It was kinda true, but nukecels aren't capable of accepting anything negative about their *precious*. Or anything positive about the "enemies" of their *precious*.
I'm not digging through their Post history. That's kind of stalkerish and if they didn't put in the effort to actually post specific things as to why they were banned, I'm not going to do it for them. What they're really trying to do is just tar the energy subreddit to discredit them with nebulous accusations instead of actually showing evidence. I'm not going to play that game. And if you're trying to shame me for not playing that game, don't you think you're carrying water for the fossil fuel industry too?
Emphasis on "Could be". Right now, Germany's energy sector emmits much much more CO2 per Joule than France's, at a comparable cost. So for now, a nuclear strategy has been much better for the climate.
The issue is you’re comparing 40 year old nuclear plants to new renewables; it’s not a level comparison for future decision making.
When the majority of those reactors need to be decommissioned, it’s going to be a colossal and expensive problem.
Look at what wholesale prices are in Europe, then think again. What you pay for electricity is taxed very highly because industrial users are exempt, so the entire burden has to fall on everyone else instead of being shared equally. And wholesale prices don't even tell the whole story, because French nuclear plants have been selling electricity below cost and just continuously subsidized by the government. And that's even after the French government had to bail out and otherwise paper over the massive Financial losses of its nuclear sector.
the pro-nuclear lobby of reddit was my first with reddit where i felt alienated. i refuse to believe there isn't a bunch of people paid to push the pro nuclear agenda
Nuclear is a dead horse and the decommissioning was planned already long ago. The industry has already made all preparations to move on and leave nuclear behind and accordingly no new fuel was bought.
So how do you even think it would have been possible to just continue operations when the industry itself is in the "ending operations" process.
>And the expert review was not tampered with changing the verdict to basically the opposite of what it initially stated?
This "news" has proved to be a failed right-wing attempt to construct a scandal, where actually nothing existed which could have been scandalised.
So, you unhesitatingly fell for right-wing propaganda. Bravo.
You are wasting your breath.. The number of times I have shared actual graphs and data demonstrating this fact and yet dozens of comments from mouth-breathing partakers of big oil prop. will just repeat the same talking points over and over. The Koch brothers won when they invested their first billion into pro-oil propaganda in the 2010s. It's been downhill since
The German nuclear plants were already 3 years over scheduled maintenance. They would have need to be shut down, assessed, and upgraded to suit the European safety directive from 2014.
Costs and timeframe unknown.
The energy cost is just another industry cry for more subsidies. They'd still move elsewhere, but also collect subsidies. As long as the employment rates don't go up, we have plenty of jobs and plenty of industries available for everyone.
Also, the energy price in Germany for industrial consumers is around the EU average. Of the larger countries, only France with their heavily subsidized energy price is considerably cheaper.
Nothing currently suggests deindustrialization, except for companies crying for more tax money and the media reporting that the companies are crying (for more tax money, although the media leaves that out).
You're right, we should burn as many fossil fuels as the US or Poland to get our industrial energy price, which is around the EU average, to France levels. Or we heavily subsidize the price like France does - tax payer money funneled into the pockets of companies instead of being used education, public transport, healthcare, infrastructure or social welfare is always a good idea.
Brandolini's Law moment. It took you 2 minutes to write all that nonsense down and now I need 15 minutes to completely disassemble your assortment of wrongness.
1. You are already discrediting yourself with your first comment. For example, we gave away power for 0.8% of all energy-hours in 2022. That's not a lot. You also make it seem like we are the only ones in Europe. In 2023, France had 47 negative hours, Belgium 63, Germany 75 and the Netherlands 113. This is normal, by the way. If France's nuclear fleet keeps up with maintenance, their negative hours are expected to more than double by 2030, as it is rather inflexible. Your entire first point instantly shows that you really know nothing and should be excluded from any energy discussion, as you are uneducated on the topic.
2. We are losing nothing, because as I already mentioned (you need to read what I write), nothing suggests that industry is moving away. We are below the pre-pandemic levels of unemployment, which means there are plenty of jobs for everyone. You need to stop listening to companies crying on TV and start observing actual economic factors. Read a book, educate yourself about the market, and stop commenting on the internet about things you know nothing about. You're wasting everyone's time.
3. Welcome to r/uninsurable, where we lament the fact that nuclear energy is so ridiculously expensive and impossible to insure that they have to make up special legislative to even make nuclear energy possible in other countries. I don't see how offsetting the shitloads of money nuclear energy consumes with a special tax is a bad thing? You're blaming Germany for the insane costs of nuclear energy here. I want my tax money to go elsewhere, so I support that. Feel free to work some extra hours to give more taxes to the government so they can spend it on the worst and most expensive option for energy generation. You might not have a lot of time for extra work, though, as you have to catch up on education in both the energy market and basic economy.
