|
silence_kit posted:Nuclear energy cannot fail. It can only be failed. All of the drawbacks to the technology are external to the technology and can be blamed on The Greenpeace Conspiracy and malicious actors inside of government nuclear regulatory agencies. Counterpoint: https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/11/why-are-nuclear-plants-so-expensive-safetys-only-part-of-the-story/ “But many of the US' nuclear plants were in fact built around the same design, with obvious site-specific aspects like different foundation needs. The researchers track each of the designs used separately, and they calculate a "learning rate"—the drop in cost that's associated with each successful completion of a plant based on that design. If things went as expected, the learning rate should be positive, with each sequential plant costing less. Instead, it's -115 percent. ... But those were far from the only costs. They cite a worker survey that indicated that about a quarter of the unproductive labor time came because the workers were waiting for either tools or materials to become available. In a lot of other cases, construction procedures were changed in the middle of the build, leading to confusion and delays. Finally, there was the general decrease in performance noted above. All told, problems that reduced the construction efficiency contributed nearly 70 percent to the increased costs.” My take: The utility company profits are baked in so they have no incentive to meet the budgets and schedules.
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 21:09 |
|
|
Ihmemies posted:Finland's 1,6GW new nuke plant was postponed (yet again) to spring 2022. The construction began in 2009. It was supposed to start production this autumn, but I guess they noticed they forgot to turn their turbines around resulting in banana-shaped turbine axles or something. The trend of putting in stuff backwards, as with San Onofre, seems to be gaining ground.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:06
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:The trend of putting in stuff backwards, as with San Onofre, seems to be gaining ground. Ehhhhh, it was more that Mitsubishi modified the steam generator designs and it went poorly, requiring replacement long before their designed 40 year lifetime. Either way closing San Onofre was a stupid waste given California is doubling down on Natural Gas now. Especially visible given the recent oil spill on the LA beaches.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:08
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Ehhhhh, it was more that Mitsubishi modified the steam generator designs and it went poorly, requiring replacement long before their designed 40 year lifetime. That happened years later: “The San Onofre station had technical problems over the years. In July 1982, Time wrote, "The firm Bechtel was ... embarrassed in 1977, when it installed a 420-ton nuclear-reactor vessel backwards" at San Onofre.” I’m friends with a construction guy who worked on the plant. There was a ‘N’ clearly marked on the vessel. It was ignored. There were also a host of bad things about the construction. And yeah, Mitsubishi’s attempt to “soup up” the plant was a major failure and I miss it running (I live in Carlsbad). The waste being put in cases near the ocean, subjecting them to chloride-induced stress corrosion, is just adding dumb to dumb. “On The Beach” is a novel/film about a post nuclear war world, not a manual for decommising a nuclear power plant.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:20
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:That happened years later: The Spent Fuel casks are not going to do anything though, its largely fudd. I wouldn't worry about that in the least given proper oversight. Its best to keep it in context with the sheer amount of damage California is doing by encouraging increased Fracking and Natural Gas dependency which is doing much more severe, yet largely invisible damage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:24
|
|
|
New Berlin airport took 10 years to build, was 5 billions/200% over budget and sucks so much rear end that there are discussions of blowing it up and have a do-over. The idea of letting these idiots try building a nuclear power plant is terrifying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:25
|
|
|
GABA ghoul posted:New Berlin airport took 10 years to build, was 5 billions/200% over budget and sucks so much rear end that there are discussing to blow it up and have a do-over. The idea of letting these idiots try to build a nuclear power plant is terrifying. Humans suck in general, film at 11. But given the alternative is the continued investment in Fossil fuels, you got a choice to make: either you assume nuclear plants are built, often overbudget, but likely held to NRC standards, or we let them continue to burn fossil fuels. At this point: Anybody arguing we can save the planet cheaper is selling something, and given how badly "cheap clean energy" is shooting Germany and others in the foot, I'm kinda tired of listening people believe the free market is gonna save us from the damage the free market did with cheap, dirty energy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:27
