4 ms·

Nuclear power is one of the few industries where a single mistake can cost you as much as replacing the entire nuclear power plant fleet.

natmaka 2y ago
Indeed, and even more. French experts stated it clearly: 1/ 'Cour des comptes' (France's supreme audit institution) established the cost of the nuclear fleet at approximately 228 billion € (2012 Report "Les coûts de la filière nucléaire"). It was contested and is probably under evaluated because some costs were paid for on various budgets (defense, scientific research...) but isn't too far fetched. 2/ IRSN (Institut de radioprotection et de sûreté nucléaire: Radioprotection and Nuclear Safety Institute") stated that the cost of a single major accident may surpass 430 billions € ( https://www.irsn.fr/savoir-comprendre/crise/cout-economique-pour-deux-scenarios-daccident https://www.irsn.fr/savoir-comprendre/crise/cout-economique-... ).
ovi256 2y ago
Not at all, the chemical industry also can do this. Worse, we store untreatable chemical waste forever (see Germany's many chemical waste dumps), unlike nuclear waste which will eventually become safe.
- natmaka 2y ago
  Please source.
  - LargoLasskhyfv 2y ago
    https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untertagedeponie_Herfa-Neurode https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untertagedeponie_Herfa-Neurode https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deponie_Ihlenberg https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deponie_Ihlenberg
    - natmaka 2y ago
      I cannot read German, Google Translated it, and could have misunderstood but could not find how those waste sites may trigger such major accident, nor about untreatable waste and one of them stores nuclear waste ("from the Greifswald nuclear power plant")! Chemical industry also produces very dangerous waste (Seveso...), I agree. This cannot serve as an excuse for nuclear, especially as, nowadays, we know how to industrially obtain electricity from renewable sources (no major accident similar to a nuclear's one, nor such dangerous waste).
      - LargoLasskhyfv 2y ago
        Sorry. Unfortunately the two sites have no english entries in Wikipedia, I just put them there because they are the two largest, but still mostly unknown to the general population. With the exception of the locals, who fear for them leaking into their groundwaters. Which may be unfounded for Herfa-Neurode because that is sitting in a real stable formation, for now... ...which says nothing about larger timescales, which we are dealing with here, because much of the stuff stored there has no 'half-life', and is way nastier than anything which caused Seveso. The other site, Ihlenberg, formerly called "Schönberg" ('nice Mountain', get it?) has a more interesting history. It's located right next to the former border between West-Germany and East-Germany, seperating them from the end of WW2 until reunification. In those times they buried much western trash for money in rather 'hush-hush' and corrupt ways there. The nastiest ones. They were poor and needed the money. What exactly, and how much, at which position und which conditions is still unknown, and not easy to assess, because that probing would disturb the other nasty stuff which it is embedded in. The fear there is much more founded, because it happend in rather uncoordinated ways, because of the 'hush-hushness' due to corruption, and that site is not stable. If it leaks, it has the potential to poison the whole Bay of Lübeck. It also sits on something like a geologic fault line roughly spanning from Kiel in the Northwest to there, caused by glacial rebound of Scandinavia. Slowly and gentle for now, but one never knows, right? That was that. As to an excuse for nuclear... Do you really think all that oh so sustainable green shit is growing on trees? Maybe look into so called 'superfund sites' in the USA, and how they overlap with semiconductor production sites, which also applies to solar cells. Japan should have had some of those 'oopsies', too. But probably not spoken about, because the nail that is standing out has to be hammered in, right? Wind? How long do they last? What's with the abrasion of the (mostly the front edges) blades while they operate and the entry of those stuff in form of microplastics into the environment? Their disposal after use? The large fundaments they need in the form of concrete, and the OH MY GAWD ALL THAT NASTY CARBON!1!! that is causing? Not to speak of the disturbance of ground water tables, when they have to go 15 to 40 meters (or even more) deep for stability. Geothermals? You have much of that. Why is it used so rarely? Sayonara.

natmaka 2y ago

Indeed, and even more. French experts stated it clearly: 1/ 'Cour des comptes' (France's supreme audit institution) established the cost of the nuclear fleet at approximately 228 billion € (2012 Report "Les coûts de la filière nucléaire"). It was contested and is probably under evaluated because some costs were paid for on various budgets (defense, scientific research...) but isn't too far fetched. 2/ IRSN (Institut de radioprotection et de sûreté nucléaire: Radioprotection and Nuclear Safety Institute") stated that the cost of a single major accident may surpass 430 billions € ( https://www.irsn.fr/savoir-comprendre/crise/cout-economique-pour-deux-scenarios-daccident https://www.irsn.fr/savoir-comprendre/crise/cout-economique-... ).

ovi256 2y ago

Not at all, the chemical industry also can do this. Worse, we store untreatable chemical waste forever (see Germany's many chemical waste dumps), unlike nuclear waste which will eventually become safe.

natmaka 2y ago
Please source.
- LargoLasskhyfv 2y ago
  https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untertagedeponie_Herfa-Neurode https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Untertagedeponie_Herfa-Neurode https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deponie_Ihlenberg https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deponie_Ihlenberg
  - natmaka 2y ago
    I cannot read German, Google Translated it, and could have misunderstood but could not find how those waste sites may trigger such major accident, nor about untreatable waste and one of them stores nuclear waste ("from the Greifswald nuclear power plant")! Chemical industry also produces very dangerous waste (Seveso...), I agree. This cannot serve as an excuse for nuclear, especially as, nowadays, we know how to industrially obtain electricity from renewable sources (no major accident similar to a nuclear's one, nor such dangerous waste).
    - LargoLasskhyfv 2y ago
      Sorry. Unfortunately the two sites have no english entries in Wikipedia, I just put them there because they are the two largest, but still mostly unknown to the general population. With the exception of the locals, who fear for them leaking into their groundwaters. Which may be unfounded for Herfa-Neurode because that is sitting in a real stable formation, for now... ...which says nothing about larger timescales, which we are dealing with here, because much of the stuff stored there has no 'half-life', and is way nastier than anything which caused Seveso. The other site, Ihlenberg, formerly called "Schönberg" ('nice Mountain', get it?) has a more interesting history. It's located right next to the former border between West-Germany and East-Germany, seperating them from the end of WW2 until reunification. In those times they buried much western trash for money in rather 'hush-hush' and corrupt ways there. The nastiest ones. They were poor and needed the money. What exactly, and how much, at which position und which conditions is still unknown, and not easy to assess, because that probing would disturb the other nasty stuff which it is embedded in. The fear there is much more founded, because it happend in rather uncoordinated ways, because of the 'hush-hushness' due to corruption, and that site is not stable. If it leaks, it has the potential to poison the whole Bay of Lübeck. It also sits on something like a geologic fault line roughly spanning from Kiel in the Northwest to there, caused by glacial rebound of Scandinavia. Slowly and gentle for now, but one never knows, right? That was that. As to an excuse for nuclear... Do you really think all that oh so sustainable green shit is growing on trees? Maybe look into so called 'superfund sites' in the USA, and how they overlap with semiconductor production sites, which also applies to solar cells. Japan should have had some of those 'oopsies', too. But probably not spoken about, because the nail that is standing out has to be hammered in, right? Wind? How long do they last? What's with the abrasion of the (mostly the front edges) blades while they operate and the entry of those stuff in form of microplastics into the environment? Their disposal after use? The large fundaments they need in the form of concrete, and the OH MY GAWD ALL THAT NASTY CARBON!1!! that is causing? Not to speak of the disturbance of ground water tables, when they have to go 15 to 40 meters (or even more) deep for stability. Geothermals? You have much of that. Why is it used so rarely? Sayonara.