RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


provfivetine -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/30/2011 8:19:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

Riiiiiiight.......[8|]

The spent waste cramming every nuke plant`s storage capacity that can`t find a home that no one wants, is proof that you`re full of shit.



Sure, but that's the result of current government policy, not because of anything inherent in nuclear power. Governments are more concerned with using D-38 for militaristic adventures and weapons as well as catering to the companies that profit from the storage techniques and facilities than they are about the responsible use of depleted uranium. Technically, the D-38 could be re-centrifuged and used as fuel, but only 10% or so of the nuclear facilities are capable of this.

What do you propose in lieu of nuclear power? The fact that you don't even think about things like this is proof that you're full of shit.




Owner59 -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/30/2011 8:45:15 PM)

I propose we live within our means.We should get some balls and make it happen.

We have the technology to make enough electricity without nuke plants.

We just lack the will.

Imagine the staggering amounts of money blown in nuke plants spent rather on solar banks,wind and geo-thermal sources.

It doesn`t follow the centralized plant provides all power model but rather gathers kilowatts from multiple sources including unused residential solar electricity fed back into the grid(and running meters backward).Which is perfectly all right with me and seems more democratic.

Somehow saying to our great grand kids that we couldn`t find a better way so here`s our nuclear waste good luck, seems the epitome of narcissism..




provfivetine -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/30/2011 8:54:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

I propose we live within our means.We should get some balls and make it happen.

We have the technology to make enough electricity without nuke plants.

We just lack the will.

Imagine the staggering amounts of money blown in nuke plants spent rather on solar banks,wind and geo-thermal sources.

It doesn`t follow the centralized plant provides all power model but rather gathers kilowatts from multiple sources including unused residential solar electricity fed back into the grid(and running meters backward).Which is perfectly all right with me and seems more democratic.



So you think that solar, wind, and geothermal energy can account for the lost energy output of nuclear power? I'm all for those energy resources too, but they can't replace the energy output of nuclear power. These power sources may be good for small towns and villages, but there's no way that they can power large metropolises. Going off of nuclear power essentially means that more gas, petroleum, and coal will be used.

[image]local://upfiles/1162612/357B7A60A8D84473B013DA15759D2CE7.gif[/image]




DarkSteven -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/30/2011 8:56:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: provfivetine

I don't know why Germany would be so foolish to try to do this. Nuclear power is an excellent way to sustain a population in an environmentally friendly way. France understands this.


When things go well, yes.  Absolutely.  But an accident in nuclear has potential to be nasty.




provfivetine -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/30/2011 9:11:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

quote:

ORIGINAL: provfivetine

I don't know why Germany would be so foolish to try to do this. Nuclear power is an excellent way to sustain a population in an environmentally friendly way. France understands this.


When things go well, yes.  Absolutely.  But an accident in nuclear has potential to be nasty.



Sure, but why do we need to base our energy decisions off of freak disasters? If the Japanese didn't suffer from a once in a lifetime cataclysmic earthquake, then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Even if you take Chernobyl - the worst possible case experienced so far (the Russians were idiots and didn't build a containment dome) - you have the World Health Organization saying that 4000 people could die as a result of it. I'm not trying to diminish the human casualties as a result of this, but we could also save 30,000 lives a year in the US if we enforced a 10 mph speed limit on all the roads.




Owner59 -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/30/2011 9:13:48 PM)

Yeah,once in my lifetime and everyone else`s......[8|]




zenny -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/30/2011 9:31:43 PM)

To those spouting nonsense about nuclear waste. Other than the other comments addressing it I have two words for you. Thorium reactors.

To those about the peoples power; Plato (IIRC) was right.

Ironically, even with the most recent incident, nuclear power is far, far outstripped by coal for deaths per year. I'm more of a realist. Right now I want new generation nuclear power because it CAN replace coal. Once (if any time in the foreseeable future) we have the materials and techniques to switch to other, marginally safer means. So be it. Although at that time it will arguably be even more safer as to negate the need to switch. Go figure.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/30/2011 9:41:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: zenny

To those spouting nonsense about nuclear waste. Other than the other comments addressing it I have two words for you. Thorium reactors.

