Remix.run Logo
jagermo 4 hours ago

No. the battery storage will deliver more power than the plant.

But, there are other issues: Atomic power keeps rising in cost. The plant was decomissioned and to turn it back on, you would basically have to rebuild it from the ground up - with people and knowledge that does not exist. Also, you would need the fuel from some place - as with oil and gas, you are depended on that place, since you can't easily switch uranium.

We would need about 55 power plants in Germany. At its height, Germany had 38 plants, all of that trash is still not solved. And we are not even thinking about the lawsuits that the reactivation or building of new plants would entail. People are suing against solar farms, what do you think a Nimby would be triggered by a nuclear plant?

In addition, none of these plants can be insured, all the risk is with the tax payer. As russia currently shows, you are also creating about 50 targets that to destroy a country. You don't even have to send a rocket, a few drones with grenades will make sure the plant has to shut down.

Personally, I do not want them. I remember Tchernobyl and the fallout afterwards. We have alternatives, like these battery storages, and can use water, wind, solar and hydrogen to not create potential nuclear issues, i am fine with that.

< For batteries you would likely go to 100 to 1000s of locations.

Yes, ideally de-centralized and build where power is generated. A battery park can be set up almost anywhere, a power plant not so much.

Nevertheless, I like the idea of using these old plant sites for storage, they have pretty good connections to the grid, so it makes a lot of sense. Can't use that space for anything else, really.

joe_mamba 4 hours ago | parent [-]

>all of that trash is still not solved.

How did UK and France solve it? Just ask them and do what they did?

> People are suing against solar farms, what do you think a Nimby would be triggered by a nuclear plant?

Simple. You make it against the law to sue a giant energy projects because energy is a national/existential issue like defense. There, problem solved.

Why do we act like there isn't a switch we can flip when needed to make our problems go away, and instead need to succumb to the whims of a few anti-intellectual nimbys who got brainwashed by anti nuclear propaganda, because "they can sue"?

>Personally, I do not want them. I remember Tchernobyl and the fallout afterwards

Do you also remember the other power plants in the world that didn't blow up?

Imagine if prehistoric humans stopped using fire because someone burned his house down once and "they remember the fire".

M95D an hour ago | parent [-]

> "they can sue"

That's one of the features of a free country. What you propose is close to tyranny.