7 ms·

Simply cost. If the plants started in the early 2000s would have been delivered on time and budget they would be a huge part of the transition today. Now nucle

Simply cost. If the plants started in the early 2000s would have been delivered on time and budget they would be a huge part of the transition today. Now nuclear costs 3-5x more compared to renewables and is simply not relevant. > "WIND" or "Solar" is not going to replace 3,500 MW of nuclear power without damaging a LOT of land. If land use is what you measure impact based on a much better target is the beef industry. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/land-use-per-kg-poore https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/land-use-per-kg-poore

kennend3 4y ago
what·a·bout·ism /ˌ(h)wədəˈboudizəm/ noun BRITISH the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counteraccusation or raising a different issue. what does "beef" have to do with converting land to wind farms? perhaps you could respond back with how solar panels are not actually very environmentally friendly? They produce a lot of toxic chemicals to manufacture. Tell us, to replace 3,500 MW of nuclear power, how many acres of land must be converted to wind/solar? what is the environmental/social impact of doing this? How much power is produced in a cold / dark winter via solar/wind vs nuclear.
- wizofaus 4y ago
  There's plenty of studies done comparing the footprint of nuclear to solar/wind, generally they show they're more or less equivalent, depending on what you measure and various assumptions built into the study - at least one IPCC study showed nuclear could have a measurably (up to 4x!) lower carbon footprint than solar. At any rate there's certainly no real reason to object to nuclear on environmental grounds (but on economical grounds, terrorism risk, plutonium proliferation, etc., sure, there are downsides that don't really exist with renewables).
moonchrome 4y ago
>Now nuclear costs 3-5x more and is simply not relevant. Compared to what ? Energy prices have jumped 2-3x in some places so far, and it's not even winter yet. Comparing renewable prices as averages or whatever is fine if you like blackouts ?
- Gwypaas 4y ago
  Then it's even better to get 3-5x the effect per invested dollar.
  - moonchrome 4y ago
    Yes - amazing - the reason prices are spiking is because supply is unstable and unable to support demand - and will be even more unstable in winter. Great for people selling electricity from renewables (although EU is capping their profit for 'fairness') but sucks for consumers.
  - belorn 4y ago
    I can easily earn a huge profit by trade 3-5x energy at one point in time, to get 1x energy at an other. As an example, in my zone, if someone provided 1x energy at 7pm, and I repaid that by providing 3x of that energy at 3am, I would still earn a profit of about 25%. The price prognosis for tonight is even lower, so I could trade 1x for 6x and still make a nice profit from the price difference.
    - Schroedingersat 4y ago
      So you're saying that a solar storage system which costs a fraction of a nuclear system is way better because you produce most of your energy during high demand and can move the rest rather than producing most of it at low demand times?
- kennend3 4y ago
  This is the CORE of the energy debate.. People throw out whatever nonsense they like to support their position. "Nuclear costs 3-5x" and as you point out, compared to what? The cost of sitting around for 20 years debating this and not taking any action at all has lead to much worse problems - power shortages. These "anti-nuclear" types fail to apply logic to their debate. I asked how much power is produced by solar during the long winter months, i suspect they will not respond as it is against their view - solar is NOT viable in cold-weather climates. You need a reliable "base" system and nuclear is very well suited for this. Our plants (CANDU) can be refuelled while producing near-full power greatly reducing the need to shut them down. The reason the temperatures fall below zero during the winter where i live is obvious.. The energy we receive from the sun has been greatly reduced. How would solar power address the reduction in available solar energy, and the increased demand for energy for heating?
derefr 4y ago
A bit of Googling suggests that Switzerland doesn't have a beef industry. Steak costs more in Switzerland than pretty much anywhere else in the world, as it has to be imported (no local industry), and the tariffs on it are also very high. Of course, they have cows, for milk, for the cheese industry that they do have. But raising dairy cattle has only a fraction of the impact that beef cattle do (as you're not constantly slaughtering them and feeding up new ones.)
- yakak 4y ago
  Just over 80% of beef consumed in Switzerland is produced in Switzerland.
  - brnt 4y ago
    Most animal feeds (by calorie) going into that beef: not produced in Switzerland though.
deevolution 4y ago
> "Now nuclear costs 3-5x more compared to renewables and is simply not relevant." We're seeing the hidden cost of renewable energy now, aren't we? Cheap because it's supplemented with natural gas to provide base load. If the politicians actually cared about the climate, they would be adamant about supplementing with nuclear, which is far far more energy dense. https://xkcd.com/1162/ https://xkcd.com/1162/
- Schroedingersat 4y ago
  Yes, it's definitely the 7% wind and solar performing exactly as advertised that is the cause of the issue, not the 35% gas and 10% nuclear which are both having problems. We should definitely spend our money on a system that will provide 1W of baseload 60-80% of the time and require gas for the rest, rather than a wind+solar+storage system that will provide at least 1 watt 100% of the year and average 2-5W depending on location.
midislack 4y ago
Hindus might not realize this but Europeans will kill for beef. Like, you're got getting rid of the beef industry, ever, period. I see you.