To those about the peoples power; Plato (IIRC) was right.

Ironically, even with the most recent incident, nuclear power is far, far outstripped by coal for deaths per year. I'm more of a realist. Right now I want new generation nuclear power because it CAN replace coal. Once (if any time in the foreseeable future) we have the materials and techniques to switch to other, marginally safer means. So be it. Although at that time it will arguably be even more safer as to negate the need to switch. Go figure.



Cmon Zenny, they can click their heels 3 times and efficient green energy will just appear, didnt you know that?




zenny -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/30/2011 9:50:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: zenny

To those spouting nonsense about nuclear waste. Other than the other comments addressing it I have two words for you. Thorium reactors.

To those about the peoples power; Plato (IIRC) was right.

Ironically, even with the most recent incident, nuclear power is far, far outstripped by coal for deaths per year. I'm more of a realist. Right now I want new generation nuclear power because it CAN replace coal. Once (if any time in the foreseeable future) we have the materials and techniques to switch to other, marginally safer means. So be it. Although at that time it will arguably be even more safer as to negate the need to switch. Go figure.



Cmon Zenny, they can click their heels 3 times and efficient green energy will just appear, didnt you know that?


Nuh uh! I just wanna believe and bury my head in the sand! [:(]

"even more safer"... whoops, looks like it's time for bed!




Owner59 -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/30/2011 10:10:45 PM)

Coal mine deaths are directly attributable to bad/no regulations/oversight and lack of adherence to basic safety rules.


Ever consider what uranium miners face?



Enough with the can can`t do-s and let`s welcome the can do-s.




Politesub53 -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/31/2011 2:54:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phoenixpower

But in regards to the water example...jeeeesh it wasn't comfortable when you sit in the tub and realise that the freaking sun wasn't around enough [&:]


Thought for the day......... [8D]




samboct -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/31/2011 1:05:15 PM)

"Technically, the D-38 could be re-centrifuged and used as fuel, but only 10% or so of the nuclear facilities are capable of this"

Yes, and I think the French do this as well. There's only one minor problem- the cost of the reprocessed fuel is somewhere around 2-3 orders of magnitude more expensive than first run fuel. Then you've still got the problem of the U-238 now mixed with higher proportions of U-234 and U-236 and the minor problem with uranium is that the stuff is unstable chemically and likes to burn- as shown by Fukushima and Chernobyl.

Germany is also buying power from Denmark- from their wind turbines. I suspect that the idea of calm conditions in the North Sea in the dead of winter is pretty laughable.

A lot of energy gets used for aluminum production- it's an electrochemical process and is probably the largest single process which consumes electricity. In this country- factories now have agreements in place with utilities that in times of high demand, they reduce their production rates in exchange for lower overall prices on electricity. So the idea that industrial demand is large and fixed is really not the case- there are other processes which can be tailored to real time electricity pricing as well.

Its not hard to replace both coal and nuclear energy with renewables- the graph showing the history from the 1970s to the 1990s is irrelevant. It's no more relevant than a graph showing the number of horses in NYC prior to 1915. The likelihood is as the economics of renewables becomes more favorable due to improvements in technology and reductions in price supports for fossil fuels and nuclear fuels- the trend to increased use of renewables will accelerate.

There are two additional technologies needed though- better grid distribution (which Germany may have for all I know, but it's not cited as a model) and better storage as PS53 has already alluded to.

And does someone want to point to an example where continued use of an obsolete technology proved to be more economically beneficial than adopting newer technology? Horse drawn carriages? Steamships? Commercial sail? Countries without the internet- their economies are booming- right? And the US phone system is a model for the world with copper cables still being run....


