this post was submitted on 01 Oct 2023
1138 points (97.5% liked)

Technology

59632 readers
2877 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Building dams literally kills whole ecosystems. Reduce biodiversity and razes woodland. They also do tend to take 10+ year of construction, just like nuclear power, while taking several times more materials. Your point is really stupid, nuclear power plants do not cause any more ecological stress than a moderate building in any city. They do consume vasts amounts of water, which can be an ecological issue, but not to the level that a dam creates. Wind turbines, for example, are not recyclable (materials used are too complex and use a lot of plastic) and they disrupt birds population. Just like solar panels, they have a very very short lifespan. Windturbines must be replaced every 5 years or so. So does solar panels but for different reasons. A nuclear power plant can create power for several decades if well maintained.

The thing is, no human intervention in any place is sustainable. Our mere mode of existence is so energy intensive that we are going to destroy the planet's habitability no matter what we do. The time to change to 100% nuclear was 5 decades ago. The time to stop using fossil fuels was 4 decades ago. The time to change to sustainable energy was 3 decades ago. We lost the train. The planet won't support us in any form in the long run. Hell, mammals might also be fucked within the next million years. The planet will never ever be the same it was during the past 2 million years. And it's because of us.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Look at France to see how 100% nuclear would have gone.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Really well, with the lowest carbon emission dependence index and the cleanest air in Europe? France has also never had a nuclear incident ever. As they are actually one of the rarest events of all the known forms of energy creation. Actually, a joke amongst wind turbine installers is that wind power has killed more people than nuclear power. Because of how frequent incidents with cranes and helicopters are.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

"French electricity group EDF said Thursday that shutdowns of four nuclear reactors would be extended for several weeks because of corrosion problems, potenti..."
"France has pledged to reduce its reliance on nuclear power by shutting down 12 nuclear reactors by 2035"
"The country relies on nuclear energy for 70% of its electricity"
Doesn't seem to be going so well, does it?
If it's going so well, why are they shutting down reactors at all?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Because Greenpeace actively protested to prevent maintenance to some of them, lol. Use your brain, stop zealously repeating catch phrases and actually think critically.

Let me give you some examples, you said:

  • “the country relies on nuclear energy for 70% of its electricity”

And all of that power is provided by 59 moderately sized buildings. 34 of them were built in the 70's and have been refurbished and maintained to this day, because mad irrational regulation doesn't let them just tear the damn things down and build newer ones that are more efficient and use recyclable fuel. You won't find a single wind turbine or solar panel that lasts over 50 years, none.

  • “French electricity group EDF said Thursday that shutdowns of four nuclear reactors would be extended for several weeks because of corrosion problems, potenti…”

Ok, that wasn't this Thursday, that was some Thursday in 2021. Guess what? it was a design flaw only present on the N4 model. They closed those four, because there are only four of them. And they figured out how to fix them and now they fix them regularly and today all those four reactors are operational. They learned a lot and are now applying the same good practices to all the nuclear reactors to avoid corrosion issues in any of the plants.

  • “France has pledged to reduce its reliance on nuclear power by shutting down 12 nuclear reactors by 2035”

Again, that was in 2014. A policy that originally aimed to reduce nuclear power reactors to 50% of the country's energy generation by 2025 amid the push of fossil fuel funded anti-nuclear activism. This was delayed in 2019 to 2035. But this year it was completely reversed. They plan to build 6 more instead and potentially expand that to 8 later this year. Because it turns out, they're really not that much more expensive than other sustainable sources and just as good at reducing fossil dependency now that Russia, the main oil exporter for EU, decided to blow their neighbor to smithereens.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/aug/03/edf-to-reduce-nuclear-power-output-as-french-river-temperatures-rise
So this reocurring thing due to global warming will totally never be a problem anymore.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/15/business/nuclear-power-france.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2023-europe-energy-crisis-updates-france-nuclear-outage/#xj4y7vzkg

You must be fuming to how this could happen when Nuclear is so awesome and has no problems and is cheap and safe and the most effective.
Except when it isnt.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Wow, you're exceptionally irrational about this. Bye.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

~~Are you this dense and uninformed on purpose, or are you just trolling us?~~ I'll apologies for that remark, it does not contribute to the discussion, though your points are rather misinformed.

France has a lot of old plants who will be at their end of life after some 50 years of service.

The exact same thing you just said also counts for windmills. Contrary to popular belief, windmills do not last forever and will need to be rebuilt or deconstructed at the latest after some 30 years.

Does this mean that windmills do not work because they aren't perpetual machines? No! There's a myriad of problems with wind and solar, but them having a finite lifespan is very normal.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

France has a lot of nuclear plants not producing electricity and is importing electricity like crazy.
It's not 4 plants being shut down because they are old. Its plants shut down because they have corrosion. And the Water required for cooling isnt sufficient.
Windmills dont need to be completely replaced. they are not shut down forever after 30 years. they will just have their parts replaced. For a tiny fraction of the price of a new nuclear plant.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

and is importing electricity like crazy

False, France has been a net exporter of electricity for over four decades. They had to import electricity, once, in 2022. Because of the corrosion issue that, as I said in another comment, is already solved. Because of the war on Ukraine, just like every single country in Europe. And because, guess what? there was a drought and hydroelectric dams were dry!

Do you do this all day, just go around telling lies? Are you just ignorant, someone brainwashed you or is someone paying you? You are truly irrational about this. Just accept that maybe your worldview is not accurate and update your existence to something other than black and white thinking.