3 ms·

> I get that this type of reactor is interesting as a research project. But given the build times, the bureaucratic hurdles and the quality, cost effectiveness

> I get that this type of reactor is interesting as a research project. But given the build times, the bureaucratic hurdles and the quality, cost effectiveness and diversity of renewable alternatives, why bother? Why bother? Because volatile renewable energy is not efficient at redid greenhouse gas emissions. Compare France and Germany. Germany: 50% renewables, 300 million tons of CO2 per year in the energy sector France: 70% nuclear, 50 million tons of CO2 per year in the energy sector Go to electricitymap.org or ourworldindata.org if you want more detailed data.

lrem 5y ago
The real problem here is that France has achieved this by steadfastly defending its nuclear for generations. Remember how Chernobyl's radioactive clouds stopped and turned around at the French border? Keeping the momentum is not that hard for the French government now. Germany has been anti-nuclear for that time. No wonder when at least a section of the society believed that the US is planning to plant a nuclear minefield in their country. That's how you end up with Greens that would prefer coal over nuclear. Which is the environment that prevents us from getting nuclear where we need it. In short term solar is way more promising on all accounts. Nuclear requires the project to survive a couple election cycles. Good luck with that.
tfourb 5y ago
I get your point. But with regards to climate change, the goal has to be to reduce CO2 emissions substantially within the next ten years. Even if the entire German population would become great advocates for nuclear energy overnight (which it won't), there is simply no way that a massive expansion of nuclear energy production would be possible within the next decade. Median construction times for nuclear reactors is around 8 years. https://www.statista.com/statistics/712841/median-construction-time-for-reactors-since-1981/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/712841/median-constructi... Not sure if this includes planning times (probably not entirely) and I doubt that the reactor would deliver maximum power immediately. Smaller scale renewable projects can be (and are) realized in a fraction of the time. They are proven technologies that continue to become cheaper. And of course there are gigantic potentials in terms of simply using less energy. The German (or any) government could simply mandate that all existing building stock would have to reduce their energy consumption by X% over the next ten years. The technologies for that exist, are used every day and the only limit on their deployment is the required capital, to which governments have pretty much unlimited access.

lrem 5y ago

The real problem here is that France has achieved this by steadfastly defending its nuclear for generations. Remember how Chernobyl's radioactive clouds stopped and turned around at the French border? Keeping the momentum is not that hard for the French government now. Germany has been anti-nuclear for that time. No wonder when at least a section of the society believed that the US is planning to plant a nuclear minefield in their country. That's how you end up with Greens that would prefer coal over nuclear. Which is the environment that prevents us from getting nuclear where we need it. In short term solar is way more promising on all accounts. Nuclear requires the project to survive a couple election cycles. Good luck with that.

tfourb 5y ago

I get your point. But with regards to climate change, the goal has to be to reduce CO2 emissions substantially within the next ten years. Even if the entire German population would become great advocates for nuclear energy overnight (which it won't), there is simply no way that a massive expansion of nuclear energy production would be possible within the next decade. Median construction times for nuclear reactors is around 8 years. https://www.statista.com/statistics/712841/median-construction-time-for-reactors-since-1981/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/712841/median-constructi... Not sure if this includes planning times (probably not entirely) and I doubt that the reactor would deliver maximum power immediately. Smaller scale renewable projects can be (and are) realized in a fraction of the time. They are proven technologies that continue to become cheaper. And of course there are gigantic potentials in terms of simply using less energy. The German (or any) government could simply mandate that all existing building stock would have to reduce their energy consumption by X% over the next ten years. The technologies for that exist, are used every day and the only limit on their deployment is the required capital, to which governments have pretty much unlimited access.