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:The Spent Fuel casks are not going to do anything though, its largely fudd. I wouldn't worry about that in the least given proper oversight. Its best to keep it in context with the sheer amount of damage California is doing by encouraging increased Fracking and Natural Gas dependency which is doing much more severe, yet largely invisible damage. Why not both? CA is stupid for closing Diablo Canyon and the fracking stuff. SONGS has been mismanaged from the start and placing canisters that close to the ocean is stupid from a pratical and PR sense.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:30
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Humans suck in general, film at 11. But given the alternative is the continued investment in Fossil fuels, you got a choice to make: either you assume nuclear plants are built, often overbudget, but likely held to NRC standards, or we let them continue to burn fossil fuels. How did a nation that gave us some of the worst automobiles ever made (Renault, I’m looking at you) manage to build reliable nuclear reactors? Why did we (USA) fail so badly at getting plants constructed and running them? Well, the Navy figured it out at least.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:33
|
|
|
VideoGameVet posted:Why not both? But therein lies the rub: EVERY nuclear plants stores their spent fuel onsite. That's just how US built nuclear plants work. This is not specific to San Onofre, and its unlikely to suddenly make the canisters less structurally rigid. Here's Diablo Canyon:  Spent fuel is the canisters in the upper right next to the pools. The answer to San Onofre was not closure, it was fixing the issues and maybe taking away ownership. Every Gigawatt of clean energy like nuclear removed from the grid is practically a crime given the sheer crisis mode we are in.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:33
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:But therein lies the rub: EVERY nuclear plants stores their spent fuel onsite. That's just how US built nuclear plants work. This is not specific to San Onofre, and its unlikely to suddenly make the canisters less structurally rigid. Me and my new EV agree with your last paragraph. FYI: The EV charging infrastructure in the USA is crap. The companies do a crappy job with their software and keeping the stuff working. Tesla did a better job but a pox on the government for not mandating a freaking standard for charging systems.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:36
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Humans suck in general, film at 11. But given the alternative is the continued investment in Fossil fuels, you got a choice to make: either you assume nuclear plants are built, often overbudget, but likely held to NRC standards, or we let them continue to burn fossil fuels.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:37
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:The developed world is also so productive now that there isn't enough useful work to do anymore, at least not for everyone to have a market-wage job to feed and house themselves. Yeah worth noting that Nuclear is one of the most unionized of all the energy solutions. A lot of specialized fields that are well paid with high tech/speciality requirements. The issue of San Onofre's spent fuel is a universal issue with US Nuclear in general, part of that is the need to start a true fuel recycling program for saving spent fuel (which can largely be recycled, re-enriched, and sent back to the pool), that would solve the need for spent fuel to just....exist on plant grounds. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Oct 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:39
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Humans suck in general, film at 11. But given the alternative is the continued investment in Fossil fuels, you got a choice to make: either you assume nuclear plants are built, often overbudget, but likely held to NRC standards, or we let them continue to burn fossil fuels. The hurdles of continued renewables/transmission infrastructure expansion are so drastically smaller than those of a nuclear revival that it just doesn't make much sense to go down that route for many countries. The obstacle for renewables are basically just political/legal. The obstacles to nuclear expansion in the west are such a massive clusterfuck that you basically need an Apollo style effort to overcome them. In a perfect world, we would go down both paths, but it's not a perfect world and opportunity costs do exist here. There is definitely the problem of what happens when renewables expansion(without large scale storage) reaches the maximum cap of 80-90%. But by then it will already be ~2040 and it's very likely that solutions will be mass market ready by then, like dirt cheap mass market sodium ion batteries or cheap electrolyzer plants.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:52
|
|
|
GABA ghoul posted:The hurdles of continued renewables/transmission infrastructure expansion are so drastically smaller than those of a nuclear revival that it just doesn't make much sense to go down that route for many countries. The obstacle for renewables are basically just political/legal. The obstacles to nuclear expansion in the west are such a massive clusterfuck that you basically need an Apollo style effort to overcome them. In a perfect world, we would go down both paths, but it's not a perfect world and opportunity costs do exist here. Except for the places where its not working. Which is pretty much all of the larger states. Pretty much all of them are falling back on majority fossil fuel generation and is literally shooting them in the foot. I'm sorry renewables alone is not a success case. There is no realistic scenario where we go majority renewables without backing it with Fossil fuels, that's gonna be the thing you have to address, and batteries just are not going to cut it. And appealing to the "dirt cheap" nature of it is an incredible fallacy: Its cheaper in upfront costs, but not in overall delivery because at the end of the day, you end up in the very scenario currently happening in mainland Europe. Germany is openly planning to rapidly expand Natural Gas because "We need 80GW right now" and they are refusing to consider just brining Nuclear Plants back online to address it. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:09 on Oct 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 18:58
