UK peeps, thinking of ever voting in your life? Must see!

[Molly]

For the time being, there is no better alternative. Nuclear is space-efficient, GHG-free, safe, cheap and we are only using one of the oldest technologies right now. Fourth generation nuclear plants will be awesome.

That's is probably one of the most common misconceptions there are: Nuclear power is NOT cheap.

Well, if you leave out waste disposal and dismantling the plants after their use, it comes equal to coal or something (don't have the exact numbers ready and I am too lazy to look them up).
German energy providers are right now trying to sell of their old plants, which were shut down, to the state with some obvious stupid fond-ruse. If they have to pay dismantling and waste disposal by themselves, they gonna be broke within a few years just by those costs. Nuclear power is only cheap when the plant is running.
Funny fact, when you get numbers for the energy costs by "way of generation", waste disposal is always calculated into the price for every single one of them except Nuclear. One should wonder why.

I am not saying that every Nuclear plant should be shut down right now. That's Green people bullshit but saying Nuclear energy is clean and cheap is just the same bullshit on the other side of the scale.

Not to mention big consortium of enterprises being sabotaged by state interests when they actually try to build big alternative stuff (looking at you, France). Lame excuses, some are hilarious even, by politicians why certain deals for really clean energy from other countries are not made (Norway and Germany have one incident which is pathetic and ridiculous at the same time).
There is hardly another topic I've seen more bullshit being spread through official channels than "Energy generation". Maybe cuz I am an electric engineer and happen to know that stuff... So many blatant lies going round, it ain't even funny.

/rant

[Overdriven]

I wouldn't argue it is either clean or cheap. I'd simply argue that it is the most viable route for solving short term energy problems until a more viable solution has been researched and can be implemented. That is purely in terms of meeting supply demands for current growing energy consumption.

[Leshma]

Growing energy consumption? Seems to me that home appliances are designed to use less power than before. Regular people at their homes don't use more energy. Unless you take population increase in that equation, but areas where population is raising rapidly are rural and undeveloped areas.

If there really is need for more energy, we can thank industry for that. With different social organization there would be no need for nuclear power. Actually our needs for energy will decrease in that case.

Wind and solar energy is still horribly ineffective and thus expensive for industrial use but it could prove useful for households, again, if we change current social structure a bit. I personally don't need billboards and shiny lights everywhere, actually don't need them at all. My ideal world doesn't contain something we call marketing.

So yeah, we greens are kinda like communists. But not in soviet communism sense.

[Molly]

I wouldn't argue it is either clean or cheap. I'd simply argue that it is the most viable route for solving short term energy problems until a more viable solution has been researched and can be implemented. That is purely in terms of meeting supply demands for current growing energy consumption.

I don't really know for other countries but Germany shut down like 8 plants after Fukishima and is still selling something between 30% and 40% of their energy production to Austria, France and other states.
And considering that it takes up to 10 years to plan a plant, get the paperworks for it and actually build it and make it run, you can hardly argue with short term stuff. Not to mention that Nuclear power isn't flexible. It takes days to shut down or power up a reactor, so it's nothing you use for anything else but basic power supply. The consumption overall isn't a flat line though. You get peaks in the morning for example when everyone is getting up and turning on their coffee machines. Those peaks are buffered by coal or gas plants, they can be fired up in minutes... Well, already off topic that, I guess

Growing energy consumption? Seems to me that home appliances are designed to use less power than before. Regular people at their homes don't use more energy. Unless you take population increase in that equation, but areas where population is raising rapidly are rural and undeveloped areas.

If there really is need for more energy, we can thank industry for that. With different social organization there would be no need for nuclear power. Actually our needs for energy will decrease in that case.

Wind and solar energy is still horribly ineffective and thus expensive for industrial use but it could prove useful for households, again, if we change current social structure a bit. I personally don't need billboards and shiny lights everywhere, actually don't need them at all. My ideal world doesn't contain something we call marketing.

So yeah, we greens are kinda like communists. But not in soviet communism sense.

Light pollution comes to mind here.
There are actually light safe zones all over Europe where you're not allowed to build any more lights
I know the UK/Scotland/Ireland has like 3 or 4 them, Germany 3 I think... Background lighting is actually becoming a serious problem.

