• Germany's Clean Energy Plan - Lets just replace those "dirty" nuclear power plants with coal!!
    39 replies, posted
[url]http://www.salon.com/2013/07/30/germanys_clean_energy_plan_backfired/[/url] [quote]When a nuclear power plant closes, a coal plant opens. At least, that’s the way things are shaping up in Germany, where the move away from nuclear energy appears to have backfired. For the second consecutive year, according to Bloomberg, the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions are set to increase. German Chancellor Angela Merkel made headlines back in 2011 when, in the wake of the reactor meltdown in Tokyo, she announced the impending closure of Germany’s 17 nuclear reactors. Up until then, nuclear-generated energy contributed to a full quarter of the nation’s electricity. At the time, the closings were framed as a positive effort to increase the country’s use of clean energy. As an expert then predicted to the New York Times: “If the government goes ahead with what it said it would do, then Germany will be a kind of laboratory for efforts worldwide to end nuclear power in an advanced economy.” But predictably, when nuclear plants began to shut down, as eight immediately did, something else had to take its place. And coal, which according to Bloomberg is favored by the market, did just that.[/quote]
Germany acted far to hastly about dismantling nuclear power plants. Soon after the Fukushima disaster, everyone was upset why nuclear power plants were still relevant and that they pose a potential danger to the environement. It was a popular bandwagon and everbody joined it in a massive uproar. The issue is that it will impact Germany pretty heavily at a long term. The energy prices will suddently rise due to the lack of substitutes. Nuclear power plants might not be the ideal method, but right now it's the most cleanest and most productive method of generating energy. Furthermore with the rise of electric cars and new technologies, energy will be more important. Although the current electricity producers are having trouble filling that particular need. Germany was not wise to abruptly decide not to use nuclear power plants anymore.
-snip
[QUOTE=DiCiSpitfire;41668373]Just pour money into fuison power research so we wont have to worry about meltdowns.[/QUOTE] Or Thorium nuclear plants, which we already know how to do, can do, and some countries are starting to do.
Germany [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1382816.stm]actually decided[/url] to phase out nuclear power by 2022 way back in 2001, and not suddenly as a response to Fukushima. Merkel [url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/greens-stoke-backlash-against-merkels-nuclear-power-extension-2071297.html]extended the phaseout[/url] by 15 years in 2010, but after Fukushima she scrapped the extension and went back to a phaseout by 2022.
Hooray for fearmongering, eh? [QUOTE=junker154;41668367]Furthermore with the rise of electric cars and new technologies, energy will be more important.[/quote] Funnily enough, in Germany at least, buying an electric car will be less green than driving a 2-stroke Trabant around because of all the coal plants. :v:[quote] Germany was not wise to abruptly decide not to use nuclear power plants anymore.[/QUOTE] Indeed. They chose...poorly.[QUOTE=DiCiSpitfire;41668373]Just pour money into fuison power research so we wont have to worry about meltdowns.[/QUOTE] Or we could just tell the fearmongers, the NIMBY assholes and the idiots to fuck off when they bitch about NPPs.
[QUOTE=smurfy;41668513]Germany [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1382816.stm]actually decided[/url] to phase out nuclear power by 2022 way back in 2001, and not suddenly as a response to Fukushima. Merkel [url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/greens-stoke-backlash-against-merkels-nuclear-power-extension-2071297.html]extended the phaseout[/url] by 15 years in 2010, but after Fukushima she scrapped the extension and went back to a phaseout by 2022.[/QUOTE] I never knew about that, despite reading a lot about the topic. Still I think that the Fukushima event has impacted the change of nuclear power in a drastic way, at least from a public view.
Kein Spaß erlaubt.
