I just tried deleting my account. Which isn't possible, counter to best practice and even many data privacy laws (not in california I guess). But I'm logging out and using a new account from now on (if at all).…
No more dissent. Got it. I would encourage a ban. I will just make another account. I get that I should reduce some of the "flame war" stuff but I think this is one-sided.
Bullshit argument. How would such a cleanup even work? The claim that the Fukushima clean up is excessive is completely pulled out of someones ass. What would be the rationale? You DO understand that exposure to…
The Chinese ramp up in nuclear power is fairly decent. Give them time. Unfortunately I don't think they will have more luck in terms of safety, rather the opposite... The Fukushima incident was a result of regulations…
And most of them are not a commercial reality or viable option for at least a decade or so...
The group-think around nuclear power on HN is indistinguishable from religious fervor and doesn't agree with average public opinions in any countries I know of. Certainly not Germany...
That "minor nuclear incident" required a clean up that still isn't finished and already ran up a tab of about a trillion Dollars. Pro-nuclear propaganda tries to focus on "only" one direct fatality, and conveniently…
"Flexible generation" also means coal and gas... So it is not an elusive technology. Neither are hydro power plants which can be varied in their output.
Nuclear power projects are not just over-budget, they start off with a budget of a couple of billions, whereas individual solar or wind power projects are way smaller and therefor carry less of a risk. Nuclear power…
Once you do any of the sort, nuclear power loses the rest of its cost advantage (if there is any to begin with).
Most dams carry way more risk and way higher benefits.
Bullshit. Germany is still a decade or two away from needing energy storage to even out renewable power peaks. Until then, all the capacity provided by renewable sources reduces the overall emissions, which is the…
[flagged]
Of course running below maximum output drives up cost. Are you disagreeing with basic math? Consumption of fuel is not the main cost of a nuclear power plant, and even if you shut it down completely, it still needs…
How is it immaterial to build twice as many nuclear power plants as necessary instead of using energy storage? You'd have to believe battery storage is way more expensive than an idle nuclear plant. But that's just not…
My point is actually that the risk of coal is calculable and the risk of nuclear is not. And if you provide any estimate, it is most certainly wrong, because it is based on false and dangerous assumptions. Yet you…
You're still lying about the alternatives to nuclear power. You are still underestimating the impact of a nuclear disaster. You are still underestimating the risk of a nuclear disaster. These things have always occurred…
Those voices just weren't there and it is plenty easy and convenient to say "I was concerned way before everybody else knew of the problem."
Your arguments are fueled by a lack of understanding. Ramping down renewables is lots faster and easier. The stability argument is just populistic bullshit. Plausible on the surface, not a concern in actual practice.…
In practice you don't. Nobody wants to transition to renewables over night. And so far it works quite well.
You don't get the fact that nuclear power requires just as much storage, right France has this problem in a hidden way: They have to import power in the summer, because they DONT have that peak capacity, nuclear or…
That's not how it works. I don't know the actual numbers, but what if peak load is 50% higher than average load? You need quite a lot of battery storage to make that work, especially if the peak load lasts longer than a…
You still don't understand. A coal power plant that doesn't run doesn't produce harmful emissions. And at lower capacity they produce less emissions, proportionately. And you are still lying about coal being the only…
Which isn't what you and others said at the time, I'd guess. Hardly anyone was advocating for this. None of the major parties for certain. Nobody wanted more expensive energy.
I just tried deleting my account. Which isn't possible, counter to best practice and even many data privacy laws (not in california I guess). But I'm logging out and using a new account from now on (if at all).…
No more dissent. Got it. I would encourage a ban. I will just make another account. I get that I should reduce some of the "flame war" stuff but I think this is one-sided.
Bullshit argument. How would such a cleanup even work? The claim that the Fukushima clean up is excessive is completely pulled out of someones ass. What would be the rationale? You DO understand that exposure to…
The Chinese ramp up in nuclear power is fairly decent. Give them time. Unfortunately I don't think they will have more luck in terms of safety, rather the opposite... The Fukushima incident was a result of regulations…
And most of them are not a commercial reality or viable option for at least a decade or so...
The group-think around nuclear power on HN is indistinguishable from religious fervor and doesn't agree with average public opinions in any countries I know of. Certainly not Germany...
That "minor nuclear incident" required a clean up that still isn't finished and already ran up a tab of about a trillion Dollars. Pro-nuclear propaganda tries to focus on "only" one direct fatality, and conveniently…
"Flexible generation" also means coal and gas... So it is not an elusive technology. Neither are hydro power plants which can be varied in their output.
Nuclear power projects are not just over-budget, they start off with a budget of a couple of billions, whereas individual solar or wind power projects are way smaller and therefor carry less of a risk. Nuclear power…
Once you do any of the sort, nuclear power loses the rest of its cost advantage (if there is any to begin with).
Most dams carry way more risk and way higher benefits.
Bullshit. Germany is still a decade or two away from needing energy storage to even out renewable power peaks. Until then, all the capacity provided by renewable sources reduces the overall emissions, which is the…
[flagged]
Of course running below maximum output drives up cost. Are you disagreeing with basic math? Consumption of fuel is not the main cost of a nuclear power plant, and even if you shut it down completely, it still needs…
How is it immaterial to build twice as many nuclear power plants as necessary instead of using energy storage? You'd have to believe battery storage is way more expensive than an idle nuclear plant. But that's just not…
My point is actually that the risk of coal is calculable and the risk of nuclear is not. And if you provide any estimate, it is most certainly wrong, because it is based on false and dangerous assumptions. Yet you…
[flagged]
You're still lying about the alternatives to nuclear power. You are still underestimating the impact of a nuclear disaster. You are still underestimating the risk of a nuclear disaster. These things have always occurred…
Those voices just weren't there and it is plenty easy and convenient to say "I was concerned way before everybody else knew of the problem."
Your arguments are fueled by a lack of understanding. Ramping down renewables is lots faster and easier. The stability argument is just populistic bullshit. Plausible on the surface, not a concern in actual practice.…
In practice you don't. Nobody wants to transition to renewables over night. And so far it works quite well.
You don't get the fact that nuclear power requires just as much storage, right France has this problem in a hidden way: They have to import power in the summer, because they DONT have that peak capacity, nuclear or…
That's not how it works. I don't know the actual numbers, but what if peak load is 50% higher than average load? You need quite a lot of battery storage to make that work, especially if the peak load lasts longer than a…
You still don't understand. A coal power plant that doesn't run doesn't produce harmful emissions. And at lower capacity they produce less emissions, proportionately. And you are still lying about coal being the only…
Which isn't what you and others said at the time, I'd guess. Hardly anyone was advocating for this. None of the major parties for certain. Nobody wanted more expensive energy.