Sam




Phoenixpower -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/31/2011 3:28:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phoenixpower

But in regards to the water example...jeeeesh it wasn't comfortable when you sit in the tub and realise that the freaking sun wasn't around enough [&:]


Thought for the day......... [8D]


Cheeky buggar [;)] Was only saying it to show you that I DO know that solar energy isn't always reliable...Before my dad installed those panels hot water was just enough for 2-3 showers...so usually I wasn't really able to take a bath...or if I did...then some other family members were peed off....once he installed them I believed all to be fine now...well....until I learned that lesson that it still depends on how much the sun is around [&:]




Edwynn -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/31/2011 4:12:54 PM)




~FR~

I don't know why some responses here keep basing estimations of feasibility of this project based on current costs and production of solar/wind power and 15 year old solar hot water heaters.

In any event, Bundeskanzlerin Merkel and the Bundesnetzagentur (energy regulator) and a host of other relevant parties have been working on this long before the Japanese earthquakes. The previous  Schröder government had already announced the phasing out of nuclear power in his first term, and sometime in 2005 set a target date of 2022. In 2010 Merkel then moved the date further to 2035. Then the earthquakes happened. So then, nothing new, just adjusting the target date a few times. This indicates that all considerations have been looked over thoroughly enough (including Kyoto), and sufficient elements of the plan being already in process that a target date could be more confidently established.

What people are also overlooking is the element of reducing usage by way of better building standards, greater use of underfloor heating (much more efficient), zone energy management, gas or electric assisted solar hot water, etc. That is, there will be as much or more focus on energy reduction as on power generation of whatever source, and that is the way of the future.








Politesub53 -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/31/2011 5:16:13 PM)

New building techniques are only workable long term. Especially here in the cities of the UK, where a lack of land prevents new housing from being built. As for costs, you can only base them on what we know, not what we hope they will come down to. As a for instance, the cost of raw material is rising, so things wont be cheaper to build. I think at present, wind farms may be okay for small local communities, but no more than that. Already the UK is having to subsidise producers so it is hardly cost effective, and the tax payer picks up the tab, via a green levy.

If I may use washing machines as an example, at first glance a new machine costs a similar amount to 25 years ago, the truth is thats only due to cheaper manufacturing using inferior parts, so the new machines wont last as long as the old machines. So what seems a similar cost is actually double the cost, due to shorter life spans.




samboct -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/31/2011 5:59:45 PM)

PS53

Don't agree about costs- look at Moore's law as an example of how an industry with an investment in R + D can drive down costs over time. Actually, PV costs continue to fall- we're rapidly approaching $1/watt for PV when the Si speculators left. Wind turbines will show smaller cost reductions since the technology is maturing- but I see no theoretical reason why wind turbines have to be used only for small hamlets. Have enough of them- cities can be supplied. Yes, it may take some storage, but the larger the network of wind turbines, the smaller the storage requirements- the wind is always blowing somewhere.

In terms of washing machines- two separate problems. Well designed washing machines should be able to reduce water and energy use. However, sounds like the UK has the same problem as the US- manufacturing is now done in China where quality control is a sick joke. I thought the VAT was supposed to prevent that?

If the economics are properly done- and Europe has a far better chance of this than the US- making the mfg have to dissassemble the product at the end of life should encourage longevity since this is a cost. However, I never trust economists- English or otherwise.

Also note that while energy use is tied to GDP in the US- this is not true in Europe and Japan. Plus, the US has landfill issues- Europe doesn't- or at least not to the same extent.

Sam




Rule -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/31/2011 6:30:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct
In terms of washing machines- two separate problems. Well designed washing machines should be able to reduce water and energy use.

Am awful lot of energy could be saved in washing if people during warm days would dress modestly nearly nude.




Edwynn -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (5/31/2011 8:19:07 PM)



Regarding how long it takes for new building techniques to become workable, and as to costs, are you telling us here that the relevant professionals working on this for 5-10 years now are not aware of this? I bet they would be most grateful if you were to bring this to their attention.

