Right now both should be expanded. It's not either. Again, if you don't plan firm power ahead you'll end up building gas because it's faster and too late. Even Norway understands this, hence they want nuclear too
pedestrian focused urban fabric, good public transportation, bike infra and nuclear power+ren are the way forward for deep decarbonization
683 followers 161 following 829 posts
view profile on Bluesky
Right now both should be expanded. It's not either. Again, if you don't plan firm power ahead you'll end up building gas because it's faster and too late. Even Norway understands this, hence they want nuclear too
Production is adapted each year. 2025 had 13% increase vs last year
That's true. So you deploy different tech to alleviate this problem. The situation also looks very different in the magnitude - it's extremely rare to get all nuclear fleet down to 5-10% production at the same time. Especially when you have more units (hence smaller reactors do have a benefit here)
So again, wind is nice and should be expanded where it makes sense, esp to avoid some drought problems like Norway has faced. But you still need more firm power. If you don't start planning for nuclear now, gas will be planned later because it's too late to plan for nuclear
And that's based on a day GWh average. The actual production in that day in some timeframes could have been even lower. On first febr offshore CF in Germany was about 3.6%. in 19Feb- 2.2%. these are daily averages so min production could have been worse (I don't have per hour data sadly)
Last year's winter, cumulative wind+solar CF in the whole EU dropped significantly for 2-3 days several times. It's hard to find data for Sweden, but say for DK on 5-7 november offshore generated at about 4-8% (1-2GWh vs 2.7GW installed). In Germany it was similar with 6% for offshore those days
On the other hand I'm optimistic about BWRX timelines. Both Sweden and Hitachi have great BWR experience and BWRX is similar in many ways to ABWR that was already built in the past. They have all the chances to beat EDF in this by a mile
Nuclear rises the bar by 1GW. Offshore can still play along with hydro modulation and help with droughts, but you no longer have supply issues. And rather than waiting when demand reaches 5GW(hypothetical) you better start building nuclear when peak demand is still 2-3GW considering delays
Offshore wind will not solve the lack of firm power. It can help for drought periods to save hydro and sometimes reduce gas. But if your total demand rises to say 5GW and hydro can output 4GW at max and wind is operating at 1%CF due to weather, you are screwed unless you ration or import
Sweden still doesn't have alternative clean firm power. Hydro can be boosted but nordics in general don't want to extend it too much due to environmental concerns. If peak demand grows and wind isn't blowing, telling people to wait isn't an option. Better start building now than waiting
Yes if EU wants to ditch gas for firming. Yes if countries want less transmission expansion Yes if countries care about material/mining amount ourworldindata.org/low-carbon-t... Or environmental impact unece.org/sites/defaul...
Recycling is sadly banned in US under any form
10% of french power is from recycled MOX from Orano la Hague. They also tested REPU last year Heck, France even had a reactor designed to work on nuclear waste called Superphenix which was closed under greens pressure. Because of that nowadays only Russia has a big working fast reactor
It's pretty safe despite of them ourworldindata.org/safest-sourc... And despite it not being renewable, it still requires least mining ourworldindata.org/low-carbon-t... And has lowest environmental impact unece.org/sites/defaul...
It is good ourworldindata.org/safest-sourc...
Not in France. It actually proved to be the best one
That's a different thing. Twh will not change much if peak demand grows by some hours but you still need to cover it
300gw is unrealistic imo Solar is nice and should be added too, but isn't firm. There's a reason big tech hopes nuclear works- buying carbon credits like before becomes challenging since amount of firm power is limited
But it exemplifies what you can do in a series build- you start a new unit 1y after prev one and continue this till you are done. But this requires tons of effort and maybe govt intervention similar to messmer
They had about 8y per units, 12 total. Each unit 1400MW. That's not fast compared to chinese deployments, french messmer ones and even more so-japanese abwr
But in their case it took bit longer per unit
You can have one team and move subteams on different sites once their phase is done. That's how you do series deployment. If you want 10 units, 5y each, with team movement, you get 15y total. Kinda similar to how Barakah was built
I think this shrimp is from Indonesia
Utah should better talk to Hitachi
It was figured out with AbWR. The question is why Vogtle picked AP1000 foak instead of ABWR noak that was a proved design
It is. Fk wastewater has tritium at levels below WHO limit. We can speculate, but CS137 is usually used for food decontamination among other usecases like medical sector. My bet is either on that or nuclear weapons testing era
Basically they installed a new equipment that performed so well that after tests they found out other equipment must be replaced too to work in sync
You should ask the same question about forever toxic chemicals, some coming from renewables, that must be stored forever. The same solution applies for nuclear
Ontario was already burnt with alternative pathway energyregulationquarterly.ca/en/articles/... Nothing bad in trying something else
If peak demand rises ren alone will not be enough and gas will be expanded.
