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

191–200 of 583 posts

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

#191

Post by BurningFrog »

jules wrote: post #149
nathanaldensr wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pure FUD. The wind doesn't blow all the time and battery technology at scale isn't there.

Yes, this argument gets repeated again and again and again, and when you ask about storage you never get a decent answer. And yet, the argument keeps getting repeated even by people who matter and make the decisions. When I started watching debates in the Dutch house of representatives I pretty much lost all hope. Of the 150 members, I'd say 145 are either unable or unwilling to think quantitatively and do simple nap…

As the old saying goes: "Those who refuse to do arithmetic are doomed to talk nonsense".

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

#192

Post by BurningFrog »

ncmncm wrote: post #178
jules wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this argument gets repeated again and again and again, and when you ask about storage you never get a decent answer. And yet, the argument keeps getting repeated even by people who matter and make the decisions. When I started watching debates in the Dutch house of representatives I pretty much lost all hope. Of the 150 members, I'd say 145 are either unable or unwilling to think quantitatively and do simple nap…

The decent answer is, simply, that storage will be built when there is enough renewable capacity to charge it from. Storage is technically trivial. Building it all will be a big civil engineering job, but we have plenty of civil engineers.

What is this trivial energy storage tech I've never heard of?

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

#193

Post by heartbreak »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #118
ncmncm wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The overwhelming majority of utility scale storage will not be in batteries, so battery technology does not matter. The sun does, in fact, shine far, far more than enough.

Ok, I'll bite. What type of utility scale storage isn't a battery ? The answer is, of course: any energy storage setup is a battery[1]. A more generous interpretation of your comment is that you meant won't be chemical batteries . In which case, I'll bite: what then? 1. Energy storage is the capture of energy produced at one time for use at a later time[1] to reduce imbalances between energy demand and energy product…

In the US we have utility scale pumped storage hydro power which is a non-chemical battery (assuming you’re referring to chemicals other than water).

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

#194

Post by ncmncm »

MichaelCollins wrote: post #166
ncmncm wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Social science is far from exact enough to predict either eventuality with any confidence. If waves of tens or hundreds of millions of refugees leaving places they cannot live in any longer begin sweeping across borders, how long will it be before fascist governments, already threatening, and already winning in Turkey, Poland, Russia, Belarus, the Philippines, Brazil, Hungary, Italy, and India take over generally and…

People have had terrible governments before, for most of human history in fact. I do expect global social conditions to deteriorate as climate change strains countries, but that's a far cry from the end of the planet. As for global thermonuclear war, we could wargame likely scenarios and potential outcomes endlessly until the day it might actually happen. But anybody who tells you with certainty that one will happen…

Nobody suggested power plants should not be constructed. At issue is what to construct. Starting nukes now brings catastrophe nearer, as they displace exactly zero CO2 output for many years, vs. alternatives that start displacing CO2 output immediately.

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

#195

Post by ncmncm »

MichaelCollins wrote: post #186
ncmncm wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sweden is not less dependent on global civilization than other countries. Is Sweden a net food importer?

I didn't say climate change won't stress Swedish society. I'm saying the claim that climate change will make Sweden not exist to utilize a power plant in 20 years is completely out of touch. Review mainstream sources about climate change projections and scenarios and find me something that says Sweden is likely to not exist in 20 years, so they shouldn't build any new long-term infrastructure. Even if things go the w…

Nobody says those things. You are making it up. Don't.

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

#196

Post by BurningFrog »

nicoburns wrote: post #65
streblo wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something like 40% of the "renewable" energy being generated in the EU/Britain comes from burning wood, a lot of which was shipped from the US.

I don't think most reasonable people count biomass in with renewable (at least not large scale biomass). e.g. this website https://grid.iamkate.com/ has biomass in "other" along with nuclear and pumped hydro storage.

Biomass literally grows on trees. It's by definition renewable.

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

#197

Post by themitigating »

belorn wrote: post #91
cjblomqvist wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The previous government didn't stop the shutdown planned 40+ years ago (due to a national referendum), in part because the owners (Vattenfall) said it's not economically feasible to run them anymore without subsidies. It's complex.

To be fair to both sides, the electricity prices at the time when the decision was made was very different from today. We had prices in the south of sweden 2020 that was as low as around €0.02 per kw/h, compared to over €0.3 in 2022, and in 2020 the price trend was looking to be going downwards. If prices had continue to go down and let say had landed at €0.01 per kw/h this year than we would not be discussing nuclea…

To be fair electricity prices vary throughout time. Basing a long term decision on a short term price is foolish.

Worse case scenario is the government has to subsidize the power station, best case is it helps prevent serious economic issues by providing power.

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

#198

Post by HyperSane »

ncmncm wrote: post #26
aPoCoMiLogin wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the mayor issue is the coal/gas lobby, just look how europe was lobbed to the point that natural gas is somewhat "green", but nuclear is bad to the point some countries don't even have one nuclear power plant.

Quoted post unavailable.

This is such BS.

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

#199

Post by ncmncm »

klabb3 wrote: post #154
ncmncm wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 muc…

The "northern parts" of Sweden are, by report, already massively oversupplied with hydro power.

Starting nukes with the hope of power in ten or fifteen years will not help keep anybody warm in the meantime.

Transmission lines ought to be quite a lot quicker to complete.

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

#200

Post by HyperSane »

ncmncm wrote: post #182
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, why not both?

Money is fungible. Each dollar spent on nuke generating capacity is that dollar not spent on several times as much renewable generating capacity.

Not when you take the capacity factor into account. Nuclear reactors have far higher capacity factors than wind and solar.
Post reply on HN