Speaking of professionals, long term cost analysis is done everyday by any company or government agency dealing in long term projects.

As for public cost of alt. energy subsidies, they would have to be increased by at least one or two orders of magnitude to match the decades long government support for nuclear power. Thankfully that will never happen, and in many subsidy or incentive schemes I have seen there is an eventual phase out built into the plan. Prior to this latest announcement, Germany was actually having trouble with too much solar power coming online too quickly, and price support is being reduced much earlier than originally scheduled.

http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aQ4YdcDGz.S4


Jan. 20 (Bloomberg) -- Germany’s Environment Ministry and the solar industry agreed to cut subsidies six months earlier than planned to slow growth in the world’s largest market for photovoltaic panels that turn sunlight into power. The above-market rates paid for solar power will be lowered in July by 3 percent to 15 percent for new installations if more than 3.5 gigawatts are forecast for this year, the ministry said today in Berlin.

Germany might install 6 to 8 gigawatts in new solar photovoltaic capacity in 2011 out of about 20 gigawatts worldwide, Bloomberg New Energy Finance forecast Jan. 12.

“The fact that industry and government and opposition parties agreed on these cuts so rapidly illustrates the urgent need to slow German PV market growth from an estimated 8-9 gigawatts in 2010 to a more sustainable level in 2011,” Francesco D’Avack, a solar analyst at Bloomberg New Energy Finance, said by e-mail today.

The Environment Ministry said it will implement cuts of 15 percent if capacity forecast for this year is more than 7.5 gigawatts.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Of course that was in January. The subsidy cuts will continue, I just read about another 6% reduction yesterday though I've lost the story now, but I doubt there will be any otherwise further disincentive for installing new capacity, as was contemplated at the start of the year.

Germany enacted an energy conservation law (Energieeinsparverordnung [EnEV]) in 2002; the formulas are already there, awaiting any variables for energy source, energy loss at terminal usage, etc., and implementation commenced soon thereafter. I'm sure various timetables contained in the law have been adjusted even prior to this latest public announcement.

As I tried (apparently without success) to explain earlier; this isn't just some spur of the moment expedient they pulled out of a hat. There is no way to predict precise cost, precise usage, how much more grid expansion, etc., but I think it's safe to say that some very good minds have been working on it for 5-10 years already (using procedures for this sort of thing in place for decades), with enough data from the significant amount of the plan already in place for over five years now to be able to derive fairly reasonable estimates to come to the chosen target date. The energy companies already have the plan in place regarding how much power and from whom they are going to import for various 2-3 year periods throughout the transition. And no, some two year importation from France's nuclear plants in the interim would not be hypocritical, anymore than using Germany's own extant nuclear capacity. If that were a permanent part of the plan come 2022, then it would be.


Another item in the mix is the Nord Stream (Baltic) pipeline from Gazprom fields in Russia which will supply much more gas than the current lines running through Eastern Europe. One line is expected to start delivery later this year, and another in 2012. Germany already had six new gas turbine generators planned based on this as the first phase of replacing the nuclear plants.


There is much much more to the whole affair than even this brief 'spot check' overview, and hard as it may be to convince some, the professionals (especially the power companies, most of whom incorporate a good bit of alt. energy currently)  have thought of a lot more issues than internet forum posters, the former having been to the task for a number of years already as opposed to the two days of idle thought given to it by the latter.









samboct -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (6/1/2011 5:26:19 AM)

Edwynn

Enjoyed your post. Do you think that wind/solar might gain more traction if we termed them fossil fuel replacements rather than "alternatives"? Alternative has a whiff of ersatz.


Sam




Moonhead -> RE: Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022 (6/1/2011 5:32:12 AM)

That's an interesting point.
The fact that wind, tide and solar weren't very developed during the '50s and '60s when nuclear plants were being built all over the place (as a source of weapons grade plutonium, as much as electricity, it should be remembered) has left them pretty well hobbled from the off, sadly.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125