|
|
|
Total Meatlove posted:Is it as bad as building your wind turbines in a reindeer grazing ground and then being surprised that people graze their reindeer there? Why is that a problem?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 19:03
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Except for the places where its not working. Which is pretty much all of the larger states. Pretty much all of them are falling back on majority fossil fuel generation and is literally shooting them in the foot. I'm sorry renewables alone is not a success case. What do you think is happening in mainland Europe? Yeah, sorry, but I'm gonna trust the actual experts on the subject and the data/studies, which show that it is absolutely feasible, and not your gut feeling on this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 19:12
|
|
|
GABA ghoul posted:What do you think is happening in mainland Europe? Yeah how is that going for Germany? They are behind France in scale of emissions, they are actively facing fuel shortages because they are heavily dependent on Natural Gas, "biomass" (wood pellets), and energy imports. Overall they are not doing well. https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-failure-on-the-road-to-a-renewable-future-a-1266586.html There is no way this works without Nuclear. Again, nobody is saying renewables are bad. But its not 1:1 replacing fossil fuels. Its barely covering a hundredth of their energy needs. quote:Germany's Federal Court of Auditors is even more forthright about the failures. The shift to renewables, the federal auditors say, has cost at least 160 billion euros in the last five years. Meanwhile, the expenditures "are in extreme disproportion to the results," Federal Court of Auditors President Kay Scheller said last fall, although his assessment went largely unheard in the political arena. Scheller is even concerned that voters could soon lose all faith in the government because of this massive failure. Why is it not the cheap solution they promised? Germany is literally scaring Japan into turning nuclear plants back on because they don't want to depend on energy imports and end up basically in a hostage crisis. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:31 on Oct 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 19:21
|
|
|
GABA ghoul posted:What do you think is happening in mainland Europe? They're falling back on fossil fuel generation. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/sep/28/eu-lawmakers-vote-prolong-fossil-fuel-gas-subsidies https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2021/10/10/a-renaissance-of-fossil-fuels-consequences-of-europes-energy-market-panic/ quote:The reinstallation of unused nuclear facilities was shadowed by the revival of old coal-fired power plants. The UK, seeking to shut down all coal-fired power plants by 2024, was forced to restart some of its generating capacity. Less than a year has passed since wind turbines became the main electricity source in Germany—yet, by the autumn of 2021, the EU’s biggest economy had to see another renaissance of the coal as electricity generation at coal plants has more than doubled since 2020, reaching an average of 8.5 GWh in the course of September. Not only will coal serve as Germany’s main energy source in 2021, but it will also retain its competitive edge over gas, which costs 10 euro per MWh more. Phanatic fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Oct 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 19:22
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Why is that a problem? You end up getting a decision against you and potentially have to dismantle 150+ wind turbines because your licences are invalid. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/two-norway-wind-farms-lose-licence-landmark-ruling-over-indigenous-rights-2021-10-11/ quote:Norway's supreme court stripped two wind farms of their operating licences on Monday in a case that could boost the legal rights of the country's indigenous Sami people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 19:31
|
|
|
Maybe UK could repair and refire the Battersea coal power plant... The one thing I don't understand is that why nuclear heat energy is wasted. Finland uses 30-40TWh yearly for heating. Current 5000MW (~44TWh yearly) of excess heat from nuclear plants, which now goes to oceans, could be used to warm the cities The amount of waste heat doubles with the new Olkiluoto 3 and Hanhikivi plant. No need to burn wood, gas, peat or coal after that. It would cut emissions by 10%. Ihmemies fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Oct 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 19:33
|
|
|
Ihmemies posted:Maybe UK could repair and refire the Battersea coal power plant... Russia did some heating with steam systems like this, I think its a lack of motivation to roll out district heating like that. https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Leningrad-II-plant-begins-providing-district-heati
