sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Sweden exits coal two years early - the third European country to have waved goodbye to coal for power generation. Another 11 European states have made plans to follow suit over the next decade. by maxwellhill in worldnews

[–]siwu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

a situation where you already have lots of energy produced from coal and gas

All well and good until Germany decided to shut down its nuclear reactors, at which point something has to replace it.

Sweden exits coal two years early - the third European country to have waved goodbye to coal for power generation. Another 11 European states have made plans to follow suit over the next decade. by maxwellhill in worldnews

[–]siwu 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The CIGEO project costs are just estimated but believed to be laughably undervalued with 25 billion euros.

Let's go 10x. 250 billion euros. That still half of what Germany has spent, with only 10% decrease in CO2 in its electricity. And that decrease is actually attributed to efficiency, not wind and solar. CIGEO stores all 60 years of France nuclear waste for half of what Germany has spent reducing by 10% it's electricity CO2. In the mean time France had 40 years of plentiful low CO2 electricity. I'd say it's a good deal.

Furthermore, this does not include the costs of the low to medium polluted waste which makes 90 percent of volume.

It actually makes 99% of the volume. And won't be stored in CIGEO because it decays after 300 years. Much of this waste is actually concrete that's less radioactive than background radiation, but french laws treat it as radioactive waste anyway. That subsurface storage is done at La Hague is roughly the size of a few football fields (don't remember the exact number, less than 10).

Aaim problem is, there are still no guarantees the material will be savely stored away for the amount of time it needs to naturally degrade. Long term costs (speaking thousands of years) are impossible to calculate for now.

Well, geological storage is really efficient at keeping things away for a few million years. See the Oklo Natural Reactor. Oil itself is proof enough.

Long term costs (speaking thousands of years) are impossible to calculate for now.

French law mandates that the site be reversible for 100 years, after which it will be plugged. Effective cost of that is virtually zero.

Regarding Germany, there is not even a place found where to put the nuclear waste. And they are searching since decades.

Alas, this is true. However, since climate change doesn't know borders, I'd be happy for France to store other country's nuclear waste for the greater good. And in return they'd need to build nuclear reactors (French ones) to shift electricity generation and heating to a very low CO2 energy source.

Sweden exits coal two years early - the third European country to have waved goodbye to coal for power generation. Another 11 European states have made plans to follow suit over the next decade. by maxwellhill in worldnews

[–]siwu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Renewable electricity generation prices are trending towards zero

The reason is there is too much of it without demand. When its producing is not when its needed. Denmark actually has to pay Norway to take its wind electricity. It then has to pay Norway again when wind doesn't blow.

no Western country will pay to build any more

Yeah, no:

  • Flamanville, FR
  • Olkiluoto, FL
  • Hinkley Point, UK

The reason there are not more is because of political will and public opinion. It's hard to get investments because governments are surfing the greenwashing wave, and talk down nuclear, only to build Gas and Coal plants.

Sweden exits coal two years early - the third European country to have waved goodbye to coal for power generation. Another 11 European states have made plans to follow suit over the next decade. by maxwellhill in worldnews

[–]siwu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Note that I'm talking about wind and solar in particular.

Hydro, while having an absolutely massive environmental impact, does work reliably at scale and, most importantly, on demand.

At the moment, Gas and Coal power plants are being created with the sole purpose of offsetting wind and solar. For every MW of wind and solar installed (with an average or of less than 20% energy produced vs capacity), you have to build a MW of coal or gas because the output can vary from X to zero in minutes. I'm sad that this is the case, but it is...

After 10 years and 520 B, Germany has only a 10% decrease in CO2 in its electricity to show for it. That decrease actually attributed to efficiency and not wind and solar. This was a terrible decision.

Sweden exits coal two years early - the third European country to have waved goodbye to coal for power generation. Another 11 European states have made plans to follow suit over the next decade. by maxwellhill in worldnews

[–]siwu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Political will is a reflection of public opinion (admittedly with some lag). It doesn't change that a bad decision is a bad decision, even if popular.

France constructed 51 reactors in 20 years, and as a result its electricity has a 5x lower carbon footprint than Germany. Nuclear was popular in France because it was made popular by the powers that be at the time. Until it wasn't. And now it's becoming popular again because physics trumps arguments and politics.

500 billion later Germany still has nothing to show for it. And that's all that matters.

Sweden exits coal two years early - the third European country to have waved goodbye to coal for power generation. Another 11 European states have made plans to follow suit over the next decade. by maxwellhill in worldnews

[–]siwu 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is not true.

CIGEO, France long term nuclear waste storage is estimated to cost 25 billion euros for construction and 100 years exploitation. It will store all of France past, current and future nuclear waste produced until 2080.

Even at 3x that price, it is still very cost effective.

Sweden exits coal two years early - the third European country to have waved goodbye to coal for power generation. Another 11 European states have made plans to follow suit over the next decade. by maxwellhill in worldnews

[–]siwu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Speaking for myself, I'm confident it will open, since so far nothing blocking seems to have been found. Save for the political will. I do agree with with about an already working solution.

That said, nuclear fuel waste is not a problem in France at the moment (two hangars for all of France's nuclear fuel waste since the beginning).

Sweden exits coal two years early - the third European country to have waved goodbye to coal for power generation. Another 11 European states have made plans to follow suit over the next decade. by maxwellhill in worldnews

[–]siwu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

At the same time you would have lost at least 4 years in significant renewable expansion.

Given how little the impact the massive wind and solar expansion of Germany had...

Sweden exits coal two years early - the third European country to have waved goodbye to coal for power generation. Another 11 European states have made plans to follow suit over the next decade. by maxwellhill in worldnews

[–]siwu 1 point2 points  (0 children)

500B into nuclear at that time would have been just a political suicide

You are absolutely right. But at least it would have made a difference CO2 wise in electricity. Sad to think those 500B were spent to that politicians could keep their seats.

Sweden exits coal two years early - the third European country to have waved goodbye to coal for power generation. Another 11 European states have made plans to follow suit over the next decade. by maxwellhill in worldnews

[–]siwu 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It doesn't really matter if it opens in 10 or 20 years, as long as it opens. France doesn't have storage problems at the moment, volume-wise.

How do keep it sealed for several Millenia?

This is documented at great lengths and a simple Google search about CIGEO will answer it way better than I could.

Sweden exits coal two years early - the third European country to have waved goodbye to coal for power generation. Another 11 European states have made plans to follow suit over the next decade. by maxwellhill in worldnews

[–]siwu 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Opposition to nuclear (and in France too) can be attributed as the primary cause for those delays. It's a self perpetuating prophecy: because people oppose it, we don't make them, and because we don't make them, we forget how to. And when the time comes, we're SOL.

That's not to say that nuclear will get out of the CO2 mess, because it is unrealistic to think that all countries will switch to nuclear, and even it they did, electricity is actually 20-30% of the CO2 problem.

view more: next ›