[QUOTE=junker154;41668367]Germany acted far to hastly about dismantling nuclear power plants. Soon after the Fukushima disaster, everyone was upset why nuclear power plants were still relevant and that they pose a potential danger to the environement. It was a popular bandwagon and everbody joined it in a massive uproar. The issue is that it will impact Germany pretty heavily at a long term. The energy prices will suddently rise due to the lack of substitutes. Nuclear power plants might not be the ideal method, but right now it's the most cleanest and most productive method of generating energy. Furthermore with the rise of electric cars and new technologies, energy will be more important. Although the current electricity producers are having trouble filling that particular need. Germany was not wise to abruptly decide not to use nuclear power plants anymore.[/QUOTE] And they're also going to become much more extremely dependent on Russia for energy.
Basically, the only option now other than putting the old Nuclear plants back into action [which is unlikely] is ram funding into Fusion, build Coal, and if they're willing to, make some Solar and Wind. It's a bit of a box they're in, to be honest, because Fusion won't come for a little while, and Wind, Solar, the such, are hard to find spots for. Wind will piss everyone within half a mile off, and solar requires a sunny area to be effective.
[QUOTE=Incoming.;41668974]Basically, the only option now other than putting the old Nuclear plants back into action [which is unlikely] is ram funding into Fusion, build Coal, and if they're willing to, make some Solar and Wind. It's a bit of a box they're in, to be honest, because Fusion won't come for a little while, and Wind, Solar, the such, are hard to find spots for. Wind will piss everyone within half a mile off, and solar requires a sunny area to be effective.[/QUOTE] Having solar panels on the roofing of many houses is also a viable option to diminish energy demands and costs, Germany has already been leading this field for some time now and with recent advancements I could see this being suitable in the long run for each home to have its own panels installed. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_by_country#Germany[/url]
I thought we ran out of coal by the year 2010. There are still coal around today? Who knew
I'm german and I'm really frustrated with this reactionist bullshit. We have all those people who totally ignore scientific and engineering facts. Those reactors aren't built by some kid in his backyard, they're multi million euro machines, with a shitload of engineering work behind them. [editline]1st August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Lone Wolf807;41669068]Having solar panels on the roofing of many houses is also a viable option to diminish energy demands and costs, Germany has already been leading this field for some time now and with recent advancements I could see this being suitable in the long run for each home to have its own panels installed. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_by_country#Germany[/url][/QUOTE] Funnily enough the german solar panel industry collapsed, because they couldn't compete with chinese products.
Nuclear reactors can be dangerous if they fuck up, but by now there's shitloads of protocols and failsafes to make sure they DON'T fuck up, aren't there? They're much safer than most people think.
If only we had a way to mass produce efficient solar panels. The Desertec project made this picture claiming that they would be able to power the world with just this much land in the Sahara for a gargantuan solar panel farm: [img_thumb]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ed/Fullneed.jpg[/img_thumb] Commercial solar panel efficiency is only at about 20%, imagine how much power you could generate with 60+ efficiency and such an area of land that gets a massive amount of energy. Hopefully in the next few thousand years we will have a functioning [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere#Dyson_swarm]Dyson sphere[/url] of sorts.
[QUOTE=Kahgarak;41670591]Nuclear reactors can be dangerous if they fuck up, but by now there's shitloads of protocols and failsafes to make sure they DON'T fuck up, aren't there? They're much safer than most people think.[/QUOTE] A well run plant will never have any major issues, modern safety features pretty much guarantee that there will never be a meltdown unless the folk running actively decide to fuck it up.
While the UK is working hard to build as little amount of new Coal power plants as we can then at the same time convert existing ones such as Drax into Biomass power plants so we can meet EU targets the biggest member of the EU and the one supposed to be setting a good example for everyone else closes their biggest source of zero-carbon energy then starts pumping out Coal power plants like bloody rabbits. Good going Germany!
I find this simply astonishing to be honest. I mean, since the invention of the nuclear reactor in 1942 and not counting Chernobyl, there have been exactly 2 deaths that can directly be attributed to radiation exposure related to a NPP.