It's interesting because usually countries that don't deploy nuclear are planning to increase gas, like Germany, hoping in some future to use cheap hydrogen. Being against nuclear means being pro gas
It didn't. It's from nuclear weapons testing era
Europe needs to rapidly decarbonize and ditch gas. The only option in this direction is building renewables and nuclear in parallel. Countries that don't, will be tied to using gas. You are free to read Fraunhofer ISE decarbonization pathway in this regard
It's 188 not adjusted in today money www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Ext... just like I said. Extensions are funded solely from EDF budget and can be seen in it's public financial reports. What will be subsidized is potential new EPR2 program, but it'll be equivalent of 3y of german EEG subs
And ironically HPC, as a failure, is still dwarfed by the amount of ren subsidies UK is pushing, especially considering transmission expansion to accommodate these distributed VRE and redispatching
No, gas can't be ditched. It's easy to see by looking at winter data. Anyone claiming this just spreads speculation detached from reality
And I think I'm done arguing with you. It's clear you are a nuclear hater. You aren't interested in a debate, you are interested in hating nuclear, otherwise you would have already read this www.vie-publique.fr/files/rappor... or many other sources Muting, no reason to waste my time here
It's Also funny you mentioned money being thrown at EDF, because now edf is subject to extra tax called arenh, nr are public. In comparison Germany subsidized ren last year alone by 18bn through EEG EEG costs already more than entire french fleet, while achieving much less
Even in jfish period France net exported about 14GW. It too can be fixed with bigger filters around intake. But why? Where will you sell these extra GWh when you export so much? Cracks/2022 was the only period france was net importer.
But ironically, Finland has nuclear despite hydro. Sweden too and plans expansion. Norway doesn't have but is in late stages of a nuclear build project. All of them have very nice emissions profiles
I know they won't build nuclear, just like I know they'll use gas/diesel firming in parallel with ren, similar to Germany if you read Fraunhofer ISE decarbonization pathways. Being against nuclear means by definition being pro fossils firming unless you got tons of hydro like nordics.
So you think using more gas is better vs building nuclear in parallel with renewables? Lol
France, unlike many other countries will be able to fully decarbonize, because it'll not use lng for firming
No, they can fix the problem by building cooling towers. All affected plants do not have cooling towers (except one special case). They are modulated to save fish. If you build towers - you fix the problem You can check more info here www.vie-publique.fr/files/rappor...
Because bess can just store electricity, not generate it. Australia still has periods of multiple hours of much lower sun generation vs usual, bess will be drained
Sun itself is reliable, but weather and summer/winter patterns are so hard to tackle nuclear is still easier unless you love gas for firming
France can fix all those problems, they don't need to. Even when npp got modulated France net exported about 14GW. It's literally the biggest net exporter on the continent. Even with all problems, CF of nuclear is pretty high vs ren
South Australia will use gas for firming (and is still using it) and has big hopes for hydrogen to get cheaper (per lazard for now it's worse vs nuclear)
Bwrx is an interesting reactor. It's basically a downscaled abwr compared to other designs on the market, hence in it's case it's pretty much proved you can build it, but economics will be worse vs abwr
Because they need firm power?
Why? It's among the safest sources of power despite everything ourworldindata.org/safest-sourc... And a neat thing- you can stockpile fuel for decades and not care about global events An even better thing- a lot of fuel can be recycled in different ways if it's a concern
To get 2 apr1000 instead of 2 epr from edf
Yes, less mining and materials per kwh ourworldindata.org/low-carbon-t... Or unece.org/sites/defaul... For the costs it's debatable - what are you willing to pay to ditch gas firming? Needless to say EPR is not a great design. Asia builds much cheaper and faster. That's why Czechia picked Korea
In other words, french nuclear fleet did cost significantly less vs EEG, decarbonization was achieved faster, and more twh are generated for the invested money and household prices are lower. And at the same time France is the biggest net exporter of electricity on the continent
But even assuming this, it's still much smaller. France spent about 180bn on nuclear fleet, not adjusted to inflation. Germany already spent over 360bn on EEG subsidies for renewables, not adjusted for inflation. And things get even better if you account TWh and current gCO2/kwh
It's also established nuclear is safe ourworldindata.org/safest-sourc...
And looking at "shills" statement I see you don't even want to learn about electric systems nor current decarbonization pathways in many countries, you just want to hate on nuclear, it's part of your identity, like in a sect, regardless of arguments, muting
Hydro is less safe than nuclear ourworldindata.org/safest-sourc... And it doesn't fully solve firming problem, otherwise Germany wouldn't plan more gas plants. Nuclear requires both less mining and materials compared to any alternative, including renewables
It doesn't. EDF financial statements are public, feel free to check them. EDF is in fact forced to subsidize competition per EU law through arenh. In comparison, Germany subsidized renewables last year alone by 18BN through EEG. It still had highest household prices in EU
It's not pseudo comparison. It's a real comparison. Forever toxic chemicals are handled in facilities like Herfa-neurode. These must be isolated forever/eternity. Onkalo is built on similar principles, but better due to being deeper The only pseudoscientific statements here are from you
Biggest impact on prices is from transmission expansion and gas firming. Ren expansion is tied to both. France has much lower bills vs UK/DK/DE. It's pursuing a mix approach and will have both clean VRE and clean firm power
And it's not even clear how it'll pan out in china considering www.bloomberg.com/news/article...
