding other cheaper and future safe options. mantra is cheaper.

It is by far the most expensive method.

https://www.lazard.com/perspective/levelized-cost-of-energy-...

Re: Sweden’s incoming cabinet says new nuclear reactors will be built

#154

Post by klabb3 »

ncmncm wrote: post #43
traceelement wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so they get compensated if they have to close it even so the government payed them to build it. this sound like a bad deal. Tax payers pay for the whole thing and the owner gets even more money if they have to close it for whatever reason. I don't think coal is the answer but germany didn't do enough for renewables during the last 10 years when we knew we would shut down the nuclear plants. So now evrybody uses bad m…

No civil nuke plant has ever been operated, anywhere in the world, without massive government subsidies, or by coercing ratepayers to pay well above market rates. Looks like the Swedish public will be on the hook for subsidies for decades more while the rest of Europe (France and Romania perhaps excepted) coasts on renewables at ever plunging prices.

Energy use in Sweden peaks in the winter, and especially a few extremely cold days. The sun literally doesn't rise in the northern parts, and the coldest days have almost no wind (and frankly it's not very strong overall either). This and last year, Swedes are stocking up on firewood, and it's not for cosplaying reason. Several knowledgeable people predict rolling blackouts this winter.

I would love renewables as much as the next guy but there's simply not a chance that Sweden could sustain a winter with the current supply. Importing helps with survival but the prices are insane, since their neighbors are cold as well. Dispatchable or baseload energy is necessary, and thus nuclear is the only carbon neutral option. Sure, it's more expensive than solar panels midday in the desert, but the comparison is irrelevant.

Re: Sweden’s incoming cabinet says new nuclear reactors will be built

#155

Post by LightG »

orthecreedence wrote: post #128
LightG wrote: post #112

One question for nuclear advocates, as I know it's full on-trend at the moment: What's to stop adversaries holding countries to ransom using their nucealer facilities? Just like Russia is playing "games" around the Ukranian nuclear plant? What's to stop that being used as the new threat? We won't turn your gas off, we'll threaten your nuclear plants? Genuine question.

> What's to stop adversaries holding countries to ransom using their nucealer facilities? Nothing, unless you yourself have leverage. Every resource or dependency is a potential weakness. The idea is to be able to say "ok, if you bomb our fission plant, we'll shut off your fresh water supply." It's all a huge game of chess.

But doesn't chess rely on two half-decent actors sitting down across a table from each other?

Clearly some actors are willing to throw the board across the room

In which case, why are 'we' considering creating that weakness?

I understand there is a strong wave behind nuclear right now, but it does feel like we're just creating the instruments of another, different, mess.

Re: Sweden’s incoming cabinet says new nuclear reactors will be built

#156

Post by ncmncm »

Manuel_D wrote: post #129
elihu wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Batteries will probably be cheaper, but pumped hydro storage will probably cost about the same since it's a mature technology. I could see Norway or Switzerland being major players in pumped hydro storage, given their geography. Awhile back I did a bunch of math to try to figure out how much stored gravitational energy is in Lake Mead, and if I didn't make any major mistakes it came out to be about as much energy as…

The cost of batteries is actually rising, now that manufacturing costs only make up ~25% of a battery's cost [1]. The remaining 75% is raw materials, dominated by the cathode and anode, which are having trouble keeping up with demand [2]. 1. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/breaking-down-the-cost-of-a... 2. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/18/ev-battery-costs-set-to-spik...

The cost of batteries is immaterial to anything being discussed here.

As you already knew.

Re: Sweden’s incoming cabinet says new nuclear reactors will be built

#157

Post by JumpCrisscross »

dekken_ wrote: post #143
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Petrol burned in a car is energy, not electricity.

The fact that you can use combustion to generate electricity, means they are interchangeable. The other comment is probably more on point about conversion effeciency.

> that you can use combustion to generate electricity, means they are interchangeable

This is an accounting issue, not a question of thermodynamics.

Electricity typically refers to grid electric. We don’t count non plug-in hybrid electrical output as “electricity.” That’s how energy use can be stable while electrification increases.

Re: Sweden’s incoming cabinet says new nuclear reactors will be built

#158

Post by Manuel_D »

ncmncm wrote: post #156
Manuel_D wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cost of batteries is actually rising, now that manufacturing costs only make up ~25% of a battery's cost [1]. The remaining 75% is raw materials, dominated by the cathode and anode, which are having trouble keeping up with demand [2]. 1. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/breaking-down-the-cost-of-a... 2. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/18/ev-battery-costs-set-to-spik...

The cost of batteries is immaterial to anything being discussed here. As you already knew.

From the previous comment:

> Batteries will probably be cheaper,

The above commenter clearly thinks that batteries are going to provide cheap storage.

If you have some alternative plan for storage at the scale of tens of terawatt hours, please do tell.

Re: Sweden’s incoming cabinet says new nuclear reactors will be built

#159

Post by ncmncm »

Isolus wrote: post #117
capitainenemo wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last I read into Germany's plan to be "100%" renewable, it was using other countries in Europe to provide the base load using their hydro and nuclear. Which is great so long as they have excess to provide Germany I suppose. There does not seem to be nearly enough construction of pumped storage or battery to cover the unevenness of German wind power. In fact, their prices have gone negative repeatedly in the past,…

In fact, many believe that storage as hydrogen shows promise. There are many test plants for this right now in areas with a lot of wind and connection to the national gas grid. The idea is that the hydrogen can then be used in existing gas power plants.

Hydrogen is one of many practical storage media. Many will be used, different ones favored in different places. Hydrogen is particularly suited for places with large, stable underground cavities.

Re: Sweden’s incoming cabinet says new nuclear reactors will be built

#160

Post by belorn »

elihu wrote: post #51
anigbrowl wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Power generation should be publicly owned, private ownership of such critical resources inevitably creates moral hazard.

I think it's fine if governments pay for and operate power generation facilities, but at the same time I don't think private companies should be prohibited from building power generation facilities if they want to and they think they can do it better (provided they have to pay for externalities).

Define externalities. Is a balanced grid part of the externalities, ie the work needed to make sure that supply can always match that of demand?
Post reply on HN