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

Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

bluewin.ch

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 1001 posts

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#531

Post by thinkingtoilet »

UltraSane wrote: post #449
thinkingtoilet wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The time for nuclear power was 50 years ago. And it's sad due to unfounded fears and coal interests there weren't more built. I would love if historically we had build more nuclear power plants. I am against it now because we have other safer, cheaper, and more sustainable options.

" I am against it now because we have other safer, cheaper, and more sustainable options." Not if you want 100% reliable power with no CO2 emissions.

If you start a plant today, it's probably a decade before it comes online. At this point, solar is more than enough for most places if we invested in it and subsidized it like we do for coal and oil. Batteries are improving rapidly and another decade will be a massive difference. I just don't see it making sense to start a new plant.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#532

Post by crote »

throwthrowuknow wrote: post #430
triceratops wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s only expensive and brittle because environmentalists have choked it to death How did they succeed with nuclear energy but fail so miserably with everything else - fossil fuels, meat, even whaling?

It’s easy to make the general public fearful of nuclear because they have no direct experience with it in daily life.

Right, because the general public has direct daily experience with... whaling?

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#533

Post by wahnfrieden »

lukan wrote: post #514
leonidasrup wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waste management has been solved problem. "A number of mercury, cyanide and arsenic waste repositories are operating worldwide including Canada (Giant Mine) and Germany (potash mines in Herfa-Neurode and Zielitz). Radioactive waste storage sites are under construction with the Onkalo in Finland being the most advanced." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_geological_repository "The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, or WIPP…

"For Europe I don't see a reason why each country needs a nuclear waste repository." Because apparently no country wants to be the dumpster for the radioactive waste of the others? I wonder why that is, when it is a solved problem.

Because it’s not a solved problem and people saying so are repeating propaganda

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#534

Post by tempest_ »

lukan wrote: post #514
leonidasrup wrote: post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waste management has been solved problem. "A number of mercury, cyanide and arsenic waste repositories are operating worldwide including Canada (Giant Mine) and Germany (potash mines in Herfa-Neurode and Zielitz). Radioactive waste storage sites are under construction with the Onkalo in Finland being the most advanced." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_geological_repository "The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant, or WIPP…

"For Europe I don't see a reason why each country needs a nuclear waste repository." Because apparently no country wants to be the dumpster for the radioactive waste of the others? I wonder why that is, when it is a solved problem.

I don't think people appreciate how much power comes from such a small amount of waste. The largest plant near me has been operating for > 50 years and the waste is still kept on site though I believe they are working on another solution.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#535

Post by tialaramex »

leonidasrup wrote: post #495
aeturnum wrote: post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find this to be the most frustrating aspect of the nuclear discourse. The "waste problem" is technically solved (we believe, gotta wait ~10k years to know) in a way that depends on a social solution that doesn't seem to exist. Pro-nuke people will handwave it away, ignoring the total failure to secure storage sites in most places, and the anti-nuclear people treat it as a fatal flaw in the technology (which it isn'…

If you are looking in tritium leaks, I would encourage to look into leaks from coal power plants, which are gigantic in comparison to nuclear power plants. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingston_Fossil_Plant_coal_fly... https://publicinterestnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10...

Coal plant waste is visibly a nightmare, mountains of toxic dust, only "mildly" radioactive but also chemically toxic and physically dangerous. If that was the other option you'd have my support for a nuclear plant - but it isn't the other option.

Today the alternate project might well be renewables and BESS, and even if it's fossil fuels it will be natural gas. Natural gas waste isn't roses and kittens, but on every measure it's less bad than coal, and it doesn't have such viceral "this a bad idea" vibes. No heaps of toxic ash, no clouds of smoke, the pollution is too abstract.

Several UK solar projects which bid for AR6 in 2024 are live today, when it was daylight earlier those projects helped power the country. They paid us handsomely to do so, because the market price was almost £100 per MWh even at midday but they bid about £75 at the CfD auction back in 2024 so that (adjusted for inflation) is all they get.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#536

Post by lukan »

NamlchakKhandro wrote: post #529
lukan wrote: post #518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"We could’ve had essentially free clean electricity" Did you ever handled radioactive material yourself? Or watched how Uranium mining works and what gets left behind? I doubt that.

