5 ms·

France, France, France, France, France. I need nuclear proponents to read about France. A nation made a bet on "let's do all nuclear". It basically worked, but

by rtpg 3y ago

France, France, France, France, France. I need nuclear proponents to read about France. A nation made a bet on "let's do all nuclear". It basically worked, but there was no magical cost decrease. They have an immense amount of institutional knowledge, huge educational system, massive amounts of resources. Their nukes are big and expensive and not really on time. There is no magic at the end of the tunnel if Greenpeace disappears. The world isn't Sim City, power plants need water access and have location concerns, and it's not a question of just dropping a bunch of truck-sized plants across the world and magically solving everything. Having said that, France is a success story of course. It's cool that it's all set up. But even after building it up, running these plants are expensive, there's often load issues meaning they are not fully utilized... "nuclear is free easy energy" is science fiction. That's fine, though! It's normal that we have to do stuff to power society. EDIT: to be clear, I'm cool with nuclear, but I am not picky about where my watts come from.

ViewTrick1002 3y ago
France went "Negative learning by doing" [1] in their initial build out and Flamanville 3 [2] is looking like a complete boondoggle. [1]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301421510003526 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03014... [2]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_Nuclear_Power_Pl...
- rtpg 3y ago
  > The French nuclear case illustrates the perils of the assumption of robust learning effects resulting in lowered costs over time in the scale-up of large-scale, complex new energy supply technologies. The uncertainties in anticipated learning effects of new technologies might be much larger that often assumed, including also cases of “negative learning” in which specific costs increase rather than decrease with accumulated experience. Oof, talk about a nasty abstract. Will need to find a way to look at this paper later.
spullara 3y ago
There is a magical end that we can optimize where it is just about making nuclear fission energy more efficient.
tjmc 3y ago
I've heard it said that in France there are 3 types of nuclear reactor and 100 types of cheese. In America it's the other way around.
troupo 3y ago
France also suffered from the same anti-nuclear sentiment as the rest of the world. To the point that they a couple of years ago they were forced to shutdown their plants for maintenance after a decade or more of neglect.
- WinstonSmith84 3y ago
  it was in fact the last winter just at the worst moment possible when electricity price was exploding. Half of them were in maintenance for various reasons https://www.tf1info.fr/economie/crise-de-l-energie-nucleaire-edf-revoit-son-estimation-de-production-a-la-baisse-en-2022-2237557.html https://www.tf1info.fr/economie/crise-de-l-energie-nucleaire...
- cycomanic 3y ago
  It is funny what all gets blamed on anti-nuclear sentiment or the anti-nuclear lobby. This is a new one though. The neglect was because of anti-nuclear sentiment? In France? I think France is probably one of the countries with the highest approval for nuclear (well > 50%). The neglect was because maintenance costs money and as usual people (+governments, corporations ...) want to save money/increase earnings/profit, so upkeep gets neglected.
  - troupo 3y ago
    Of course the issue is more complex than just one cause, but anti-nuclear sentiment plays a huge role: --- start quote --- Following the 2011 Fukushima I nuclear accidents, an OpinionWay poll at the end of March found that 57% of the French population were opposed to nuclear energy in France.[119] A TNS-Sofres poll in the days following the accident found 55% in favour of nuclear power.[119] In 2006, BBC/GlobeScan poll found 57% of the French opposed to nuclear energy.[120] In May 2001, an Ipsos poll found that nearly 70% of the population had a 'good opinion' of nuclear power, however 56% also preferred not to live near a nuclear plant and the same proportion thought that a 'Chernobyl-like accident' could occur in France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France#Public_opinion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France#Public... --- end quote --- It's also one of the major reasons why no new nuclear reactors appeared in France after 2000, and why the government would neglect the existing reactors.

by rtpg 3y ago

ViewTrick1002 3y ago

France went "Negative learning by doing" [1] in their initial build out and Flamanville 3 [2] is looking like a complete boondoggle. [1]: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301421510003526 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S03014... [2]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_Nuclear_Power_Pl...

rtpg 3y ago
> The French nuclear case illustrates the perils of the assumption of robust learning effects resulting in lowered costs over time in the scale-up of large-scale, complex new energy supply technologies. The uncertainties in anticipated learning effects of new technologies might be much larger that often assumed, including also cases of “negative learning” in which specific costs increase rather than decrease with accumulated experience. Oof, talk about a nasty abstract. Will need to find a way to look at this paper later.

spullara 3y ago

There is a magical end that we can optimize where it is just about making nuclear fission energy more efficient.

tjmc 3y ago

I've heard it said that in France there are 3 types of nuclear reactor and 100 types of cheese. In America it's the other way around.

troupo 3y ago

France also suffered from the same anti-nuclear sentiment as the rest of the world. To the point that they a couple of years ago they were forced to shutdown their plants for maintenance after a decade or more of neglect.

WinstonSmith84 3y ago
it was in fact the last winter just at the worst moment possible when electricity price was exploding. Half of them were in maintenance for various reasons https://www.tf1info.fr/economie/crise-de-l-energie-nucleaire-edf-revoit-son-estimation-de-production-a-la-baisse-en-2022-2237557.html https://www.tf1info.fr/economie/crise-de-l-energie-nucleaire...
cycomanic 3y ago
It is funny what all gets blamed on anti-nuclear sentiment or the anti-nuclear lobby. This is a new one though. The neglect was because of anti-nuclear sentiment? In France? I think France is probably one of the countries with the highest approval for nuclear (well > 50%). The neglect was because maintenance costs money and as usual people (+governments, corporations ...) want to save money/increase earnings/profit, so upkeep gets neglected.
- troupo 3y ago
  Of course the issue is more complex than just one cause, but anti-nuclear sentiment plays a huge role: --- start quote --- Following the 2011 Fukushima I nuclear accidents, an OpinionWay poll at the end of March found that 57% of the French population were opposed to nuclear energy in France.[119] A TNS-Sofres poll in the days following the accident found 55% in favour of nuclear power.[119] In 2006, BBC/GlobeScan poll found 57% of the French opposed to nuclear energy.[120] In May 2001, an Ipsos poll found that nearly 70% of the population had a 'good opinion' of nuclear power, however 56% also preferred not to live near a nuclear plant and the same proportion thought that a 'Chernobyl-like accident' could occur in France https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France#Public_opinion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_France#Public... --- end quote --- It's also one of the major reasons why no new nuclear reactors appeared in France after 2000, and why the government would neglect the existing reactors.