9 ms·
Good job Finland. I respect the opinions of the environmentalists and agree with most of what they say, but until we have something more reliable that can put o
by lizardactivist 5y ago
Good job Finland. I respect the opinions of the environmentalists and agree with most of what they say, but until we have something more reliable that can put out power 24/7 year round, we need more new, modern nuclear plants.
- threeseed 5y agoIt doesn't work in every country but renewables with storage can provide 24/7 power. And it's a fraction of the price of nuclear.
- arnaudsm 5y agoDo you have a source regarding your pricing claim? Renewables are usually cheaper per W, but way more expensive in real world usage (battery storage + full life cycle costs)
- pfdietz 5y agoSee for yourself: https://model.energy/ https://model.energy/ The area around Finland and Eastern Europe is one of the worst in the world for renewables, though.
- arnaudsm 5y agoAwesome simulation tool, but why is nuclear power absent from the simulation?
- pfdietz 5y agoIt's not! The strangely named "Dispatchable 2" can be turned on as an option; it's based on the economics of the EPR (although you can change all the assumptions as needed.) If you do that, you'll find the solutions tend to be either "no nuclear" or "all nuclear", depending on the cost assumptions. This is a counter to the people who suggest "renewables, but use nuclear to cover the last 20%", which is a dumb idea.
- jahewson 5y agoOutside of pumped hydro, storage is very expensive. Would need something like a 15x reduction in storage costs to be competitive with nuclear.
- cm2187 5y agoAnd where do you build that hydro? I hear some people suggesting Europe using the valleys in Sweden and Norway. Imagine the EU electricity grid at the mercy of one of Putin’s submarines. The rest of Europe doesn’t have many valleys left to flood.
- flor1s 5y agoLuckily Putin would never capture a nuclear plant.
- cm2187 5y agoHe needs to pass through NATO forces and successfully prove the nuclear deterence wrong before you need to start worrying about that.
- ncmncm 5y agoAll you really need for pumped hydro is a hill. It's cheaper if there is a natural basin up there, but you can build sides of you need to.
- tenuousemphasis 5y ago
- cm2187 5y agoRenewables with “magic” storage. Wind can be low for a month for a whole country (cf UK last year). There is no storage technology that can store that much power at scale. What you need is an alternative on demand source of energy, which cost is always omitted when looking at renewable energy cost.
- bigbugbag 5y agoActually, no. The only climate compatible way is not an alternative on demande source of energy, but the other way around: adapt our energy consumption to its availability and significantly lower our energy use. (see this 2009 piece by low tech magazine[1]) This is the real issue with dealing with climate change: we have to drastically change our way of living, in ways that most of us have not properly grasped and are not ok with. But it is not a matter of choice, this will happen. It is a matter of choosing to do it in a somewhat controlled manner over the few time left, of to be subjected to this change in a brutal way. [1]: https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2009/11/renewable-energy-is-not-enough.html https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/2009/11/renewable-energy-i...
- ComradePhil 5y agoNot possible to build a civilization with hunter gatherer ways of harvesting power. "The sun didn't shine and wind speed was too low, so the ventilators stopped and people died". We need energy equivalent of grains: renewable and storable.
- chelical 5y ago24/7 isn't true at all. People keep repeating this like it's 2020. There's an ongoing energy crisis that started in 2021. Low wind speeds across all of Europe were a massive trigger.
- bigbugbag 5y agoalso France stopped 13+ nuclear reactors mid-winter which really did not help. But defects were found that would jeopardize the current evaluation to renew the certification for using them for 10 more years, so the decision was made to stop several reactors for forced maintenance and repairs.
- tuukkah 5y agoNuclear won't solve the climate crisis as it's too slow to build.
- orlovs 5y agoNuclear is slow to build as we dont have much experience to build it. More we will build it, the better we will become in it
- laurent92 5y agoFrance chose to build in bulk of 5-15 plants, as seen in this (extremely interesting) Gantt diagram: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/24/Chrono-parc-nucleaire-francais.svg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/24/Chrono-p...
- rhn_mk1 5y agoNothing will solve the climate crisis in the time frame it takes to build a nuclear reactor. If you start building now, you get part of the solution in the future.
- tuukkah 5y agoFinland is aiming to be carbon neutral by 2035. Do you suggest that if we start planning now, we can rely on having new nuclear plants operational in 13 years? Also note that we wouldn't be buying them from Russia because of the current war, and China would be risky in the same way. There's a current project where the only offer was from Russia and that one is being suspended indefinitely right now.