No post body was provided.
Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants
191–200 of 392 posts
Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants
#192Finally. Opposition to nuclear is beyond unreasonable. https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy
Here are three arguments that I personally find both reasonable and convincing.
1) Nuclear fuel and waste are clearly dangerous. Your linked article makes a logical fallacy in that it claims a dangerous activity is safe because few people have died from it. But we know things are dangerous even when nobody dies from it. The level of security surrounding nuclear is beyond anything else, and it's required to keep it safe. These security measures are expensive to maintain but are dwarfed by the expenses when they fail.
2) Nuclear is much more expensive than we are led to believe.
This is quite clearly deduced from official writings from nuclear agencies, international treaties controlling who will actually pay if things go south, and also demonstrated in the market where nuclear operators are deeply in debt after selling nuclear power for unrealistic prices for decades. (See France).
Nuclear energy is most likely many times more expensive than any numbers presented to date from anyone operating nuclear power plants. This cost is covered "in blanco" by governments, meaning taxpayers now and in generations to come. I am convinced that the energy we consume from nuclear today will be paid for by our great-great-great-grandchildren and theirs too.
3) Renewables are better long-term so all efforts should be spent on inventing and implementing systems to make renewables the source of all energy. (Storage implied).
Money spent on nuclear is not available for renewables so it's reasonable to be opposed to nuclear for that reason too.
All that being said, it is of course very reasonable to keep plants running for a while longer given the current circumstances. :)
Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re not countering the implicit argument that Germany won’t have a problem with earthquakes ruining their nuclear powerplants. Germany is also a “well-run country” if you want to run with the old anti-Soviet argument.
FWIW, I'm a fan of nucear, but ... they don't have to counter that argument. It doesn't have to be earthquakes - it can be 1 of 100 problems. Japan knew they have to deal with earthquakes and didn't. What should make people more comfortable that Germany will be able to safeguard against their known risks?
What are the remaining 95 potential uncontrollable problems beyond earthquake, fire, flood, war, human incompetence?
Given appropriate attention and care, these can be accounted for through planning processes and protocols.
Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
And new reactor designs are meltdown proof, so what's the problem exactly?
Can you cite your claim? Meltdown-proof? So a huge earthquake and tsunami won't cause nuclear waste leaks in the slightest? Nothing will?
I'll give an example of molten salt reactors [1]; other designs have different but comparable safety properties. The nuclear fuel is suspended in a molten salt. If the reactor is breached, you'll have what's effectively a contained chemical spill that has a very limited spread. Current water reactors trigger a steam explosion that spews out radiation into the atmosphere, which is why it's so catastrophic.
If you get a runaway reaction, it has a fail-safe described in the article that drains the reactor into containment vessels underground.
[1] https://www.technologyreview.com/2015/09/04/166330/meltdown-...
Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is Germany using more natural gas now than in 2010? Did they replace coal by gas? Would it have been possible to replace coal with nuclear instead, and keep gas at 2015 levels?
It is needed in summer to replace solar energy during the night. Gas power plants can be switched on and off almost at will, unlike coal or nuclear plants that have long startup and shutdown times. So the gas power plants are switched on at night in summer when the sun doesn't shine. Also, the EU commission declared in February 2022 natural gas as a sustainable energy source, and the EU parliament confirmed this in J…
So nuclear was replaced by renewables+gas (EU newspeak not withstanding).
Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
Burning coal releases more airborne radioactive waste in a short time than a nuclear plant does over its whole lifetime. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-...
Let's say a metric ton of coal has around 1 kBq and around 10000 PBq were released at Chernobyl. That would mean around 10 quadrillion tons of coal would need to get burned to emit the same amount of radiation. China is currently burning 4 trillion tons of coal per year, which is a 2500th part of it. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20005612/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster#Release_and...
Only caesium-137 is long lived, of which 85 PBq was released
Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants
#197While I agree that it would have been sensible to phase out coal and then nuclear, the german position is more complex. The fallout from Tschernobyl was measurable in Germany… measurable as in my science teacher measured it in his garden. Up to today boar and mushrooms have an elevated level of radiation in the forests around my home. So this is the emotional background, the risks are not far away. Fukushima gave the…
This is the best explanation I’ve heard so far about Germany’s position on nuclear. It is based much more on emotions than on rational arguments.
Not that there is a lack of rational arguments against nuclear... But climate change may overrule them all.
Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
You’re not countering the implicit argument that Germany won’t have a problem with earthquakes ruining their nuclear powerplants. Germany is also a “well-run country” if you want to run with the old anti-Soviet argument.
It's not fully an objective argument, butnan emotional. "Even Japan can't run them safely!" Where Japan is known for its precision and strict following of rules (perception!) Yes, rationally the maths is a lot different, but countering emotions with facts is hard. (And then consider facts like long term deposition of nuclear waste etc.)
> Where Japan is known for its precision and strict following of rules (perception!)
As compared to the Germans? Supposed rule-sticklers without earthquakes.
Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
And new reactor designs are meltdown proof, so what's the problem exactly?
Can you cite your claim? Meltdown-proof? So a huge earthquake and tsunami won't cause nuclear waste leaks in the slightest? Nothing will?
Gen III+ reactors are pretty fucking close to meltdown proof.
Any reactor in use today will have a negative void coefficient. Which means, if you don't put power into it, the reaction naturally stops. Then you've got control rods and neutron moderators that will fall back upon the core if there's no power. Then Gen3+ includes a core catcher in which, should it breach its reactor, it just falls in there and cools down.
Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Germany's main source of heating is gas and yes, gas is used to generate electricity, so nuclear can reduce gas consumption. However, only about 10% of gas is used for electricity and Germany has enough electricity. In a worst-case scenario, those nuclear power plants can help stabilize the grid, but they are not needed in general. A number of cities also use district heating, where the heat is taken directly from…
I wouldn't like nuclear water heating my house.
It's a separate circuit. That water never touches the reactor core.