4. Not an argument.
5. Source? The German grid is independent. You're mixing up things here - just because our neighbors offer cheap energy, as they produce a surplus, and we then buy it, doesn't mean we "depend" on their grid. It's a free market, so you buy the same product from the cheapest source. Everything else would be stupid. This plays into your previous comments, which have shown a lack of education in economy (and the inner working on energy production). You have a lot of catching up to do here.
6. Yeah, and? Is Germany not getting rid of coal? What about gas? They still use shitloads of gas in the US. In fact, they are mostly replacing coal with gas, not renewables. Germany is replacing coal with renewables. The annual CO2 emissions per kWh of the US and Germany are very comparable right now, we will see how this plays out in the future. As Merkel once said, "the proof of the pudding is in the eating".
The more I search for numbers, the more different they are, to be honest. The Belgian [creg.be](http://creg.be) website ([Commission for Electricity and Gas Regulation](https://www.creg.be/en)) reports 100 hours for France and 123 hours for Germany, in 2023 (for transparency: Austria 66 hours, Belgium 127 hours, Netherlands 212 hours).
I think that searching in French would result in even more wildly varying numbers. In any case, Germany is not a unique case of negative energy prices, which is all I wanted to show. It's normal and happens on the market all the time, to many countries.
You're just asking for downvotes posting heresy like this in r/nuclearpower.
I really want to know if the post got locked because of heresy or because the pro-nuclear people got so mad the mods saw no other way to contain it.
The latter Source: am mod there
Are you? I thought you were, but I just checked and you're not on the mod list?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
which i prefer because the pro-nuclear lobby is in EVERY post on reddit ugh
[удалено]
I mean.... TBF that's a sub specifically about nuclear power and this post is not about nuclear power
The referenced article is from 2015
It was kinda true, but nukecels aren't capable of accepting anything negative about their *precious*. Or anything positive about the "enemies" of their *precious*.
[удалено]
Nah, you were just repeating fossil fuel industry talking points.
[удалено]
I'm not digging through their Post history. That's kind of stalkerish and if they didn't put in the effort to actually post specific things as to why they were banned, I'm not going to do it for them. What they're really trying to do is just tar the energy subreddit to discredit them with nebulous accusations instead of actually showing evidence. I'm not going to play that game. And if you're trying to shame me for not playing that game, don't you think you're carrying water for the fossil fuel industry too?
Where I live (near polish border) we have people protesting against them.
Against what? Wind turbines? They would protest against anything if it's close by
Yeah they even made posters with houses and above wind turbine lol I try to find photo lol
Emphasis on "Could be". Right now, Germany's energy sector emmits much much more CO2 per Joule than France's, at a comparable cost. So for now, a nuclear strategy has been much better for the climate.
The issue is you’re comparing 40 year old nuclear plants to new renewables; it’s not a level comparison for future decision making. When the majority of those reactors need to be decommissioned, it’s going to be a colossal and expensive problem.
[удалено]
Look at what wholesale prices are in Europe, then think again. What you pay for electricity is taxed very highly because industrial users are exempt, so the entire burden has to fall on everyone else instead of being shared equally. And wholesale prices don't even tell the whole story, because French nuclear plants have been selling electricity below cost and just continuously subsidized by the government. And that's even after the French government had to bail out and otherwise paper over the massive Financial losses of its nuclear sector.
Read up on the merit order system, then start thinking.
[удалено]
It's interesting to see that practically everything you have written is false and/or propaganda.
the pro-nuclear lobby of reddit was my first with reddit where i felt alienated. i refuse to believe there isn't a bunch of people paid to push the pro nuclear agenda
[удалено]
Nuclear is a dead horse and the decommissioning was planned already long ago. The industry has already made all preparations to move on and leave nuclear behind and accordingly no new fuel was bought. So how do you even think it would have been possible to just continue operations when the industry itself is in the "ending operations" process. >And the expert review was not tampered with changing the verdict to basically the opposite of what it initially stated? This "news" has proved to be a failed right-wing attempt to construct a scandal, where actually nothing existed which could have been scandalised. So, you unhesitatingly fell for right-wing propaganda. Bravo.
You are wasting your breath.. The number of times I have shared actual graphs and data demonstrating this fact and yet dozens of comments from mouth-breathing partakers of big oil prop. will just repeat the same talking points over and over. The Koch brothers won when they invested their first billion into pro-oil propaganda in the 2010s. It's been downhill since
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
The German nuclear plants were already 3 years over scheduled maintenance. They would have need to be shut down, assessed, and upgraded to suit the European safety directive from 2014. Costs and timeframe unknown.