Yes, nuclear provides firm electric clean power. China will have a mix of ren and nuclear. Others like Germany - mix of ren and gas China only in ~2020 adopted a faster buildup strategy. Before that they were still under post fukushima numbing
And France is also trying to expand recycling. 10% of french power is from recycled fuel. Last year they started REPU tests too, aiming to grow it to 30% soon.
Not quite. France will build Cigeo, it'll be paid by EDF. The principle is the same as for handling forever toxic chemicals, some coming from renewables. As example, check what herfa neurode is. If you are fine with ren, you are fine with nuclear
What do you mean? Renewables can't provide firm power hence usually paired with gas, like in Germany Nuclear has other advantages too like least materials use ourworldindata.org/low-carbon-t... Least environmental impact unece.org/sites/defaul...
Zero. Fukushima waters are sampled frequently and no anomalies are detected. Most chances are that the source is nuclear weapons testing from the past. Those big mushrooms weren't just clouds
The solution is the same as the solution for forever toxic chemicals, some coming from renewables. As examples check what Herfa Neurode is and later Onkalo. If you want to be fancy you can recycle it with Purex like in la Hague or fast reactors like Superphenix, but simple solution is fine too
It's the biggest net exporter on the continent while household prices are lower vs uk/germany and the grid is clean. Wouldn't call this a nightmare
The stat includes the catastrophes
ourworldindata.org/safest-sourc...
Yes, nuclear is clean. It requires least mining ourworldindata.org/low-carbon-t... Has lowest environmental impact unece.org/sites/defaul... including GHG emissions Final waste is small per kwh UK does have a twin approach - tons of ren, mostly wind and nuclear to fully ditch the gas
Australia plans to use hydrogen to replace gas too, not just industry applications
There's no alternative of clean firming. If you don't start building now, you'll start later if you want to ditch gas
Nuclear in fact does benefit a lot from bess development)
Taiwan literally burns more gas post phaseout
Yes, and cheap h2 peaking is a pipedream similar to fusion www.cleanenergywire.org/news/shippin... www.cleanenergywire.org/news/eu-repo...
Sweden picked smaller because they don't have alternatives. Russia isn't option. Edf is nuts now, Korea banned to bid in EU, Hitachi ditched ABWR, Westinghouse is already involved in paperwork for other projects. If you want to get power, you basically have no choice but build small
Didn't last AR6/7 have higher CFDs than these numbers?
Australia's strategy too is based on gas. My apologies, 'cheap green hydrogen'
Coal can modulate and you can see it in german grid Gas expansion will happen according to Fraunhofer plans. If it'll not reach ~80GW by 2035, high chances coal will be extended
Not quite. Germany plans to replace coal firming with gas
It provides firm power which renewables can't And it has lower ghg over lifecycle vs alternatives ourworldindata.org/safest-sourc...
Didn't she push for ren operators to pay for grid expansion? This would automatically solve the issue
Yes. But money for fossils is needed anyway, otherwise coal will not be retired. Expansion of ren when bess and transmission are way behind makes little sense
I wouldn't be so sure www.cleanenergywire.org/news/early-2... The path is much longer
Per Fraunhofer ISE, Germany needs 80GW of gas+ccgt by 2035 to be able to ditch coal. Since it's not built, high chances coal will be extended
I would say basically all parties are incompetent in own ways. Afd is so high because people do vote against others even if they don't align fully with afd. And post current govt it'll boost them more sadly
I see
In other words the number should be even higher
ec.europa.eu/eurostat/sta... Before calling someone a lunatic you should check data first BTW in this stat about 6ct in are subsidized in Germany (eeg fee)
You should read Fraunhofer decarbonization pathway before saying this
Yes, they are. They are also saying eeg fees will drop, but per ewi, it'll actually increase www.ewi.uni-koeln.de/en/news/medi... And things will get harder considering www.offshore-mag.com/renewable-en...
There are reasons stats are about averages not individual cases ec.europa.eu/eurostat/sta... New contracts do skew the data with luring offers
And uses least materials ourworldindata.org/low-carbon-t...
That's energy, not electricity
Yes, Germany now has highest household prices in EU
I think if you check data, France is the biggest net exporter of about 3.5TWh and about 2.3TWh are from denmark, mostly forwarded from Norway and Sweden
And Germany was already net importer last 2 consecutive years. It looks like this will be third
Please don't counteract one nonsense with a bigger one. France is top net exporter on the continent, even in summer. Even this summer when some npp were modulated down to save fish, it exported about 14GW