• Switzerland votes on nuclear power phase out process
    46 replies, posted
[QUOTE]Swiss voters are casting their ballots to decide whether or not to speed up the process of phasing out the country's nuclear power plants. If voters choose "yes" in Sunday's referendum, it would force three of the country's five reactors to close next year, and the remaining two by 2029. The five plants currently generate 40% of Switzerland's electricity. ... Recent opinion polls show the "yes" and "no" camps to be neck-and-neck. ... The proposal before voters, brought by the Green party, calls for nuclear plants to be closed after a maximum 45 years in operation, and for a ban on construction of any new plants. [/QUOTE] [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38120559[/url] I don't see any reason to speed it up. At least if they just shut them down at the end of their natural lives then they have time to replace it with renewables. [B]Update:[/B] They voted against it 55% to 45%: [QUOTE]People in Switzerland voting in a referendum have rejected a proposal to introduce a strict timetable for phasing out nuclear power. A projection for SRF public television showed the initiative failing by 55% to 45%. A majority of cantons (Swiss states) voted against the initiative. [/QUOTE] [url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-38120559[/url]
[quote]The Swiss Greens and Social Democrats have been pressing for a vote since the Fukushima disaster in Japan in 2011, arguing that Swiss plants are ageing and unsafe. However, government and industry figures argue a quick exit from nuclear power could raise reliance on fossil fuels instead of renewable energy and possibly lead to power shortages.[/quote] I don't see a problem with them being phased out if they replace them with newer, better ones.
Replacing 40% isn't an easy task, and the article doesn't say what will they be replaced with. I would assume politicians in Swiss have a plan ?
Before you vote you should already have an alternative in mind.
[QUOTE=AntonioR;51434688]Replacing 40% isn't an easy task, and the article doesn't say what will they be replaced with. I would assume politicians in Swiss have a plan ?[/QUOTE] The current ""plan"" is to simply buy it from foreign countries, as we completely lack the capabilites to make up for it in any other way. Basically instead of using our own nuclear power plants, we buy from france's nuclear power plants, or buy power from germany, which is produced by coal power plants. And the price for power will increase dramatically.
that plan is fucking retarded
Unless these plants are old as fuck or they are in a place with earthquakes and tsunamis why would you want to get rid of them?
" ..to be closed after a maximum 45 years in operation.."
[QUOTE=AntonioR;51434688]Replacing 40% isn't an easy task, and the article doesn't say what will they be replaced with. I would assume politicians in Swiss have a plan ?[/QUOTE] If it's like everywhere else where the forced a nuclear phase out it's going to be gas and coal.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;51434714]Unless these plants are old as fuck or they are in a place with earthquakes and tsunamis why would you want to get rid of them?[/QUOTE] No natural disasters in this region, and the only threat these plants had come from Greenpeace hippies trying to infiltrate and deface the facility. Been at one of them near me for a while, and they are constantly renewing the infrastructure there. Removing them is merely symbolic and serves no practical purpose whatsoever.
They should be advocating for newer and safer nuclear plants so that they can safely and seemlessly phase out the old ones that they fear might fail.
what a dumb fucking thing to have a referendum over
[QUOTE=Samiam22;51434682]I don't see a problem with them being phased out if they replace them with newer, better ones.[/QUOTE] We're not building new ones though. That's the current plan: use our old ones as long as they're safe then no more nuclear.
[QUOTE=Turnips5;51434777]what a dumb fucking thing to have a referendum over[/QUOTE] Switzerland relies on direct democracy a lot, they hold referenda very frequently.
Europe, including Switzerland are already on the same power grid, so it simply means buying more power from other nations if they can't meet demand, as they already do.
[QUOTE=kaukassus;51434699]The current ""plan"" is to simply buy it from foreign countries, as we completely lack the capabilites to make up for it in any other way. Basically instead of using our own nuclear power plants, we buy from france's nuclear power plants, or buy power from germany, which is produced by coal power plants. And the price for power will increase dramatically.[/QUOTE] So is France just supposed to power everyone now? Maybe instead of being (ironically slow) reactionaries they should come up with viable plans to replace their old nuclear plants with newer, more efficient ones and phase the old ones out as new ones are brought online.
