German Nuclear Power Phaseout

[Alex K]

As a child I grew up with NPPs Philippsburg Block 1+2 permanently in view just 10 miles down in the valley. I was in Kindergarten when Chernobyl blew up and was terrified living next to a NPP for a while.
3 days ago, the last operating Block, Philippsburg 2, was taken offline as part of the Nuclear power phaseout which was decided after the Fukushima meltdowns.
There was a switch off party by the Greens, but, remarkably, there also was a small international protest by people fighting for the preservation and expansion of the German nuclear fleet as a means to fight climate change.



Philippsburg 2 was basically substituted simultaneously by a brand new coal fired plant, further worsening our bad CO2 footprint. The "Energiewende" , the official policy which purports to achieve decarbonization purely with renewables, is not it good shape at all, with newly built wind power dwindling and the local solar industry basically dying from neglect, and no visible effort to develop the necessary gigantic power storage capability which has to go with a grid of 100% intermittent power sources, so we're basically risking becoming a bad example for the rest of the world.


So what do you think? Should we keep the nukes, even build new ones as these protesters demand in order to save the climate, or throw them out and go for 100% Wind+Solar?

[Mr Greene]

Ideally we'll figure out the cold fusion thing if it ever gets properly funded but we're still decades away from that.

100% renewables, nice ambition but obviously there's problems in funding (as always).

We're already seeing the effects of climate change so anything to reduce that is welcome.

As such I'd have said keep the nuclear stations active temporarily until they're ready to fund a decent alternative.

[Alex K]

Ideally we'll figure out the cold fusion thing if it ever gets properly funded but we're still decades away from that.

100% renewables, nice ambition but obviously there's problems in funding (as always).

We're already seeing the effects of climate change so anything to reduce that is welcome.

As such I'd have said keep the nuclear stations active temporarily until they're ready to fund a decent alternative.

Forget cold fusion, it's not a real thing. Ordinary fusion, sure, but as you say that's indeed going to take too long to wait for it unless there's a completely unforseen breakthrough... (ITER and DEMO are scheduled for 2035 and 45 or so)

We'd have to build 130 reactor blocks to completely decarbonize all energy sectors in the country using only uranium, that's also not cheap. Anti nuclear activists won't tire telling you that they would be impossibly expensive,but looking at the numbers (investments in renewables so far+cost of storage) that criticism doesn't seem to hold up to scrutiny.

[Fireball]

[Rev. Rye]

[Peebothuhlu]

---

So what do you think? Should we keep the nukes, even build new ones as these protesters demand in order to save the climate, or throw them out and go for 100% Wind+Solar?

Build more Nuke plants.

Systems, material science, our understanding of their workings... Have all increased over the half century since the first 'Pile' was put together on a basket-ball court.

'Renewables'... Technically aren't.

The materials from which turbines etc are made generally consume more energy than they mechanically (Wind, water) or 'Electronically' (Not actually sure on eht sub term of 'Photvoltaic'? Is is sub atomic, since photons are smacking electrons about? *Shrug*) generate within the service life time of the equipment.

Atomic energy is a hundred fold more 'power' dense than chemical or mechanical energy.

For your capital investement you litterally get 'More bang per buck'.

*Plants flag on hill... Prepares for incomming...*



Not at work.

[Fake Messiah]

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Godzilla Breath, it's the way of the future!

[The Grand Nudger]

Fukushima went pear shaped because they decided to cut costs on the building reinforcement necessary to put the backup gens at elevation. Opting to put them in the basement, instead, that they knew could be flooded.

In theory, nuclear power is our best bet...but in practice..well, they'll build em like they built fukushima.

[Mr Greene]

Accidents happen,
Germany;

Rheinsburg 1973 breach in coolant pipe Level 2 event

Greifswald 1975 Near Core Meltdown

Hamm-Uentrop 1986 Damaged Fuel elements in Thorium Reactor contaminated surrounding area.

Hessen 1987 Failed Stop Valve, contaminated reactor building

Greifswald 1989 Control of reactor lost, coolant pump failure, Close to meltdown

Looking over the saftey records I'd revise my previous statement to 'Make sure the reactors in East Germany are never used again...'