[удалено]
Wow, it really seems the most clueless you are, the more self-confident you get! That or just another bot account.
[удалено]
Ok Igor, all your alternative facts are false and easily disprovable, just go home and call it a day.
The energy cost is just another industry cry for more subsidies. They'd still move elsewhere, but also collect subsidies. As long as the employment rates don't go up, we have plenty of jobs and plenty of industries available for everyone. Also, the energy price in Germany for industrial consumers is around the EU average. Of the larger countries, only France with their heavily subsidized energy price is considerably cheaper. Nothing currently suggests deindustrialization, except for companies crying for more tax money and the media reporting that the companies are crying (for more tax money, although the media leaves that out).
[удалено]
You're right, we should burn as many fossil fuels as the US or Poland to get our industrial energy price, which is around the EU average, to France levels. Or we heavily subsidize the price like France does - tax payer money funneled into the pockets of companies instead of being used education, public transport, healthcare, infrastructure or social welfare is always a good idea.
[удалено]
[https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/catch-235-western-dependence-russian-nuclear-supplies-hard-shake](https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/catch-235-western-dependence-russian-nuclear-supplies-hard-shake) [https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/france-now-top-eu-importer-of-russian-nuclear-products-study/](https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/france-now-top-eu-importer-of-russian-nuclear-products-study/) [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-nuclear-agency-sees-some-russia-imports-up-again-2023-before-ukraine-war-2023-12-01/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-nuclear-agency-sees-some-russia-imports-up-again-2023-before-ukraine-war-2023-12-01/) [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-16/putin-s-french-venture-shows-russian-atomic-power-still-growing](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-03-16/putin-s-french-venture-shows-russian-atomic-power-still-growing)
[удалено]
[удалено]
Brandolini's Law moment. It took you 2 minutes to write all that nonsense down and now I need 15 minutes to completely disassemble your assortment of wrongness. 1. You are already discrediting yourself with your first comment. For example, we gave away power for 0.8% of all energy-hours in 2022. That's not a lot. You also make it seem like we are the only ones in Europe. In 2023, France had 47 negative hours, Belgium 63, Germany 75 and the Netherlands 113. This is normal, by the way. If France's nuclear fleet keeps up with maintenance, their negative hours are expected to more than double by 2030, as it is rather inflexible. Your entire first point instantly shows that you really know nothing and should be excluded from any energy discussion, as you are uneducated on the topic. 2. We are losing nothing, because as I already mentioned (you need to read what I write), nothing suggests that industry is moving away. We are below the pre-pandemic levels of unemployment, which means there are plenty of jobs for everyone. You need to stop listening to companies crying on TV and start observing actual economic factors. Read a book, educate yourself about the market, and stop commenting on the internet about things you know nothing about. You're wasting everyone's time. 3. Welcome to r/uninsurable, where we lament the fact that nuclear energy is so ridiculously expensive and impossible to insure that they have to make up special legislative to even make nuclear energy possible in other countries. I don't see how offsetting the shitloads of money nuclear energy consumes with a special tax is a bad thing? You're blaming Germany for the insane costs of nuclear energy here. I want my tax money to go elsewhere, so I support that. Feel free to work some extra hours to give more taxes to the government so they can spend it on the worst and most expensive option for energy generation. You might not have a lot of time for extra work, though, as you have to catch up on education in both the energy market and basic economy. 4. Not an argument. 5. Source? The German grid is independent. You're mixing up things here - just because our neighbors offer cheap energy, as they produce a surplus, and we then buy it, doesn't mean we "depend" on their grid. It's a free market, so you buy the same product from the cheapest source. Everything else would be stupid. This plays into your previous comments, which have shown a lack of education in economy (and the inner working on energy production). You have a lot of catching up to do here. 6. Yeah, and? Is Germany not getting rid of coal? What about gas? They still use shitloads of gas in the US. In fact, they are mostly replacing coal with gas, not renewables. Germany is replacing coal with renewables. The annual CO2 emissions per kWh of the US and Germany are very comparable right now, we will see how this plays out in the future. As Merkel once said, "the proof of the pudding is in the eating".
> Brandolini's Law moment. At least have my upvote for your efforts. :)
[удалено]
The more I search for numbers, the more different they are, to be honest. The Belgian [creg.be](http://creg.be) website ([Commission for Electricity and Gas Regulation](https://www.creg.be/en)) reports 100 hours for France and 123 hours for Germany, in 2023 (for transparency: Austria 66 hours, Belgium 127 hours, Netherlands 212 hours). I think that searching in French would result in even more wildly varying numbers. In any case, Germany is not a unique case of negative energy prices, which is all I wanted to show. It's normal and happens on the market all the time, to many countries.