5 ms·
The article has a heavily biased view. Some points it gets wrong: >"If you close eight nuclear plants, which were carbon-free, overnight, you will increase car
by onli 14y ago
The article has a heavily biased view. Some points it gets wrong:
>"If you close eight nuclear plants, which were carbon-free, overnight, you will increase carbon emissions,"
Nuclear plants are not carbon free. Getting the uranium, transporting the nuclear waste, transporting the people who run the plant costs a lot of carbon emissions. You need to look at the whole picture.
>Inevitably, some hot July week will come when a high-pressure system stalls over Europe, stilling turbines just when sunburned Germans reach for their air conditioners
The summer in Germany isn't that hot. Middle europe, not california. Accordingly, we don't have air conditioners (in general)
Look at who is cited - People from large companies loosing their monopoly and Sinn, a conservative "expert".
- toemetoch 14y ago>Inevitably, some hot July week will come when a high-pressure system stalls over Europe, stilling turbines just when sunburned Germans reach for their air conditioners The summer in Germany isn't that hot. Middle europe, not california. Accordingly, we don#t have air conditioners (in general) These scenarios do happen. They're not always as straight-forward as the one suggested (low production/high demand). A few weeks ago there was a sunny/windy holiday in Belgium (May 28th). Due to overproduction and low demand they had to avert a national blackout by paying France to sink the surplus energy. In Belgium, renewables account for 7% of energy. That weekend it was 3 times as much.
- onli 14y agoI don't know about Belgium. Maybe air conditioners there are more common? In Germany, it is said that cold winters are more dangerous for the energy balance, as the cold also increases energy demand and the photovoltaik-cells aren't as useful as in a hot (and sunny) summer.
- toemetoch 14y agoPlease read again. Energy demand was lower because it was a holiday, nothing to do with air conditioners.
- onli 14y agoThanks. I didnt get that fully, because i saw that reply as phrased as a critic to my statement, whereas it supports my point (which was, that high demand/low availabality because of the summer is unlikely in that scenario). Or not, but it is not a real critic on my statement. Of course such scenarios happen, especially the situation you described.
- toemetoch 14y agoIt was an addendum, not a rebuttal ;)
- khuey 14y agoPV cells are actually more efficient at lower temperatures. The lost production comes entirely from decreases in the amount of sunlight.
- adam-a 14y agoI had no idea too much electricity could be a problem? I was trying to read more about this effect but google has no answers for me. Also, surely the obvious thing to do would be turn off some of the turbines in that situation?
- toemetoch 14y ago- It's not just wind (turbines) but also solar. - You don't have centralized access to all the facilities. E.g. small and medium-scale solar falls under the control of the owner AFAIK. Large scale wind also has other parties involved that don't want to miss out on income. - Control of energy production on a national or regional scale follows prediction models, not only for demand but also price of resources such as gas and weather forecasts for renewables. So for a holiday they would shutdown a number of "classic" facilities to follow a day-ahead schedule. This probably increased the dependency on renewables for that day. The big question "why didn't they shutdown wind farms": I don't know but I plan to find out.
- LiamMcCalloway 14y agoAs per the 2003 E.U. directive on renewable energy, renewables have priority access to the rid to offload their production. This is makes sense because it ensures full utilization of the assets and helps reduce their costs. EDIT: grammar
- toemetoch 14y agoBoth the 2003 directive [0] and the 2009 directive [1] state that member states may give priority - with notion of exceptions for security. Maybe priority was indeed the factor, but it's not mandated on a European level. [0] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2003:123:0042:0042:EN:PDF http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2... [1] http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:140:0016:0062:EN:PDF http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2...
- 14y ago
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- ars 14y ago> Nuclear plants are not carbon free. Getting the uranium, transporting the nuclear waste, transporting the people who run the plant costs a lot of carbon emissions. But shutting them down when you already paid all the costs is clearly stupid. And he didn't say carbon free. He said "increase carbon emissions" (he probably meant carbon dioxide emissions), and it clearly will increase them.
- maigret 14y agoShutting down was driven by fear, not by cost.
- onli 14y agoHe said carbon free. I cited that sentence. Also a working nuclear "you already paid for"-plant costs money and produces carbon emissions.
- ars 14y agoOnce you build the plant, any emissions from running it are absolutely minuscule. Gasoline maybe from the employees driving to work, maybe a bit from maintenance.
- onli 14y agoDrilling for the uranium is a whole chunk, according to http://www.nature.com/climate/2008/0810/full/climate.2008.99.html http://www.nature.com/climate/2008/0810/full/climate.2008.99.... But sure, less than coal (but still, more than wind). edit: added link.
- ars 14y agoNo wind uses more. You need to mine for the raw materials used to build the wind turbine. For the equivalent amount of energy wind turbines use hundreds of times as much raw materials as nuclear - even including building the nuclear power plant, not just the uranium.
- sneak 14y ago> The summer in Germany isn't that hot. Middle europe, not california. Accordingly, we don't have air conditioners (in general) Germans are always saying this. It was 90F in Berlin yesterday. That is air conditioner weather, period. The part about most people not having them is true, though. This US expat is hooking his up this week, despite power costing twice here what it does in California.
- Xylakant 14y agoClimate differs wildly throughout Germany. Berlin tends to get hot days, but those are of a moderate number. The upper Rhine valley where I come from has a warmer climate, but less extreme summer heat (lots of forest area around). The coastal area is generally cooler during the summer. So yes, we do get hot days, but it's still rare that people have air conditioning in their flats. Modern office buildings have air conditioning though and most shops as well. Still, when the temperature difference is lower you still need less energy to power them. Another point is that it's a rare occurrence to have no sun (hence no solar power) and massive heat.
- sjwright 14y agoFahrenheit? What is this, the nineteenth century? (90F = 32 degrees Celsius)
- kaybe 14y agoDo you have a normal German house, with shutters and thick stone walls? Normally they're good for at least a week when it gets hot - only open up at night and during the day close the shutters and don't open the windows. And heat waves that last longer than a week are very rare. All of Europe lives like this, even in the southern countries. There are some places where this doesn't work though, like the flat directly underneath the roof..
- soc88 14y ago> That is air conditioner weather, period. Whine whine whine
- Symmetry 14y agoNuclear plants are not carbon free. No, but of course solar power isn't carbon free either by the same logic. The problem is that in the short term the power that those nuclear plants were providing is being made up for by coal plants, which are much worse for the environment.
- onli 14y ago>made up for by coal plants, which are much worse for the environment This is exactly the point the article is missing. According to the german public, for the environment and the whole humanity the risks from nuclear plant are that high that coal plants, even though they are now used more and are unhealthy, are way less dangerous. Keep in mind that the plan is to shutdown all nuclear plants, substitute them with green energy and use coal only as long as needed in between the change.
- orangecat 14y agoAccording to the german public, for the environment and the whole humanity the risks from nuclear plant are that high that coal plants, even though they are now used more and are unhealthy, are way less dangerous. Yes, and the German public is flat-out wrong.
- onli 14y agoWe have not a single working endlager for the waste the nuclear plants are producing. Historically, there have been several large accidents, Tschernobyl, Fukushima, Three Mile, and several more smaller ones which would almost been fatal. I know that people on HN obviously like technology, and noticed that many people who like technology like nuclear plants. Maybe because they see them as great technology and are able to believe in that. But given the facts, no, the german public is not wrong. They are undisputably right. The Super-GAUs prove that.
- gwern 14y ago> several more smaller ones which would almost been fatal. As opposed to the air pollution from coal burning, and accidents installing solar and air; which are fatal every year.