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

Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online

euractiv.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 399 posts

Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online

#181

Post by xyzzyz »

ashtonkem wrote: post #142
loeg wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Right now the choice is between a nuclear power plant during these moments, or a natural gas one. Well, gas and coal. Germany is still ~26% coal in 2021[1]. Edit: Maybe 50% coal if you look at consumption, not just generation, per 'incrudible[2]. [1]: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/g... (Lignite is a kind of coal) [2]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28857398

I would expect that in most places this will shift to natural gas, given that natural gas is more economically viable than coal for new plants. But still, both are fossil fuels, so neither option is great.

No, gas is not more economical everywhere. It is in places which have gas, but most of Europe doesn’t have it — it has coal, though. For most of Europe, betting on gas means putting themselves under Kremlin control for its basic needs.

Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online

#183

Post by schleck8 »

Ericson2314 wrote: post #149
schleck8 wrote: post #59

It's worth noting that nuclear is really expensive when factoring in insurance and disposable, a lot more so than wind and solar. >The cost of generating solar power ranges from $36 to $44 per megawatt hour (MWh), the WNISR said, while onshore wind power comes in at $29–$56 per MWh. Nuclear energy costs between $112 and $189. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-energy-nuclearpower/nucle...

> Let us not submit to the vile doctrine of the nineteenth century that every enterprise must justify itself in pounds, shillings and pence of cash income … Why should we not add in every substantial city the dignity of an ancient university or a European capital … an ample theater, a concert hall, a dance hall, a gallery, cafes, and so forth. Assuredly we can afford this and so much more. Anything we can actually do…

Are you saying we should ignore the economic aspect of everything?

Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online

#184

Post by jollybean »

proctrap wrote: post #81
junon wrote: post #3

I'm a US expat living in Germany, and boy is the anti-nuclear sentiment real here. There have even been fights - physical altercations - between Green Party members at rallies for having differing viewpoints about nuclear. Unfortunately, it seems those who are against are working with very outdated information and 'tropes' w.r.t. nuclear safety and whatnot. Quite unfortunate.

How about - Germany trying to find a nuclear waste deposit since ages (that doesn't have to be evacuated due to ground water later on)* - Failed nuclear plants we're deconstructing since ages and are paying millions every year to do so - Nuclear fuel expected to be depleted in the next 100 years - State and taxpayers always having to pay for the disasters of nuclear plants, while the gains are going to the companies…

"Germany trying to find a nuclear waste deposit since ages"

That's politics.

"Failed nuclear plants"

That's not quite true and doesn't have to happen.

"Nuclear fuel expected to be depleted in the next 100 years"

This is just plain wrong. Maybe 1000 years even then, we are extracting a tiny fraction of the energy. As we get better, all that 'waste' is actually 'fuel'.

Far from a bad example, France is a good example.

If France were to have built 2x the capacity instead of stopping where they did, they might have already been Carbon Neutral.

Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online

#186

Post by criley2 »

fulafel wrote: post #157
ashtonkem wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you’re being glib, but the issue is that you can’t guarantee the alignment of sun and wind to match demand. Sometimes the wind blows at night, yes, but sometimes it does not. On a pure renewable grid, no wind at night means rolling brownouts or blackouts. This is particularly problematic during the summer when people want to run AC in order to sleep, and will also be an issue when people move to electric heat…

We can also use real time price mechanism to match demand with supply intra day, energy intensive loads like water/home heating and ev charging can cheaply (vs cost of batteries connected to grid) buffer many hours without issue.

A well insulated modern construction can hold a temperature for a long time. Heating and cooling during energy availability and using your insulated building as a thermal battery of sorts is a real thing, and should be I think considered part of the solution here.

Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online

#187

Post by moooo99 »

johnchristopher wrote: post #53
xg15 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

German here. I can't really compare the viewpoints, but historically, the anti-nuclear movement has been an integral part of the german civil rights movement in the 60s and 70s. [1] I believe there have been two key events which have influenced this: - Chernobyl. Being in close proximity, the event had a far stronger impact than in the US: There was widespread contamination from fallout drifting over from Ukraine and…

Hi, what's the general population's stance on Belgian nuclear plants ?

The construction of (fairly) new nuclear power plants near the shared borders with Belgium and France is actually an argument I hear quite often.

In many debates people argue about why Germany should go ahead and quit using nuclear if the neighboring countries keep building and running new plants, also posing a huge risk to Germany in the event of a catastrophic failure (actually the risk in case of a failure is probably higher for Germany than it is for France or Belgium).

Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online

#188

Post by dragonwriter »

fulafel wrote: post #177
xyzzyz wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In cold and hot places, you cannot easily buffer heating and AC for hours.

You can if you have decent insulation (which at least cold climates do). In fact people historically have taken advantage of cheaper night time electricity prices to shift heating to night time. Better insulation will become a more attractive investment than in the past.

> In fact people historically have taken advantage of cheaper night time electricity prices to shift heating to night time.

Night time is usually when heating is most needed.

Shifting AC to night time in hot regions would be more impressive.

Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online

#189

Post by Ericson2314 »

eutectic wrote: post #170
Ericson2314 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Let us not submit to the vile doctrine of the nineteenth century that every enterprise must justify itself in pounds, shillings and pence of cash income … Why should we not add in every substantial city the dignity of an ancient university or a European capital … an ample theater, a concert hall, a dance hall, a gallery, cafes, and so forth. Assuredly we can afford this and so much more. Anything we can actually do…

A nuclear power station is not exactly a university or an art gallery.

The larger point still stands.

Investments look more bad than they should when:

- We ignore externalities

- We ignore that demand changes too, whether in response to monetary magic, or simply do to elasticity (it was always there, we just didn't know it).

This applies to both Keynes's examples and nuclear.

Re: Intellectuals urge Germany to keep nuclear plants online

#190

Post by rks404 »

Ericson2314 wrote: post #149
schleck8 wrote: post #59

It's worth noting that nuclear is really expensive when factoring in insurance and disposable, a lot more so than wind and solar. >The cost of generating solar power ranges from $36 to $44 per megawatt hour (MWh), the WNISR said, while onshore wind power comes in at $29–$56 per MWh. Nuclear energy costs between $112 and $189. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-energy-nuclearpower/nucle...

> Let us not submit to the vile doctrine of the nineteenth century that every enterprise must justify itself in pounds, shillings and pence of cash income … Why should we not add in every substantial city the dignity of an ancient university or a European capital … an ample theater, a concert hall, a dance hall, a gallery, cafes, and so forth. Assuredly we can afford this and so much more. Anything we can actually do…

holy hell that's a great quote
Post reply on HN