natmaka

42 ms·

421.
by natmaka 3y ago
The challenge isn't about producing electricity, but providing it when needed. In most nations "providing it when needed" was equivalent to "producing it when needed" because, then, the sole way to realistically sto
422.
by natmaka 3y ago
This very average frequency/amplitude/speed of discharge, for any given battery, depends upon many parameters (during most of such 'call to batteries': slope of the call and quantity of electricity needed, duration, prop
423.
by natmaka 3y ago
Those are the share of nuclear and renewables in total electricity production, therefore this is quite real. In which way 'electricity production' isn't real, or not helping to reduce greenhouse-gas effect emissions?
424.
by natmaka 3y ago
Load-following runs the equipment harder, indeed. There are safety-related limits (power modulation proportion, duration of a pause needed after each modulation, modulations frequency...) to nuclear load-following capacity, and the very com
425.
by natmaka 3y ago
LCOE (cost of produced electricity: the difference between nuclear and renewables is huge, and growing. Therefore it offers financial resources to build what is needed for a renewables-based system to provide most of the time: continental
426.
by natmaka 3y ago
AFAIK there is no recycling (re-enrichment) in France since 2013 (costs, technical problems...). Source: https://www.rtl.fr/actu/debats-societe/nucleaire-que-devienn... It may restart in 2029. Some is done in Russ
427.
by natmaka 3y ago
A major piece here (electricity storage) is V2G ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle-to-grid ). Reducing emissions related to transportation leads to electrical vehicles, and therefore to a vast amount of batteries
428.
by natmaka 3y ago
Share of nuclear and renewables: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/nuclear-renewables-electr... https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/nuclear-renewables-electr...
429.
by natmaka 3y ago
This is a work in progress. The growing fleet of renewable units will enable Spain to shut reactors down without building other ones. This is heavy industry, nothing can be done in a jiffy.
430.
by natmaka 3y ago
This (need for military-grade plutonium) is only part of the benefits of breeder reactors. They lift most of the dependency towards uranium providers (needing way less of it), and considerably helps tackling the nuclear waste challenge (pro
431.
by natmaka 3y ago
This seems pretty simple to me: please name a single model of breeder reactor ready for industrial deployment. It is not about failed attempts (there were numerous, for sure) not vague plans. This is about an existing solution, and therefo
432.
by natmaka 3y ago
This is not because renewables cannot tackle the challenge, but because this is a work in progress (not quick enough) => not enough electricity produced => it offers a path for coal which is important for social and financial reasons.
433.
by natmaka 3y ago
> Nuclear AND Renewable energy It cannot be done because it financially condemns new nuclear plants. "The rates at which conventional power plants are utilized will continue to decrease as competitive pressure from near-zero margin
434.
by natmaka 3y ago
Please name a single model of breeder reactor ready for industrial deployment. There is none, therefore this is not a solution.
435.
by natmaka 3y ago
Moreover modern gas turbo-alternators can burn hydrogen instead of methane, and electricity generated thanks to renewable units' (wind turbines, solar panels...) overproduction can be used to obtain hydrogen (dubbed 'green hydrog
436.
by natmaka 3y ago
This is a work in progress, their transition isn't done yet. Without nuclear no risks tied to a major accident, dependancy towards uranium providers, hot waste disposal, overcentralization, overcentralization, proliferation, daunting b
437.
by natmaka 3y ago
I fail to understand how one may think nuclear as part of any realistic approach. For one cranking up new reactors became too difficult a long time ago. France (Flamanville-3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_N
438.
by natmaka 3y ago
Emissions are to be reduced. All of them, not only those related to gridpower generation. To do so electrifying usages is key. This in turn imply that more electricity has to be generated. Each and every nation in the EU27 moves towards th
439.
by natmaka 3y ago
> 63% is far lower Nope. We have to take into account consumption-based CO₂ emissions: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/prod-cons-co2-per-capita?... > that 63% can be easily reduced in France by introducing he
440.
by natmaka 3y ago
At the time of the Fukushima disaster no one could assess in real-time, and therefore according to the then-prime minister the worst case scenario was worked on. You can call it 'disinformation' (in other words: 'he is a lia
441.
by natmaka 3y ago
We progress towards a mix of renewables (wind, solar...) deployed at continental scale ( https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/180592/european-cooperation-... ) , backed up by V2G ( https://en.wikipedia.org&#
442.
by natmaka 3y ago
> Wind/Solar are the single biggest recipient of subsidies According to the IEA: "EU electricity consumers are expected to save an estimated EUR 100 billion during 2021-2023 thanks to additional electricity generation from newl
443.
by natmaka 3y ago
In France about 63% of the final energy is produced thanks to fossil fuel. A new nuclear reactor is being built since 2007, it should have launched a new set of reactors, and this WIP is a disaster: https://en.wikipedia.org/
444.
by natmaka 3y ago
"In 2012, ex-prime minister Naoto Kan was interviewed about the Fukushima nuclear disaster, and has said that at one point Japan faced a situation where there was a chance that people might not be able to live in the capital zone inclu
445.
by natmaka 3y ago
The hydro stats are mainly due to the Banqiao case, which is a fluke: in similar conditions anything would go boom with way less latency: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35521090
446.
by natmaka 3y ago
Nowadays this is not about "nuclear vs. coal" but "nuclear vs. renewables (which are way less deadly than coal)".
447.
by natmaka 3y ago
> PWRs can't explode like what happened in Chernobyl. No, sadly. PWR's sure can explode (due to hydrogen, vapor...). The root causes will not be identical to Chernobyl's causes, and the containment will probably limit leak
448.
by natmaka 3y ago
> I knew we had an interconnected grid, but I had no idea it span from WP articles about this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronous_grid_of_Continenta... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europ
449.
by natmaka 3y ago
In such a game the trick is to build and maintain a consistent 'you', and therefore to control your own party, made of blurry and changing subgroups/alliances of individuals, most of them perceiving their own interests in the
450.
by natmaka 3y ago
Indeed. To conquer (resources, mainly land) converting (to your culture, historically more often than not your religion or general philosophy about society/life...) the people now owning it is way more efficient than invading by wagin

More ›