[QUOTE=Janus Vesta;51434804]So is France just supposed to power everyone now? Maybe instead of being (ironically slow) reactionaries they should come up with viable plans to replace their old nuclear plants with newer, more efficient ones and phase the old ones out as new ones are brought online.[/QUOTE] Maybe they will build new ones if "no" wins? It would show that there's public support for nuclear power. If yes wins though then I doubt any politician is going to touch nuclear power at all for decades.
The title made me think they already voted
[QUOTE=fruxodaily;51434834]The title made me think they already voted[/QUOTE] They have: [QUOTE]Polling stations closed at 11:00 GMT and results are expected in the next few hours. [/QUOTE]
Why the [b]fuck[/b] would you [b]phase out[/b] nuclear energy? It's, by far, the single most viable form of clean energy production that we have in this world holy fuck.
[QUOTE=geel9;51434864]Why the [b]fuck[/b] would you [b]phase out[/b] nuclear energy? It's, by far, the single most viable form of clean energy production that we have in this world holy fuck.[/QUOTE] Because most people are disgustingly misinformed about nuclear technology. On Friday the guy who sits next to me in class was talking about how they had to close Fukushima down because it caused a nuclear explosion. :speechless:
[QUOTE=Morgen;51434839]They have:[/QUOTE] oh fuck im retarded
[t]http://i.imgur.com/qYdc69G.png[/t] Current predictions and results lean towards a No. [URL="http://www.20min.ch/schweiz/news/story/-Leute-wollen-nichts-vom-Atomausstieg-wissen--31222005"]Source[/URL]
[QUOTE=kaukassus;51434874][t]http://i.imgur.com/qYdc69G.png[/t] Current predictions and results lean towards a No. [URL="http://www.20min.ch/schweiz/news/story/-Leute-wollen-nichts-vom-Atomausstieg-wissen--31222005"]Source[/URL][/QUOTE] So that's a "No" to a phaseout?
[QUOTE=download;51434893]So that's a "No" to a phaseout?[/QUOTE] Yes that's a no.
[URL="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38120559"]They voted no.[/URL] Sounds like a good thing, we need more nuclear power plants not less.
We need something even better, but until we can literally harness the power of the sun we'll have to do with nuclear energy.
You know for a European country (which 9/10 has leagues better public education than the US), its surprising how knee-jerk of a reaction (~45%) voted in favor for NPP phase out.
[QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;51435043]You know for a European country (which 9/10 has leagues better public education than the US), its surprising how knee-jerk of a reaction (~45%) voted in favor for NPP phase out.[/QUOTE] The ""Greens"" have been trying to push for a nuclear phase out for over a decade now. Only after the fukushima incident, they really gained traction, but everyone failed to realize why that reactor failed, and how it literally cant happen here.
[QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;51435043]You know for a European country (which 9/10 has leagues better public education than the US), its surprising how knee-jerk of a reaction (~45%) voted in favor for NPP phase out.[/QUOTE] It's not perfect, there's legitimate reasons to be concerned with nuclear fission. It's just that at present, for most places, it's still by far the best option. Not 100% sure if Switzerland is one of those places, if it is able to use other renewables to completely satisfy their needs, then this isn't terribly bad of a proposal. If it isn't, then banning future plants is completely asinine. Closing the old ones, sure, but have a plan that isn't just burning fossil fuels. [QUOTE=kaukassus;51435059]The ""Greens"" have been trying to push for a nuclear phase out for over a decade now. Only after the fukushima incident, they really gained traction, but everyone failed to realize why that reactor failed, and how it literally cant happen here.[/QUOTE] It's a really sad thing that it seems that all internation green parties share, their absolute hatred of nuclear
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.