There was another post here last week, basically as it is now, Germany relies of burning things and producing CO2 for the majority of their power. Most of that is lignite, which is 1/3 and inferior to coal, because its low heat capacity, so they need more to burn. Given the several once in a 100 year floods they've had just about every year in the last decade, they can't afford to keep burning.
There is a difference between turning off nuclear reactors completely while there is not enough renewals to replace them and diverging investment money from renewables by creating a sustainability label to something that causes likely a lot of cost in the future and is risky. In end both maybe wrong .
(Although I believe personally that it makes sense to turn off nuclear reactors, because of the overall cost: waste, reactor shutdown costs and cost related to security and risks: it only takes one fatal failure to add alot of cost. If actually operators would pay for all the costs and include them in the pricing it would be another story. However, currently nuclear power cost are hardly calcultable and commonly the public will pay for it )
Even if so, building more wind turbines will kill more birds while building more nuclear plants will not kill more birds.
It would also be interesting to see the data relative to something. Maybe it's 200'000 birds on a total of 100 wind turbines (or 1'000, 10k, 100k, ...).
Thermal powerplants are killing machines in their own right. They might not kill birds but they can kill fish by the millions and if you run them near a river then the temperature increase can kill the entire river when seasonal flow rates are low which leads to premature shutdown of the nuclear powerplant just to avoid killing aquatic life.
in germany there is always a place where wind happens. unfortunatly it is basically not possible to efficentily transfer that. for a efficent transfer of wind and solar you probably need hvdc transmission which we are building (est. finsihed 2025-2026 i.e. multiple projects)
this is mostly for southwest and north but there are other projects and also some plans for renewable grid advancement i.e. we want 100gw pv and 100gw wind until 2030 sadly no announcement for hydro.
11 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 45.6 ms ] thread(Although I believe personally that it makes sense to turn off nuclear reactors, because of the overall cost: waste, reactor shutdown costs and cost related to security and risks: it only takes one fatal failure to add alot of cost. If actually operators would pay for all the costs and include them in the pricing it would be another story. However, currently nuclear power cost are hardly calcultable and commonly the public will pay for it )
It would also be interesting to see the data relative to something. Maybe it's 200'000 birds on a total of 100 wind turbines (or 1'000, 10k, 100k, ...).
Links only in german, sadly...:
- https://www.transnetbw.de/de/netzentwicklung/projekte/suedli...
- https://www.transnetbw.de/de/netzentwicklung/projekte/ultran...
this is mostly for southwest and north but there are other projects and also some plans for renewable grid advancement i.e. we want 100gw pv and 100gw wind until 2030 sadly no announcement for hydro.