Have you?

Yes. I was born and live close to a site where Uranium was extensively mined and cannot confirm clean nor safe.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#537

Post by eldaisfish »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #331
eldaisfish wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is china building new coal plants or not? Do you want to hazard a guess as to why? The answer is because we still do not know how to supply expanding electricity demand with wind, solar and batteries. The side of the story that people on this website love to bring up is the fact that China happens to be the largest builder of solar and wind, which is true, but the increased electricity demand is being met via coal, f…

> Do you want to hazard a guess as to why? Because it was only in 2025 that batteries became cheaper than coal, so the lead times involved mean they are still building coal. They're very rapidly ramping up battery bank installation, it's too early to tell if they're also ramping down coal plant installations, but it seems likely.

china has confirmed building new coal plants until at least 2030.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#538

Post by throw0101c »

TheCondor wrote: post #245
bilekas wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Switzerland has an amazing opportunity to be the standard setter in the EU with nuclear though. The technology is so unbelievably safe and efficient these days. It a real shame to leave it all on the table because of poorly designed and managed disasters.

Did waste management become a solved problem? In Colorado they shut down their last reactor (a very modern, at the time, thorium unit) in 1989 and there is still tons of waste product onsite since Yucca mountain was the designated target for it and it never came online. It's in a river basin and the containment facility is supposedly insanely robust (can withstand 300mph winds, etc..) but it's still there and I think…

> Did waste management become a solved problem?

Yes? Just have them sit in concrete casks? It's safe enough to do a 'maternity photoshoot' with:

* https://xcancel.com/MadiHilly/status/1671491294831493120

The volumes of "waste" that is generated, given the electricity produced, is not a lot. The entirety of the US' waste created, over the course of multiple decades, can fit on single football field/pitch, ten yards/metres high (that's the actual fuel bundles: the dry casks they're stored in would increase the volume).

France is just across the border, so Orano can do reprocessing with the "waste" to reduce its volume even further if desired, and extract the unused fuel from the waste.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#539

Post by crote »

jrflowers wrote: post #225
LinXitoW wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So its really safe, but also the evil regulations make it expensive. I'm certain there's ZERO correlation between regulations that make it expensive and regulations making it safe.................... So, where is the free market shitting out nuclear power? Anywhere?

> The Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program has over 7,500 reactor years of cumulative reactor operation, and nuclear powered ships have steamed over 175 million miles. Since the inception of the program, there has never been an accident involving a naval reactor nor a release of radioactivity to the environment which has adversely affected public health or safety. https://www.nr-ha.org/history

The program led to the Three Mile Island accident, which is one of the largest releases of radioactivity in US history.

Naval reactors are inherently safer due to their small size and unlimited supply of cooling water. A meltdown is virtually impossible, worst-case scenario you could always use a firehose and a diesel pump to inject sea water into the reactor. On the other hand: you really don't want to overfill the reactor: a naval reactor "going solid" rips itself apart, killing the ship.

Commercial reactors are the exact opposite. Overfilling them is not a huge deal as there are plenty of ways to relieve pressure, but underfilling them can easily lead to a meltdown. Even after shutdown it needs active cooling for a decent while to prevent residual decay from overheating it.

The TMI reactor operators were trained on naval reactors, but they were operating a commercial reactor. During the incident they were too busy trying to prevent it from overfilling to notice that it was actually cooking itself dry - so they intentionally shut down the emergency cooling system!

So no, saying that the Navy Nuclear Propulsion Program has led to zero accidents is both wrong, and completely irrelevant to the subject here.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#540

Post by nish__ »

jokteur wrote: post #32

This still has to pass with the people in a referendum. The discourse on nuclear is still quite chaotic in politics in Switzerland. All left leaning parties and greens parties are strongly against nuclear. I am not expecting informed and civil discussions about this topic. Switzerland has a summer/winter energy problem. We have lots of potential of producing energy in the spring and summer (when our dams are full fro…

They should look into what Brazil is doing to store energy long term:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/849994733672039/posts/136230...

Post reply on HN