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:10
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Yeah how is that going for Germany? They are behind France in scale of emissions, they are actively facing fuel shortages because they are heavily dependent on Natural Gas, "biomass" (wood pellets), and energy imports. Overall they are not doing well. We went over all of this itt before. Germany is not a high gas user per capita(you are maybe thinking of the Netherlands, or confusing gas and coal?) Gas use in the energy sector has decreased in the last decade. Germany is a net exporter of power. I don't know what you mean by "fuel shortages", but if you are talking about the strategic gas reserves being lower than usual for this winter, then yeah, that's true. But that's true for every country in Europe this year. Haven't heard anything about reseves or supply being low enough to cause a shortage. Do you have a source? Don't really care about that ~but what if the wind don't blooow~ navel gazing in the media. You measure the success of decarbonization by the amount of Wh generated by renewables per year, not on a single day. Every Wh per year genered from renewables sources saves a Wh from fossil fuels. And no poo poo France has lower emissions per capita. They decarbonized something like 70% of their energy sector in the 70s an 80s. That's very admirable and I wish every country had done it then too. Would have saved us a lot of troubles today. Germany is not gonna reach that point until the mid to late 30s or something. Definitely a missed chance. Phanatic posted:They're falling back on fossil fuel generation. Again, just look at the data. Germany's renewables share for 2021(up to this week) is 48%. It's a drop of 3% compared to last year. With renewables expansion having been killed completely by the government 2 years ago it's withing the range of normal fluctuation. The UK is definitely hosed though, you are absolutely right about that one. Their mainland connection to France got damaged in a fire recently and they basically dissolved almost all of their strategic gas reserve infrastructure a couple year ago because they thought it would be cheaper to rely on other EU countries gas reserves. Then Brexit and this poo poo happened and now they are absolutely hosed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:10
|
|
|
GABA ghoul posted:We went over all of this itt before. Germany is not a high gas user per capita(you are maybe thinking of the Netherlands, or confusing gas and coal?) Gas use in the energy sector has decreased in the last decade. Germany is a net exporter of power. I don't know what you mean by "fuel shortages", but if you are talking about the strategic gas reserves being lower than usual for this winter, then yeah, that's true. But that's true for every country in Europe this year. Haven't heard anything about reseves or supply being low enough to cause a shortage. Do you have a source? The problem is this isn't actually solving the problem? Germany is already at the EU calling "Natural Gas" a "Clean Energy" which is not only false, but its bait and switch. Given Germany's inability to weigh risks in shuttering nuclear plants versus, say, shuttering the coal plants they are now shifting Nuclear loads onto, its hypocrisy in its clearest form. https://www.dw.com/en/germany-coal-...y%20to%20blame. The renewables didn't get stored. They fell directly back to carbon energy sources. This isn't solving the problem, its practically greenwashing. If your goals are to demonstrate how....wood pellets, lignite coal, and Natural Gas, all carbon intense energy sources are somehow Green? Congrats, Germany did it. If this has helped Germany even be on par with France's carbon footprint, maybe you'd have a point. They are still behind them. The entire point of having baseload like nuclear is you are not in a carbon hostage crisis when the wind fails to deliver and the storage isn't fulfilled. This is going to only become more common in the coming years. Between that and the NIMBYism around new Wind/Solar buildouts, they can't even overcome that? CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 20:22 on Oct 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:18
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Russia did some heating with steam systems like this, I think its a lack of motivation to roll out district heating like that. I love how every picture of Russia I see looks like either a Call of Duty level or something out of STALKER. I also imagine maybe in a more sparsely populated country like Finland maybe transferring the heat efficiently might be difficult? Maybe also NIMBY concerns about "radiation"? I'm not an engineer but that sounds like a cool idea, like how in FF6 the town of Marsh is heated from the excess heat of their their steam engines.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:18
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I love how every picture of Russia I see looks like either a Call of Duty level or something out of STALKER. My large public university in the US was heated by the waste steam heat from the (NG) cogeneration plant. It isn't just a nuclear thing. The issue is that it requires density and common infrastructure. It's a great thing in the areas it works though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:22
