Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants • Hacker News Board

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#621

Post by dalyons » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 4:42 AM UTC

otterley wrote: post #410

KennyBlanken wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason people are not aware of it is because it's utter tripe. In the US, coal generation has been falling for twenty years because it's more expensive than wind and solar. Same reason nuclear is being phased out - grid operators can get power cheaper via wind, solar, import/export, and battery storage.

That may be true for the USA, but there's the rest of the world to consider. China and India were both increasing their coal generation year after year until, well, just this past year: https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-coal-power-drops-in-chi...

Last two years for china. But yes? That’s because renewables finally got great. They’re momentum is not expected to slow down

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#622

Post by prettygood » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 4:42 AM UTC

bilekas wrote: post #146

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…

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.

Setting a standard in Europe? What’s France doing then?

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#623

Post by Scroll_Swe » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 4:43 AM UTC

crote wrote: post #564

Scroll_Swe wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Base load generation. Yes, we have hydro. Wind is way too unpredictable, solar is too. So, we can only have 2 powers to provide base load in Sweden. https://www.svk.se/om-kraftsystemet/kontrollrummet/

Nuclear base load is a lie. The aforementioned subsidies aren't just for the electricity it produces, it is also for the electricity it could produce. The nuclear plant has a right to sell electricity to the grid at a certain price. Market price too low? The government pays the difference. No demand? The government buys the unused production capacity. In practice this means that during periods of excess you are shutt…

Okay so we turn off all nuclear like Germany?

Now what?

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#624

Post by dalyons » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 4:44 AM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #380

Matumio wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if that's fair. Sometimes the sun actually does shine, and while you won't get rich selling energy during that time, having electricity available essentially for free during some of the peak hours is worth something. Someone will eventually find a use for free energy. If nothing else, at least we can turn off all coal, gas and oil plants while the sun shines.

> we can turn off all coal, gas and oil plants while the sun shines. Those plants are not designed to be turned on and off, and both must be done gradually and carefully to avoid cracking the turbines.

And I’m supposed to care? Old tech will be pushed off the grid by cheap renewables, and rapid dispatch gas will remain. Sounds great.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#625

Post by dgrin91 » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 4:45 AM UTC

thelastgallon wrote: post #567

Two things to keep in mind when thinking about nuclear 1) Has the lowest deaths/TWH: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-p... 2) Any country that is not US absolutely needs to invest in nuclear technology. This is for your own security. In addition to providing energy security, it also provides physical security (with a bit more work). Without nuclear, your country will remain vulnerable to: 1)…

I'm pretty nuclear, but I don't understand how having nuclear power prevents vulnerability to direct attack? If anything it would concentrate your risks - your energy now comes from fewer, more centralized and more fragile sources

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#626

Post by Krasnol » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 4:49 AM UTC

palata wrote: post #422

Krasnol wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waste which will be here for many generations of humans and can seriously harm them is overblown? It never cases to amaze me how much blatant misinformation circulates around this topic. Just a few years ago, nobody sane would have predicted Trump. How can anybody seriously predict what would happen to this waste in a few years? I'm not even talking about generations here.

Again, destroy a dam and you get a catastrophe. Don't do anything in particular and watch how many people die in the mid-term due to climate change. It's all about risk management.

Yeah but the risk management of a dam is ridiculously small compared to waste which will be dangerous so far into future that we might not know if people will even know what it is.

A dam damming water at a hill is obvious.

Some warm stuff set up like something really special, is not.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#627

Post by Krasnol » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 4:50 AM UTC

throwthrowuknow wrote: post #414

Krasnol wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waste which will be here for many generations of humans and can seriously harm them is overblown? It never cases to amaze me how much blatant misinformation circulates around this topic. Just a few years ago, nobody sane would have predicted Trump. How can anybody seriously predict what would happen to this waste in a few years? I'm not even talking about generations here.

Like they said, if it’s properly stored and monitored it’s not going to harm anyone. If you’re worried about some kind of societal collapse leading to it being abandoned, well in that case there are much bigger problems that are more immediately dangerous.

Do you know it will still be properly monitored in 100 years?

What about 1000?

How would you know if there are even people left who know what it is??

May be societal collapse isn't a problem. Maybe we're having a nice new beginning but someone finds some nice, warm stuff?

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#628

Post by Krasnol » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 4:51 AM UTC

bethekidyouwant wrote: post #508

Krasnol wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waste which will be here for many generations of humans and can seriously harm them is overblown? It never cases to amaze me how much blatant misinformation circulates around this topic. Just a few years ago, nobody sane would have predicted Trump. How can anybody seriously predict what would happen to this waste in a few years? I'm not even talking about generations here.

Correct as long as we still have Geiger counters.. I’m not sure what kind of apocalypse you’re planning for. Maybe get a radon detection kit for your basement.

I'm not planning for anything because you can't plan for the next decade atm. How would you plan for 100s and 1000s of years?

We should REDUCE the danger to those generations and not make it larger for no sane reason.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#629

Post by Krasnol » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 4:53 AM UTC

Mawr wrote: post #435

Krasnol wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Waste which will be here for many generations of humans and can seriously harm them is overblown? It never cases to amaze me how much blatant misinformation circulates around this topic. Just a few years ago, nobody sane would have predicted Trump. How can anybody seriously predict what would happen to this waste in a few years? I'm not even talking about generations here.

You realize we're literally dispersing coal, gas & gasoline fumes into the atmosphere that we all breathe, right? 24/7? Yeah, small amounts of solid waste sitting somewhere is as much of a non issue as can be.

Yeah I know this Shillenberger tactic of playing "you love coal because you hate nuclear".

It is no argument or discussion happening in real life now.

It is nuclear vs. renewables and nuclear is losing.

...also those are not small amounts. The fuel may be a small amount but there is much much more that needs to disappear in holes we don't have.

Re: Swiss parliament lifts ban on new nuclear power plants

#630

Post by YetAnotherNick » Fri, Jun 19, 2026, 4:56 AM UTC

thelastgallon wrote: post #567

Two things to keep in mind when thinking about nuclear 1) Has the lowest deaths/TWH: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-p... 2) Any country that is not US absolutely needs to invest in nuclear technology. This is for your own security. In addition to providing energy security, it also provides physical security (with a bit more work). Without nuclear, your country will remain vulnerable to: 1)…

I tracked down the source once and almost all of the fossil fuel deaths boiled down to deaths due to particulate matter in developing countries. It is highly preventible and only occurs because of no oversight or corruption. If we scale nuclear and have profit maximisation as objective and have no standards in factory, it will have significantly worse fate.