3 ms·

Germany Deserves a New Deal on Nuclear Energy from Merz

5 points by mpweiher 2y ago

mpweiher 2y ago
https://archive.is/l5y3O https://archive.is/l5y3O
anovikov 2y ago
Well, problem with nuclear power is timelines. Before any new nuclear can be built, renewables will fill all energy needs. So it will be wasted money. Gotta wait.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
BMc2020 2y ago
No country has ever made nuclear power profitable, it is always subsidized.
- mpweiher 2y ago
  That turns out not to be true. Here a short primer on the economics of nuclear reactors: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbeJIwF1pVY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbeJIwF1pVY Intermittent renewables on the other hand require massive subsidies.
- FirmwareBurner 2y ago
  Other non-renewable energy sources are also subsidized when you factor in second order effects, like for example the breathing health issues caused by coal particulate emissions, or the global warming caused from CO2 from extracting and burning gas. Nuclear is truly the most environmentally friendly.
  - lostlogin 2y ago
    > Nuclear is truly zero emissions on the environment. It is low emissions, but it isn’t zero and other sources are lower (wind turbine - see below). I assume it’s the mining, processing, storage and vast quantities of concrete in the plants. https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/energy-and-the-environment/carbon-dioxide-emissions-from-electricity https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/energy-and-the...
    - mpweiher 2y ago
      Nuclear is zero emissions during operation. Renewables are also non-zero emissions during construction, and the required resources (per kWh produced) are around 10x higher.
    - FirmwareBurner 2y ago
      That's why I said "non-renewable".
- credit_guy 2y ago
  Maybe except China? They've built 37 reactors in the last 10 years (with a total capacity of 20 GW) and have 30 more under construction with a total capacity of 31 GW [1]. It is possible this is all subsidized construction, like lots of things in China. How could you tell? Still, there's also a fairly good chance they found a way to make them economical, just like they build roads and bridges and buildings and railways at a much lower cost point than the West. [1] https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-a-f/china-nuclear-power https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profil...
GuestFAUniverse 2y ago
And where does Germany get the necessary uranium from? facepalm
- mpweiher 2y ago
  1. Australia 2. Canada 3. Kazakhstan 4. Recycling nuclear fuel 5. South Africa 6. China 7. Brasil 8. Namibia 9. Seawater 10. Use Thorium instead Oh, if you find China in this list objectionable, as it is a dictatorship, remember that that is where we get essentially all our solar panels from.
  - GuestFAUniverse 2y ago
    These are most likely places with mine = close to useless. Enrichment is done 35-45% by Tenex (Rosatom subsidiary). The rest of the market is divided between the U.S., France (Orano), the UK (Urenco), and China. Well, the U.S. are not preferable these days, dependency on China is already too high. So, France or the UK it is -- do they have the capacity? Doubt it.

5 points by mpweiher 2y ago

https://archive.is/l5y3O https://archive.is/l5y3O

Well, problem with nuclear power is timelines. Before any new nuclear can be built, renewables will fill all energy needs. So it will be wasted money. Gotta wait.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

BMc2020 2y ago

No country has ever made nuclear power profitable, it is always subsidized.

mpweiher 2y ago
That turns out not to be true. Here a short primer on the economics of nuclear reactors: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbeJIwF1pVY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbeJIwF1pVY Intermittent renewables on the other hand require massive subsidies.
FirmwareBurner 2y ago
Other non-renewable energy sources are also subsidized when you factor in second order effects, like for example the breathing health issues caused by coal particulate emissions, or the global warming caused from CO2 from extracting and burning gas. Nuclear is truly the most environmentally friendly.
- lostlogin 2y ago
  > Nuclear is truly zero emissions on the environment. It is low emissions, but it isn’t zero and other sources are lower (wind turbine - see below). I assume it’s the mining, processing, storage and vast quantities of concrete in the plants. https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/energy-and-the-environment/carbon-dioxide-emissions-from-electricity https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/energy-and-the...
  - mpweiher 2y ago
    Nuclear is zero emissions during operation. Renewables are also non-zero emissions during construction, and the required resources (per kWh produced) are around 10x higher.
  - FirmwareBurner 2y ago
    That's why I said "non-renewable".
credit_guy 2y ago
Maybe except China? They've built 37 reactors in the last 10 years (with a total capacity of 20 GW) and have 30 more under construction with a total capacity of 31 GW [1]. It is possible this is all subsidized construction, like lots of things in China. How could you tell? Still, there's also a fairly good chance they found a way to make them economical, just like they build roads and bridges and buildings and railways at a much lower cost point than the West. [1] https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-a-f/china-nuclear-power https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profil...

GuestFAUniverse 2y ago

And where does Germany get the necessary uranium from? facepalm

mpweiher 2y ago
1. Australia 2. Canada 3. Kazakhstan 4. Recycling nuclear fuel 5. South Africa 6. China 7. Brasil 8. Namibia 9. Seawater 10. Use Thorium instead Oh, if you find China in this list objectionable, as it is a dictatorship, remember that that is where we get essentially all our solar panels from.
- GuestFAUniverse 2y ago
  These are most likely places with mine = close to useless. Enrichment is done 35-45% by Tenex (Rosatom subsidiary). The rest of the market is divided between the U.S., France (Orano), the UK (Urenco), and China. Well, the U.S. are not preferable these days, dependency on China is already too high. So, France or the UK it is -- do they have the capacity? Doubt it.