| ▲ | NeutralForest 5 hours ago |
| I just want Belgium to go all-in on renewables, we [already have a pretty good electricity production make-up](https://statbel.fgov.be/en/themes/energy/electricity-product...) but we're still [too dependent on oil](https://www.iea.org/countries/belgium/energy-mix). Hopefully the current energy crisis is a wake up call. |
|
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| > want Belgium to go all-in on renewables I want everyone to go all in on anything that isn't a fossil fuel. The problem with gatekeeping new energy is upgrading the grid to accomodate wind and solar, and waiting for batteries to be delivered, creates a gap that gets filled with fossil fuels. The pragmatic solution to the energy problem is all of the above; joined with climate change, it's everything above but fossil fuels. |
| |
| ▲ | elric 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | IIRC those old Belgian reactors got in the way of more renewables for some time. They provided a very cheap base load that seemed hard to modulate, which meant that even cheap renewables couldn't really compete on price. If I understand correctly, newer nukes can more easily modulate their output, which would be useful at night or on days without wind etc. Gas peaker plants currently fill this gap. | | |
| ▲ | masklinn 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > If I understand correctly, newer nukes can more easily modulate their output, which would be useful at night or on days without wind etc. Gas peaker plants currently fill this gap. It's not new, it's that PWRs have to be built and operated with that capability (load following), which most nations didn't bother with until pretty recently because it does have a cost in complexity & efficiency. But France has done it that way pretty much the entire time. > Gas peaker plants currently fill this gap. Nukes with load following aren't peakers: PWRs can modulate output by 2~5%/minute (depending on their exact design and operating mode) between 30 and 100%. They're not reactive enough to compensate for wind, although they can work with the daily and seasonal patterns of solar pretty well. The replacement for peakers are mostly batteries (hydro and pumped hydro where that's available but usually where available it's already done) |
| |
| ▲ | NeutralForest 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Depending on the country's situation, you might have to use fossil fuels during the transition, that's alright. But the transition is non-negotiable at this point. | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > you might have to use fossil fuels during the transition, that's alright The EU has north of €1 trillion into new gas infrastructure. That's €1 trillion of commercial interests with a vested interest in negotiating the non-negotiable. Using fossil fuels for transition is fine, particularly if it's replacing coal with natural gas. But building LNG terminals and installing gas turbines because ding dongs in Dusseldorf got scared of nukes a quarter of a continent away is a great way to raise the continent's energy prices, volatility and carbon continent. | | |
|
|
|
| ▲ | efdee an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That is about production. The story that you don't get from these graphs is that Belgium is highly dependent on imported energy because the production is just too low. |
|
| ▲ | Insanity 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Compared to other countries I've lived in, Belgium doesn't do too bad of a job in promoting 'green energy'. Although I've not lived there for some years, they used to subsidize things like solar panels on roofs (at least when my parents installed them 20-ish years ago). And there are 'green energy' companies as far as I'm aware, so you don't have to stick with the larger energy providers. That said, my information is outdated. |
|
| ▲ | shlant 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| just FYI - unfortunately HN doesn't have markup like reddit so your hyperlinking doesn't work |
| |