[Overdriven]

I don't really know for other countries but Germany shut down like 8 plants after Fukishima and is still selling something between 30% and 40% of their energy production to Austria, France and other states.
And considering that it takes up to 10 years to plan a plant, get the paperworks for it and actually build it and make it run, you can hardly argue with short term stuff. Not to mention that Nuclear power isn't flexible. It takes days to shut down or power up a reactor, so it's nothing you use for anything else but basic power supply. The consumption overall isn't a flat line though. You get peaks in the morning for example when everyone is getting up and turning on their coffee machines. Those peaks are buffered by coal or gas plants, they can be fired up in minutes... Well, already off topic that, I guess

Well 10 years is relatively short term in terms of energy production. I seriously doubt we will have any major leaps in clean, efficient and cheap energy production so something has to replace conventional fossil fuels as becoming more reliant on imports isn't exactly desirable.

Anyway you are right, off topic I suppose 

[Leshma]

There is cheap and there is cheap. Nuclear waste is horribly expensive in both ways. Because it is very dangerous. Whatever you do with it, you're creating pollution somewhere (unless you send it to the Sun). Solar and wind energy are expensive because it is novelty and isn't supported by major industry players. But it is much cheaper if you take out capitalism out of equation.

There are ways how to improve efficiency of both wind and solar energy. Don't build turbines and solar panels on the ground, build them higher in the atmosphere. Of course that could create a lot of issues. Because on the ground there is already a lot of objects and it's not possible to build too many turbines (but it's perfectly possible to place solar panels on the roof of every building). But in the air there is barely any obstacle and I fear if that becomes "a new way" people will build so many of those and pollute air above us...

[Molly]

Well 10 years is relatively short term in terms of energy production. I seriously doubt we will have any major leaps in clean, efficient and cheap energy production so something has to replace conventional fossil fuels as becoming more reliant on imports isn't exactly desirable.

Anyway you are right, off topic I suppose 

Last post, I swear

Clean and renewable energy is viable from the pure technical point of view. There are so many more concepts beside the windmill and the photovoltaic everyone knows..

Lemme tell you a little story about my country, Germany in case you don't already know...

There was this crazy offer from Norway once. They approached the German chancellor(ette) and some Minister of Industry/Economics/whatever it's called and said "Listen, we have so much water running trough our country, energy is so cheap for us, we can even heat our pedestrian walks in the winter to keep them free from snow and ice. We wanna make you an offer which could be awesome for both our nations. We build more water plants, like a bunch of them, and get people working there. Then we produce so much energy, we sell it to you for as good as nothing. You'll get clean and really cheap energy and we get some money and places for people to work at. And since we need to transport that energy, we would even put the cable into the sea for cheap, hell, we'll do it for free! What do you say?"
Some time went by, analyst made calculations claiming that deal could save the average energy consumer in Germany costs up to 45%! They were excited and full of joy. "We can have really cheap energy and clean on top! How awesome!"
Above mentioned Minister said nothing. Chancellor(ette) said nothing.
One day the crazy Norwegians came by again and asked "So? Did come to a decision about that energy thing we suggested?"
The proud and fine Minister took a deep breath and answered "Yea... well... you know... that cable in the sea... yea, no can do... it has a different specification than we need it according to our rulebook. No, sorry, not interested. Have a good day!"

It really happened like that. The "No" from our fine Minister had been made official like 2 - 3 years afterwards.
One of the main reasons it didn't go through was some "expert" of the ministry who said that the cable can't be connected to the plugs (simplified) we have at the shore. After the elections the Minister was replaced by someone else and that expert went working for Vattenfall.

Keeps pissing me off whenever I think about that shit.

[Kafein]

That's is probably one of the most common misconceptions there are: Nuclear power is NOT cheap.

Well, if you leave out waste disposal and dismantling the plants after their use, it comes equal to coal or something (don't have the exact numbers ready and I am too lazy to look them up).
German energy providers are right now trying to sell of their old plants, which were shut down, to the state with some obvious stupid fond-ruse. If they have to pay dismantling and waste disposal by themselves, they gonna be broke within a few years just by those costs. Nuclear power is only cheap when the plant is running.
Funny fact, when you get numbers for the energy costs by "way of generation", waste disposal is always calculated into the price for every single one of them except Nuclear. One should wonder why.

I am not saying that every Nuclear plant should be shut down right now. That's Green people bullshit but saying Nuclear energy is clean and cheap is just the same bullshit on the other side of the scale.