[QUOTE=Kahgarak;41670591]Nuclear reactors can be dangerous if they fuck up, but by now there's shitloads of protocols and failsafes to make sure they DON'T fuck up, aren't there? They're much safer than most people think.[/QUOTE] The two major nuclear disasters happened when a skeleton crew decided to run the reactor with all the safety measure turned off for some reason and a 50 year old plant was hit by both a massive earthquake AND a tsunami which where among the strongest on record. Modern nuclear reactors are [i]the safest[/i] way to produce energy. People freak out because of 2 nuclear disasters in 30 years but there are hundreds of oil explosions and spills every year and no one bats an eyelid.
The coal power plants are filling in for the nuclear ones yes and it's bullshit but at the same time it puts the green energy industry in a great position, more people I know, even my parents, are discussing about green energy production for heating, something I woldn't have dared to imagine 5 years ago. The anti-nuclear hippies are uneducated idiots though, coal power plants release more radioactivity than a nuclear power plant.
[QUOTE=JanusVestaALT;41670681]The two major nuclear disasters happened when a skeleton crew decided to run the reactor with all the safety measure turned off for some reason and a 50 year old plant was hit by both a massive earthquake AND a tsunami which where among the strongest on record. Modern nuclear reactors are [i]the safest[/i] way to produce energy. People freak out because of 2 nuclear disasters in 30 years but there are hundreds of oil explosions and spills every year and no one bats an eyelid.[/QUOTE] People are retarded, that's the way the world works.
Well, I'm not a huge fan of nuclear power plants, but I got to admit that they're not as bad as people try to picture them. They're also not as dirty as coal; I'd say we should go for Thorium. That seems to be the next big thing.
[QUOTE=TestECull;41668698] Funnily enough, in Germany at least, buying an electric car will be less green than driving a 2-stroke Trabant around because of all the coal plants. :v:[/QUOTE] You best be trolling
[QUOTE=Cushie;41670649]If only we had a way to mass produce efficient solar panels. The Desertec project made this picture claiming that they would be able to power the world with just this much land in the Sahara for a gargantuan solar panel farm: [img_thumb]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/ed/Fullneed.jpg[/img_thumb] Commercial solar panel efficiency is only at about 20%, imagine how much power you could generate with 60+ efficiency and such an area of land that gets a massive amount of energy. Hopefully in the next few thousand years we will have a functioning [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere#Dyson_swarm]Dyson sphere[/url] of sorts.[/QUOTE] Only thing about solar panels is that they are incredibly vulnerable, I wouldn't like the idea of the world being powered by fragile panels all put in one place.
[QUOTE=Stopper;41670676]I find this simply astonishing to be honest. I mean, since the invention of the nuclear reactor in 1942 and not counting Chernobyl, there have been exactly 2 deaths that can directly be attributed to radiation exposure related to a NPP.[/QUOTE] Um Why are we not counting Chernobyl?
Why don't they build a nuclear powerplant underground. that way if there is a meltdown, the radiation cannot leak out into the air.
[QUOTE=Harry3;41672539]Um Why are we not counting Chernobyl?[/QUOTE] Because Chernobyl was a major fuck-up done by a lot of people in a backwards régime in an unsafe and ancient power plant AKA not something that could happen in a first-world country if we know what we're doing
[QUOTE=BCell;41672844]Why don't they build a nuclear powerplant underground. that way if there is a meltdown, the radiation cannot leak out into the air.[/QUOTE] Because then it will melt through the bedrock and into the water table and then we have a thermal explosion and are all royally fucked.
[QUOTE=Psychokitten;41672957]Because then it will melt through the bedrock and into the water table and then we have a thermal explosion and are all royally fucked.[/QUOTE] minecraft taught me bedrock was unbreakable
[QUOTE=rampageturke 2;41672964]minecraft taught me bedrock was unbreakable[/QUOTE] Radiation can do [i]anything[/i]!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.