kennend3 4y ago

what·a·bout·ism /ˌ(h)wədəˈboudizəm/ noun BRITISH the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counteraccusation or raising a different issue. what does "beef" have to do with converting land to wind farms? perhaps you could respond back with how solar panels are not actually very environmentally friendly? They produce a lot of toxic chemicals to manufacture. Tell us, to replace 3,500 MW of nuclear power, how many acres of land must be converted to wind/solar? what is the environmental/social impact of doing this? How much power is produced in a cold / dark winter via solar/wind vs nuclear.

wizofaus 4y ago
There's plenty of studies done comparing the footprint of nuclear to solar/wind, generally they show they're more or less equivalent, depending on what you measure and various assumptions built into the study - at least one IPCC study showed nuclear could have a measurably (up to 4x!) lower carbon footprint than solar. At any rate there's certainly no real reason to object to nuclear on environmental grounds (but on economical grounds, terrorism risk, plutonium proliferation, etc., sure, there are downsides that don't really exist with renewables).

moonchrome 4y ago

>Now nuclear costs 3-5x more and is simply not relevant. Compared to what ? Energy prices have jumped 2-3x in some places so far, and it's not even winter yet. Comparing renewable prices as averages or whatever is fine if you like blackouts ?

Gwypaas 4y ago
Then it's even better to get 3-5x the effect per invested dollar.
- moonchrome 4y ago
  Yes - amazing - the reason prices are spiking is because supply is unstable and unable to support demand - and will be even more unstable in winter. Great for people selling electricity from renewables (although EU is capping their profit for 'fairness') but sucks for consumers.
- belorn 4y ago
  I can easily earn a huge profit by trade 3-5x energy at one point in time, to get 1x energy at an other. As an example, in my zone, if someone provided 1x energy at 7pm, and I repaid that by providing 3x of that energy at 3am, I would still earn a profit of about 25%. The price prognosis for tonight is even lower, so I could trade 1x for 6x and still make a nice profit from the price difference.
  - Schroedingersat 4y ago
    So you're saying that a solar storage system which costs a fraction of a nuclear system is way better because you produce most of your energy during high demand and can move the rest rather than producing most of it at low demand times?
kennend3 4y ago
This is the CORE of the energy debate.. People throw out whatever nonsense they like to support their position. "Nuclear costs 3-5x" and as you point out, compared to what? The cost of sitting around for 20 years debating this and not taking any action at all has lead to much worse problems - power shortages. These "anti-nuclear" types fail to apply logic to their debate. I asked how much power is produced by solar during the long winter months, i suspect they will not respond as it is against their view - solar is NOT viable in cold-weather climates. You need a reliable "base" system and nuclear is very well suited for this. Our plants (CANDU) can be refuelled while producing near-full power greatly reducing the need to shut them down. The reason the temperatures fall below zero during the winter where i live is obvious.. The energy we receive from the sun has been greatly reduced. How would solar power address the reduction in available solar energy, and the increased demand for energy for heating?

derefr 4y ago

A bit of Googling suggests that Switzerland doesn't have a beef industry. Steak costs more in Switzerland than pretty much anywhere else in the world, as it has to be imported (no local industry), and the tariffs on it are also very high. Of course, they have cows, for milk, for the cheese industry that they do have. But raising dairy cattle has only a fraction of the impact that beef cattle do (as you're not constantly slaughtering them and feeding up new ones.)

yakak 4y ago
Just over 80% of beef consumed in Switzerland is produced in Switzerland.
- brnt 4y ago
  Most animal feeds (by calorie) going into that beef: not produced in Switzerland though.

deevolution 4y ago

> "Now nuclear costs 3-5x more compared to renewables and is simply not relevant." We're seeing the hidden cost of renewable energy now, aren't we? Cheap because it's supplemented with natural gas to provide base load. If the politicians actually cared about the climate, they would be adamant about supplementing with nuclear, which is far far more energy dense. https://xkcd.com/1162/ https://xkcd.com/1162/

Schroedingersat 4y ago
Yes, it's definitely the 7% wind and solar performing exactly as advertised that is the cause of the issue, not the 35% gas and 10% nuclear which are both having problems. We should definitely spend our money on a system that will provide 1W of baseload 60-80% of the time and require gas for the rest, rather than a wind+solar+storage system that will provide at least 1 watt 100% of the year and average 2-5W depending on location.

midislack 4y ago

Hindus might not realize this but Europeans will kill for beef. Like, you're got getting rid of the beef industry, ever, period. I see you.