3 ms·
No, that’s what you inferred and presented as something I said. They weren’t failing. They voted to phase them out [1]. And France made a similar bonehead mis
by rglover 4y ago
No, that’s what you inferred and presented as something I said.
They weren’t failing. They voted to phase them out [1].
And France made a similar bonehead mistake: there were regulations put in place by the government after the 2003 heatwave regarding water temperature limits [2] and wildlife which forced them to be powered down. Hilariously enough, they chose to do this not just during a heatwave, but also when there was a massive maintenance backlog due to the pandemic.
So, yes, they would have helped immensely.
As per usual, the government and their zealots created the mess and blamed it on someone else. These people are halfwits and their destruction will be of great benefit and security to humanity.
[1] https://www.cleanenergywire.org/glossary/letter_n#nuclear_phase-out https://www.cleanenergywire.org/glossary/letter_n#nuclear_ph...
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/aug/03/edf-to-reduce-nuclear-power-output-as-french-river-temperatures-rise https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/aug/03/edf-to-redu...
- Schroedingersat 4y agoSo how does nuclear, gas and coal being vulnerable to politicking making it less reliable relate to the wind and solar which was working just fine? Also being able to have a backlog of maintenance because your power generation is incredibly fragile and centralised sounds really bad. If only there was another way. You're really selling small modular power generation with fewer failure modes quite well here. You're making the other options sound less reliable with each comment. Do you work for the solar lobby?