4 ms·

There's no physics reason of course, but not using the natural river source for cooling like this further hurts the economics of nuclear power, which is already

There's no physics reason of course, but not using the natural river source for cooling like this further hurts the economics of nuclear power, which is already it's primary weakness. Similarly, all industrial processes of heat rejection, including data centers, could use closed cycle cooling, but they don't, because it's more expensive to install and operate.

realusername 2mo ago
> the economics of nuclear power, which is already it's primary weakness. That affects ~0.5% of the yearly production in France, it's not a "primary weakness", it's the opposite, it's so low of a problem that the state simply doesn't care enough to fix it.
- ZeroGravitas 2mo ago
  They are saying economics is the primary weakness i.e. nuclear costs more than renewables even if you don't have fancy cooling methods that would increase the cost further.
  - realusername 2mo ago
    Well no it isn't, this problem is so small that it's not even worth installing any additional cooling method. It's also the lowest consumption period of the year, making the problem even more irrelevant as some plants are already offline for maintainance anyways. And since the poster didn't knew that, I'm not sure the cost analysis holds up.
  - leonidasrup 2mo ago
    For renewables (solar, wind) to work reliably you have to provide on-demand backup, invest in energy storage systems and increase investments in electric as renewables are often far away from consumers. (German offshore wind in north, major industrial consumers in south). So direct comparison of isolated costs of renewables and nuclear is misleading. You have compare the whole system.
    - uecker 2mo ago
      People who did this found renewables to be cost effective.
      - leonidasrup 2mo ago
        "Germany has one of the most ambitious energy transition policies dubbed ‘Die Energiewende’ to replace nuclear- and fossil power with renewables such as wind-, solar- and biopower. The climate gas emissions are reduced by 25% in the study period of 2002 through 2022. By triangulating available information sources, the total nominal expenditures are estimated at EUR 387 bn, and the associated subsidies are some EUR 310 bn giving a total nominal expenditures of EUR 696 bn. Alternatively, Germany could have kept the existing nuclear power in 2002 and possibly invest in new nuclear capacity. The analysis of these two alternatives shows that Germany could have reached its climate gas emission target by achieving a 73% cut in emissions on top of the achievements in 2022 and simultaneously cut the spending in half compared to Energiewende. Thus, Germany should have adopted an energy policy based on keeping and expanding nuclear power." https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14786451.2024.2355642 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14786451.2024.2...
        ZeroGravitas 2mo ago
        Isn't this the guy that double counted everything? Because he counted when something got bought and then counted the subsidy used to buy and added then together?
        leonidasrup 2mo ago
        Double-counting was criticism from Fraunhofer ISI. Jan Emblemsvåg has responded to the criticism with follow on article: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14786451.2026.2668864 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14786451.2026.2...
        throw0101d 2mo ago

realusername 2mo ago

> the economics of nuclear power, which is already it's primary weakness. That affects ~0.5% of the yearly production in France, it's not a "primary weakness", it's the opposite, it's so low of a problem that the state simply doesn't care enough to fix it.

ZeroGravitas 2mo ago
They are saying economics is the primary weakness i.e. nuclear costs more than renewables even if you don't have fancy cooling methods that would increase the cost further.
- realusername 2mo ago
  Well no it isn't, this problem is so small that it's not even worth installing any additional cooling method. It's also the lowest consumption period of the year, making the problem even more irrelevant as some plants are already offline for maintainance anyways. And since the poster didn't knew that, I'm not sure the cost analysis holds up.
- leonidasrup 2mo ago
  For renewables (solar, wind) to work reliably you have to provide on-demand backup, invest in energy storage systems and increase investments in electric as renewables are often far away from consumers. (German offshore wind in north, major industrial consumers in south). So direct comparison of isolated costs of renewables and nuclear is misleading. You have compare the whole system.
  - uecker 2mo ago
    People who did this found renewables to be cost effective.
    - leonidasrup 2mo ago
      "Germany has one of the most ambitious energy transition policies dubbed ‘Die Energiewende’ to replace nuclear- and fossil power with renewables such as wind-, solar- and biopower. The climate gas emissions are reduced by 25% in the study period of 2002 through 2022. By triangulating available information sources, the total nominal expenditures are estimated at EUR 387 bn, and the associated subsidies are some EUR 310 bn giving a total nominal expenditures of EUR 696 bn. Alternatively, Germany could have kept the existing nuclear power in 2002 and possibly invest in new nuclear capacity. The analysis of these two alternatives shows that Germany could have reached its climate gas emission target by achieving a 73% cut in emissions on top of the achievements in 2022 and simultaneously cut the spending in half compared to Energiewende. Thus, Germany should have adopted an energy policy based on keeping and expanding nuclear power." https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14786451.2024.2355642 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14786451.2024.2...
      - ZeroGravitas 2mo ago
        Isn't this the guy that double counted everything? Because he counted when something got bought and then counted the subsidy used to buy and added then together?
        leonidasrup 2mo ago
        Double-counting was criticism from Fraunhofer ISI. Jan Emblemsvåg has responded to the criticism with follow on article: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14786451.2026.2668864 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14786451.2026.2...
        throw0101d 2mo ago