3 ms·

Note that economics doesn't work even with Korean nuclear plants: Korean nuclear is cheaper than Korean gas, but more expensive than European gas, because Europ

Note that economics doesn't work even with Korean nuclear plants: Korean nuclear is cheaper than Korean gas, but more expensive than European gas, because European gas is pipelined, Korean gas is liquified, and liquified gas is so much more expensive than pipelined gas. European nuclear initiatives are mostly about strategic concerns to get out of Russian gas. Economically, even the cheapest nuclear power on Earth can't compete with gas, if it is pipelined. (It can compete if it is liquified.) Or you need to penalize gas to unreasonable degrees for carbon emission.

trashtester 4y ago
European gas is cheap as long as we're willing to hand over control of Europe's energy supply to Putin. Which most countries in Europe no longer are, and maybe never will be again. Meanwhile the largest known deposits of Uranium can be found in Australia and Canada, making them much safer sources for western countries. If EU countries allow fracking domestically, this will change, of course. Though the same "green" movement that opposes nuclear is likly to try to block this. Maybe we should look at how much funding these people get from Russia?
- Brometheus 4y ago
  In Germany none, because the Greens are against Putin. So instead Putin finances the people that protest against wind power and solar.
  - trashtester 4y ago
    Maybe you're right, but there are sources claiming otherwise: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/19/russia-secretly-working-with-environmentalists-to-oppose-fracking https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/19/russia-s... https://www.newsweek.com/putin-funding-green-groups-discredit-natural-gas-fracking-635052 https://www.newsweek.com/putin-funding-green-groups-discredi... https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/german-green-group-branded-a-russian-puppet-over-nord-stream-ii-gas-pipeline-nzd9p056q https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/german-green-group-brande... https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/01/putins-green-fifth-column/ https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/01/putins-green-fifth-co... Just to pick a few random google results. As far as I can tell, it's in Russia's interest to encourage any energy source that synergizes with NG (ie wind and solar) and to work against energy sources that are full alternatives (nuclear, coal and large scale storage), while at the same time ignore the downsides of NG. It would make sense to fund groups aligned with these interests, even those that are generally negative to Russia politically. Such funding would not need to be done directly, but could be done through subsidiaries.

trashtester 4y ago

European gas is cheap as long as we're willing to hand over control of Europe's energy supply to Putin. Which most countries in Europe no longer are, and maybe never will be again. Meanwhile the largest known deposits of Uranium can be found in Australia and Canada, making them much safer sources for western countries. If EU countries allow fracking domestically, this will change, of course. Though the same "green" movement that opposes nuclear is likly to try to block this. Maybe we should look at how much funding these people get from Russia?

Brometheus 4y ago
In Germany none, because the Greens are against Putin. So instead Putin finances the people that protest against wind power and solar.
- trashtester 4y ago
  Maybe you're right, but there are sources claiming otherwise: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/19/russia-secretly-working-with-environmentalists-to-oppose-fracking https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/19/russia-s... https://www.newsweek.com/putin-funding-green-groups-discredit-natural-gas-fracking-635052 https://www.newsweek.com/putin-funding-green-groups-discredi... https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/german-green-group-branded-a-russian-puppet-over-nord-stream-ii-gas-pipeline-nzd9p056q https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/german-green-group-brande... https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/01/putins-green-fifth-column/ https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/01/putins-green-fifth-co... Just to pick a few random google results. As far as I can tell, it's in Russia's interest to encourage any energy source that synergizes with NG (ie wind and solar) and to work against energy sources that are full alternatives (nuclear, coal and large scale storage), while at the same time ignore the downsides of NG. It would make sense to fund groups aligned with these interests, even those that are generally negative to Russia politically. Such funding would not need to be done directly, but could be done through subsidiaries.