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

France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

politico.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 450 posts

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#171

Post by zjaffee »

HideousKojima wrote: post #10
socialdemocrat wrote: post #7

I am skeptical to current nuclear power, would have liked Molten Salt Reactors instead. However I see leaders having to do something. Environmentalists are blocking construction of more wind power, and crisis with Russia makes gas less accessible. France has a relatively good track record on nuclear power. They may pull this off. 2035 is a really long time to wait for new power to the grid though.

>Environmentalists are blocking construction of more wind power Environmentalists really are their own worst enemies. When I was in high school near San Diego about 15 years ago, there was a huge amount of opposition to a solar power project. From environmentalists. There was a solar power plant out in Imperial County and the environmentalists were protesting the high voltage lines that would bring the power into San…

There's a difference between conservationism and environmentalism as it relates to climate change, and this comes up every time there's a debate like this. Most environmental advocacy groups are much more concerned with conservation than climate change.

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#172

Post by SiempreViernes »

323 wrote: post #16
rdtsc wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I keep hearing from people who think nuclear's a bad idea that "France is ramping down its reliance on nuclear power, so what does that tell you?" A cynical person might even imagine French infiltrators behind the scenes supporting anti-nuclear sentiments in neighboring countries in order to eventually sell them electricity. Energy independence and energy costs have started wars before, so it would just be pocket c…

Or Russian infiltrators. Isn't it funny how after deciding to get rid of nuclear reactors Germany suddenly realized that it needs to build a gas pipeline to Russia to cover it's energy needs. The former German chancellor, Gerhard Schröder is now chairman of Russian energy company Rosneft, and was a strong advocate of the Nord Stream pipeline project.

That would be ironic indeed, but of course that's pure trash history: Germany has consistently been getting around 40% of it's gas imports from Russia/USSR since 1985, so about 25 years before they started turning of nuclear.

You can also look at this plot of fossil fuel as fraction of all consumption and try to point out the point there there's a jump from nuclear switching off: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/fossil-fuels-share-energy...

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#173

Post by baud147258 »

Nbox9 wrote: post #115
d--b wrote: post #71

Keep in mind that the presidential election is in 3 months. Macron wants to show he is being pragmatic. Nuclear energy allows to reduce carbon emissions without sacrificing the economy. It's particularly smart in this moment of tension with Russia, as Europe depends a lot on Russian energy. But whether this happens or not remains to be seen.

> It's particularly smart in this moment It may be particularly smart for this moment in internal French politics, but energy independence is a smart move for any sovereign.

well, with nuclear you're (and in this case, we're) still dependent on uranium mines and all the equipment that's require to build and maintain those power plants, some of which might not be manufactured in the countries

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#174

Post by yongjik »

Gwypaas wrote: post #92
thatfrenchguy wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no even medium-size grid in the world today that runs on renewables that aren't hydro.

South Australia is getting close. [1] Give it a year or two. > Sometimes the sun does shine and the wind does blow. That’s most of the time in South Australia, apparently. The average share of wind and solar during October was 72%. For 29 out of 31 days, 100% of the power used in South Australia (SA) was renewable. The sky didn’t fall, the grid didn’t collapse, and the apocalypse is not nigh. [1]: https://cleantechni…

With enough uninhabited desert to fit France in it, Australia is ideally suited for solar. It's great that they're pioneering solar, but I guess the numbers may look different for France.

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#175

Post by rad_gruchalski »

oblib wrote: post #83

Meanwhile in Japan...

> Fukushima would have survived if they followed Europe's lead and improved the plant's design. In short, had Tepco and the nuclear safety agency followed international standards and best practice, the Fukushima accident would have been prevented.

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/10/opinion/fukushima-could-h...

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#176

Post by mlyle »

baud147258 wrote: post #173
Nbox9 wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's particularly smart in this moment It may be particularly smart for this moment in internal French politics, but energy independence is a smart move for any sovereign.

well, with nuclear you're (and in this case, we're) still dependent on uranium mines and all the equipment that's require to build and maintain those power plants, some of which might not be manufactured in the countries

That may be a problem in the long term, but there's not some spigot of gas you can turn off and cause an immediate problem.

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#177

Post by p1mrx »

Gwypaas wrote: post #92
thatfrenchguy wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no even medium-size grid in the world today that runs on renewables that aren't hydro.

South Australia is getting close. [1] Give it a year or two. > Sometimes the sun does shine and the wind does blow. That’s most of the time in South Australia, apparently. The average share of wind and solar during October was 72%. For 29 out of 31 days, 100% of the power used in South Australia (SA) was renewable. The sky didn’t fall, the grid didn’t collapse, and the apocalypse is not nigh. [1]: https://cleantechni…

If renewables provide 100% of power on good-weather days, doesn't this mean they've picked the low-hanging fruit, and additional renewables no longer have a stable source of income?

What incentive exists to decarbonize the remaining 26%, and provide clean power on bad-weather days?

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#178

Post by mabbo »

joe_the_user wrote: post #56
robertlagrant wrote: post #2

I keep hearing from people who think nuclear's a bad idea that "France is ramping down its reliance on nuclear power, so what does that tell you?" I wonder whether any will change their minds based on this news.

France is the only country I know that's managed to make nuclear power work. Unfortunately, they haven't been able to export that expertise. Nuclear power plants are vast construction project. The construction and large-engineering industries combined are vastly corrupt in the US (look at the 3 billion dollars planning costs of the unbuilt high speed rail project in California, look at the Big Dig in Boston, etc). In…

> France is the only country I know that's managed to make nuclear power work.

Hello from Ontario, Canada! Have a look at the 'supply' tab of this page: https://www.ieso.ca/power-data. Most of our energy production is from nuclear. It works well, and is relative inexpensive and consistent (I mean, look at that graph, it's INSANELY consistent).

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#179

Post by tomdell »

tomdell wrote: post #12

I advise anyone not in the know to look into France's historical control of uranium mining in Niger. France's nuclear industry has long been fueled by a highly unequal neocolonial relationship with their former colony.

Link for those who care: https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/feb/16/macron...

Cmd/ctrl+f "colonial penetration" for a brief overview of the subject.

Not sure why so many people here seem to think the historical source of much of France's uranium is irrelevant - people in Niger are still paying the cost of long-term uranium exposure.

Re: France to Build Six New Nuclear Reactors

#180

Post by julienb_sea »

Retric wrote: post #170
rodgerd wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A point which may not be well-understood by people unfamiliar with French economic history is that for much of post-WW II period, France's power prices have been dramatically lower that other Western European countries (for industry, anyway). One of the challenges that moves to get away from nuclear generation have caused is the prospect of hurting the French industrial base more than it's already been undermined by…

Those where low wholesale prices via government subsides. Germany “subsidized” very early wind/solar adoption by forcing electricity consumers to pay through the nose for it. That isn’t to say either model is better, just that you can’t look at wholesale prices and see the underlying economic realities. Time is running out on early German subsides where France still needs to pay for decommissioning. France has a grea…

Wind/solar generation have fundamental availability constraints that require supplementing with on-demand generation capacity. Nuclear is not exactly an answer for on-demand capacity because it is not possible to rapidly spin up and down, but having additional nuclear availability should allow France to have greater clean, stable energy capacity. It additionally introduces the possibility of broader energy exports to other European nations.
Post reply on HN