4 ms·

> China has built four, one in just four years, in two roughly-parallel series. So the anti-nukes’ too-slow argument is bunk. But the pro-nuke team needs a lear

> China has built four, one in just four years, in two roughly-parallel series. So the anti-nukes’ too-slow argument is bunk. But the pro-nuke team needs a learning curve barely demonstrated in another country to continue. We have much more evidence of contruction being too slow (if that's what you mean); why is one example from the other side more convincing? Also, China is not directly comparable, being able to undemocratically externalize the welfare of residents, construction workers, and operators. Also, the last sentence seems to agree that the evidence is weak ? > the anti-nukes ... the pro-nuke Maybe there are also people who just care about getting the best outcome, aren't on a team that has drawn a predetermined conclusion, and are working with the data.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> why is one example from the other side more convincing Because it’s a Gen III+ design. > the last sentence seems to agree that the evidence is weak It’s a new design. > people who just care about getting the best outcome, aren't on a team that has drawn a predetermined conclusion, and are working with the data Very few people who have done this conclude we should go all in on a single solution. Nuclear, natural gas, solar and wind look like a solid mix.
- analognoise 3y ago
  Why do you need natural gas in that mix at all?
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > Why do you need natural gas in that mix at all? It’s cleaner than the alternatives and has its distribution infrastructure already built. While waiting for more solar, or waiting for more solar and wind and nukes, those coal and oil plants are still burning.
  - peterfirefly 3y ago
    We don't need it -- or wind and solar -- if we have enough nuclear. We are very far from having enough nuclear.
  - laszlojamf 3y ago
    I think the parent was thinking of the US. There, natural gas is an abundant predictable, and cheap base energy source. Not so much in Europe. In Sweden the mix is nuclear, water, and the rest, but we're still suffering from the rest of Europe not having a cheap base alternative, since the markets are interconnected. Europe would _love_ to have it's own natural gas source right about now.
    - peterfirefly 3y ago
      > Europe would _love_ to have it's own natural gas source right about now. And yet... the Netherlands closed down the Groningen gas field because the green voters wanted it and because they showed a few slightly cracked walls on a few houses on TV and claimed it was because of the gas field (and not because of shoddy foundations and poor construction). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groningen_gas_field https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groningen_gas_field We also could have been doing fracking on land. Maybe in the future? https://www.investigate-europe.eu/posts/europes-energy-crisis-is-reviving-the-fracking-industry https://www.investigate-europe.eu/posts/europes-energy-crisi... (2.9 on the Richter scale isn't much.) And the biggest Danish gas field in the North Sea is still down due to the old off-shore facilities being scrapped and new ones being built. This is done by TotalEnergies and should have been completed more than a year ago. It was delayed by Covid-19 but should then have been completed by summer this year. It is still not complete :( High expectations from TotalEnergies: https://totalenergies.com/projects/gas/tyra-major-offshore-project-core-our-climate-strategy https://totalenergies.com/projects/gas/tyra-major-offshore-p... Danish realities: https://energinet.dk/gas/forsyningssikkerhed/tyra/ https://energinet.dk/gas/forsyningssikkerhed/tyra/ The last platform was only put in place in October 2022 (and there was still lots of work to do): https://energiwatch.dk/Energinyt/Olie___Gas/article14460490.ece https://energiwatch.dk/Energinyt/Olie___Gas/article14460490....
- pydry 3y ago
  >Because it’s a Gen III+ design. That doesn't exist yet. >It’s a new design. Which doesn't exist yet. Vaporware is always cheaper.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > doesn't exist yet Yes, it does. Per the original comment. AP1000s have been built and are generating power.
mpweiher 3y ago
China builds 80% of the world's solar panels and 60% of the world's wind turbines.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> why is one example from the other side more convincing Because it’s a Gen III+ design. > the last sentence seems to agree that the evidence is weak It’s a new design. > people who just care about getting the best outcome, aren't on a team that has drawn a predetermined conclusion, and are working with the data Very few people who have done this conclude we should go all in on a single solution. Nuclear, natural gas, solar and wind look like a solid mix.

analognoise 3y ago
Why do you need natural gas in that mix at all?
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > Why do you need natural gas in that mix at all? It’s cleaner than the alternatives and has its distribution infrastructure already built. While waiting for more solar, or waiting for more solar and wind and nukes, those coal and oil plants are still burning.
- peterfirefly 3y ago
  We don't need it -- or wind and solar -- if we have enough nuclear. We are very far from having enough nuclear.
- laszlojamf 3y ago
  I think the parent was thinking of the US. There, natural gas is an abundant predictable, and cheap base energy source. Not so much in Europe. In Sweden the mix is nuclear, water, and the rest, but we're still suffering from the rest of Europe not having a cheap base alternative, since the markets are interconnected. Europe would _love_ to have it's own natural gas source right about now.
  - peterfirefly 3y ago
    > Europe would _love_ to have it's own natural gas source right about now. And yet... the Netherlands closed down the Groningen gas field because the green voters wanted it and because they showed a few slightly cracked walls on a few houses on TV and claimed it was because of the gas field (and not because of shoddy foundations and poor construction). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groningen_gas_field https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groningen_gas_field We also could have been doing fracking on land. Maybe in the future? https://www.investigate-europe.eu/posts/europes-energy-crisis-is-reviving-the-fracking-industry https://www.investigate-europe.eu/posts/europes-energy-crisi... (2.9 on the Richter scale isn't much.) And the biggest Danish gas field in the North Sea is still down due to the old off-shore facilities being scrapped and new ones being built. This is done by TotalEnergies and should have been completed more than a year ago. It was delayed by Covid-19 but should then have been completed by summer this year. It is still not complete :( High expectations from TotalEnergies: https://totalenergies.com/projects/gas/tyra-major-offshore-project-core-our-climate-strategy https://totalenergies.com/projects/gas/tyra-major-offshore-p... Danish realities: https://energinet.dk/gas/forsyningssikkerhed/tyra/ https://energinet.dk/gas/forsyningssikkerhed/tyra/ The last platform was only put in place in October 2022 (and there was still lots of work to do): https://energiwatch.dk/Energinyt/Olie___Gas/article14460490.ece https://energiwatch.dk/Energinyt/Olie___Gas/article14460490....
pydry 3y ago
>Because it’s a Gen III+ design. That doesn't exist yet. >It’s a new design. Which doesn't exist yet. Vaporware is always cheaper.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago
  > doesn't exist yet Yes, it does. Per the original comment. AP1000s have been built and are generating power.

mpweiher 3y ago

China builds 80% of the world's solar panels and 60% of the world's wind turbines.