Not to mention big consortium of enterprises being sabotaged by state interests when they actually try to build big alternative stuff (looking at you, France). Lame excuses, some are hilarious even, by politicians why certain deals for really clean energy from other countries are not made (Norway and Germany have one incident which is pathetic and ridiculous at the same time).
There is hardly another topic I've seen more bullshit being spread through official channels than "Energy generation". Maybe cuz I am an electric engineer and happen to know that stuff... So many blatant lies going round, it ain't even funny.

/rant

Isn't nuclear cheaper than the usual suspects of green energy if we really count everything ?

Building dozens of wind turbines far away from each other, producing energy when nobody needs it doesn't seem to be a good deal.
Neither do solar panels that have a barely positive energy balance.

[Leshma]

Last post, I swear

Clean and renewable energy is viable from the pure technical point of view. There are so many more concepts beside the windmill and the photovoltaic everyone knows..

Lemme tell you a little story about my country, Germany in case you don't already know...

There was this crazy offer from Norway once. They approached the German chancellor(ette) and some Minister of Industry/Economics/whatever it's called and said "Listen, we have so much water running trough our country, energy is so cheap for us, we can even heat our pedestrian walks in the winter to keep them free from snow and ice. We wanna make you an offer which could be awesome for both our nations. We build more water plants, like a bunch of them, and get people working there. Then we produce so much energy, we sell it to you for as good as nothing. You'll get clean and really cheap energy and we get some money and places for people to work at. And since we need to transport that energy, we would even put the cable into the sea for cheap, hell, we'll do it for free! What do you say?"
Some time went by, analyst made calculations claiming that deal could save the average energy consumer in Germany costs up to 45%! They were excited and full of joy. "We can have really cheap energy and clean on top! How awesome!"
Above mentioned Minister said nothing. Chancellor(ette) said nothing.
One day the crazy Norwegians came by again and asked "So? Did come to a decision about that energy thing we suggested?"
The proud and fine Minister took a deep breath and answered "Yea... well... you know... that cable in the sea... yea, no can do... it has a different specification than we need it according to our rulebook. No, sorry, not interested. Have a good day!"

It really happened like that. The "No" from our fine Minister had been made official like 2 - 3 years afterwards.
One of the main reasons it didn't go through was some "expert" of the ministry who said that the cable can't be connected to the plugs (simplified) we have at the shore. After the elections the Minister was replaced by someone else and that expert went working for Vattenfall.

Keeps pissing me off whenever I think about that shit.

Answer is really simple in that case. Germany doesn't want to be dependent on Norway.

[Molly]

Isn't nuclear cheaper than the usual suspects of green energy if we really count everything ?

Building dozens of wind turbines far away from each other, producing energy when nobody needs it doesn't seem to be a good deal.
Neither do solar panels that have a barely positive energy balance.

Granted, saving wind energy somewhere is an issue. And solar panels get better by the month but are not that efficient (current gen is at something like 40% efficiency... BUT - it's a big but - the energy costs are Null. Sunshine is free, wind is free (though wind when you don't want/need one is an actual problem).
But those 2 are just the most commonly known ways of renewable stuff. There are even simpler methods using the sun for example (oil, mirrors, turbine) which are way easier to build and maintain with just a part of the costs.
There have been calculations - theoretical! - that planting half the Sahara with those oil-mirror-things could supply full Europe.

I am not saying they are perfect or good enough to make Nuclear power obsolete. But saying they are not viable is not true, neither is saying Nuclear power is cheap.

[cmp]

here are even simpler methods using the sun for example (oil, mirrors, turbine) which are way easier to build and maintain with just a part of the costs.
There have been calculations - theoretical! - that planting half the Sahara with those oil-mirror-things could supply full Europe.

4 million square kilometers of parabolic mirrors?

[Molly]

That's why there is the word "theoretical".

[Kafein]

In my opinion, the best results for the least effort can be achieved through energy efficiency and perhaps a better energy grid. And by energy grid I mainly mean locating power-hungry industry near dams, like in Brazil.

[cmp]

That's why there is the word "theoretical".

I don't get the purpose of that statement. What I read is: "Renewable energy is good because x, y, z. Here's a theoretical example that shows how inefficient and unfeasible it is."

[SirCymro_Crusader]

.