When do we get the next one?

  • ebikefolder@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    don’t you think we should be exploring every carbon free avenue, and shutting down every single fossil fuel power plant?

    Sure. But nuclear is probably not the answer: we don’t have those decades left it takes to build hundreds of new plants. Not to mention the astronomical cost. The ship had sailed 30 years ago.

    Edit: the last 3 nuclear plants we shut down this year had a combined capacity of around 4 GW. In 2022 we installed over 7 GW of solar and about 2.5 GW of wind capacity (this year it will probably significantly more)

    • Claidheamh@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      We don’t need hundreds of new plants. France only has around 50 and it’s more than enough. It’s also feasible to retrofit existing coal plants with nuclear reactors, for example.

      30 years ago it was the same argument. “It takes too long, we needed to have started earlier”. Well, here we are now. Let’s not have kids 30 years from now saying the same thing.

      • ebikefolder@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        France regularly imports (renewable) electricity from Germany when they have to shut down some of their reactors due to cooling problems in summer. So 50 are not enough. For a smaller economy.

        • Claidheamh@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Every country imports electricity from their neighbours. Germany also imports from France. That’s how an interconnected power grid works.

            • Claidheamh@slrpnk.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Well, so has France. And at a larger percentage. While emitting disproportionately less carbon, which, again, is the whole point of this conversation. I’d rather not sacrifice climate for the sake of economy. Especially because the economy will suffer a lot more if we don’t get emissions under control.

                • Claidheamh@slrpnk.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Because they fill different roles in the power grid? They don’t replace each other. Haven’t you been reading what I’ve been saying all this time or what? Nuclear works WITH renewables. It’s fossil fuels we need to phase out, and nuclear can fill their role when renewables can’t.

                  • ebikefolder@feddit.de
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I have been reading what you wrote, but I don’t consider your “renewables can’t” a valid point. They can.

                    But I don’t think we will ever be able to convince each other. Can we agree on that?