• @Benaaasaaas
    link
    English
    103 hours ago

    Because there are nights there are winters there are cloudy and rainy days, and there are no batteries capable of balancing all of these issues. Also when you account for those batteries the cost is going to shift a bit. So we need to invest in nuclear and renewables and batteries. So we can start getting rid of coal and gas plants.

    • Suzune
      link
      fedilink
      English
      93 hours ago

      But Germany has no space for nuclear waste. They haven’t been able to bury the last batch for over 30 years. And the one that they buried most recently began to leak radioactivity into ground water.

      And… why give Russia more military target opportunities?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        52 hours ago

        I’m not a rabid anti-nuclear, but there are somethings that are often left out of the pricing. One is the exorbitant price of storage of spent fuel although I seem to remember that there is some nuclear tech that can use nuclear waste as at least part of it’s fuel (Molten salt? Pebble? maybe an expert can chime in). There is also the human greed factor. Fukushima happened because they built the walls to the highest recorded tsunami in the area, to save on concrete. A lot of civil engineering projects have a 150% overprovision over the worst case calculations. Fukushima? just for the worst case recorded, moronic corporate greed. The human factor tends to be the biggest danger here.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          12 hours ago

          Not an expert, but molten salt reactors are correct. MSRs are especially useful as breeder reactors, since they can actually reinvigorate older, spent fuel using more common isotopes. Thorium in particular is useful here. Waste has also been largely reduced with the better efficiency of modern reactors.

          Currently, Canada’s investing in a number of small modular reactors to improve power generation capacity without the need to establish entire new nuclear zones and helps take some of the stress off the aging CANDU reactors. These in particular take advantage of the spent fuel and thorium rather than the very expensive and hard to find Uranium more typically used. There’s been interest in these elsewhere too, but considering how little waste is produced by modern reactors, and the capacity for re-use, it feels pike a very good way to supplement additional wind and solar energy sources.

        • @Lumisal
          link
          English
          42 hours ago

          If Finland could find space, Germany definitely can.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            22 hours ago

            Idk, Finland has a much lower population density vs Germany. France is something like 1/2 the population density, but they also have >50 reactors, so surely Germany can find room for a few…

            • @Lumisal
              link
              English
              02 hours ago

              Finland smaller tho.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 hour ago
                • Finland: 338,145 km² and 5.6 million people
                • Germany: 357,596 km² and 82 million people

                Where do you want to put your hazardous waste again?

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                22 hours ago

                Yup, but population density should be what matters, because that implies how much usable space there is for waste disposal.