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:My large public university in the US was heated by the waste steam heat from the (NG) cogeneration plant. It isn't just a nuclear thing. That's really cool. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:25
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:That's really cool. Sounds kinda warm to me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:30
|
|
|
GABA ghoul posted:Again, just look at the data. Germany's renewables share for 2021(up to this week) is 48%. It's a drop of 3% compared to last year. With renewables expansion having been killed completely by the government 2 years ago it's withing the range of normal fluctuation. I'd like to point out that the renewables figures are also leaning hard on burning lumber in old coal plants, which isn't green or carbon-free in the slightest no matter what Germany might say. You factor that out, and recognize the temporary drop in energy consumption due to the pandemic, and those renewables figures start to look more like 40 percent or less. And that's before considering that swapping gas power for wind power on continental electric grids doesn't really make it carbon-free. Germany is heavily relying on other countries to provide them with fossil fuel electricity when they need it, and that fact is definitely getting papered over in those figures. Kaal fucked around with this message at 20:34 on Oct 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:30
|
|
|
Raenir Salazar posted:I love how every picture of Russia I see looks like either a Call of Duty level or something out of STALKER. (2 nuke plants in) Loviisa-->Helsinki is 70 kilometers. (2, soon 3 nuke plants in)Olkiluoto-->Turku 110km Olkiluoto-> Pori 55km Olkiluoto->Tampere 160km If pipe is estimated to be 10 million euros/km the prices aren't that bad. Highway is 3-5 million euros/km to build in Finland so I'd hope they can build some pipe for 10m €/km. Considering heating energy in Helsinki for example costs over 60€/MWh now. If we calculate 5000MW*24h*60€*365d ... 2600 million euros yearly wasted to warming the sea. 26 billion euros in 10 years. One could lay some pipe with that money. 1000km of pipe would be 10 billion euros and the heating is "free". One could lay the pipe through Finland with that money... Tampere area has around 400k pops, Pori 135k, Turku 325k, Helsinki area 1200k. So that would be 2M people in the area already for 400km of pipe... (Finland has 5,5M total). Ihmemies fucked around with this message at 20:47 on Oct 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:42
|
|
|
Kaal posted:I'd like to point out that the renewables figures are also leaning hard on burning lumber in old coal plants, which isn't green or carbon-free in the slightest no matter what Germany might say.  No? Do you have a source for Germany burning wood in coal plants? Are people just completely making poo poo up now and writing their own Germany fanfic?quote:You factor that out, and recognize the temporary drop in energy consumption due to the pandemic, and those renewables figures start to look more like 40 percent or less. And that's before considering that swapping gas power for wind power on continental electric grids doesn't really make it carbon-free. Germany is heavily relying on other countries to provide them with fossil fuel electricity when they need it, and that fact is definitely getting papered over in those figures. I mean, sure, if you completely ignore the actual amount of power generated and then just make up a number from thin air instead, then this number could be lower. Hmm, yes, never looked at it this way 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:48
|
|
|
Anyways heating is only 10% of energy usage in Finland, but my point is that if all that energy is already being produced for no extra cost in nuclear power plants, why not use it? Why build expensive power plants to burn fossil fuels (including "bio" fuels like wood and whatever) when we produce all the heat needed already? The point should be how to avoid burning anything at all, instead of burnining some stuff is better than burning some other stuff. The goal is stop all the burning, and we have all the solutions already to stop it.. but we just don't want to. For whatever reasons. It's not like the water ejected to sea from nuclear plant is radioactive. Heating water would not be any more radioactive. And there's no need for heating on a dead planet so uh hnghhh I hate politics
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:53
|
|
|
You can't just snap your fingers have have steam heating pipes in the ground. Even if the $X billion check is written, it takes 5-10 years to build that kind of stuff, and people need to not freeze to death in the meanwhile. Part of the solution is we need to roll out the things that can be quickly rolled out immediately, so we aren't waiting 20 or 30 years for the slow solutions to come online before we start doing anything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 20:59
|
|
|
Well Finland's aim is to be carb neutral in 2035. 14 years still. Plenty of time to do long term goals too. Also I can't understand why it was not done 20 years ago already.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 21:01
|
|
|
GABA ghoul posted:Again, just look at the data. I did. I even quoted it to you: quote:yet, by the autumn of 2021, the EU’s biggest economy had to see another renaissance of the coal as electricity generation at coal plants has more than doubled since 2020, reaching an average of 8.5 GWh in the course of September. Not only will coal serve as Germany’s main energy source in 2021, but it will also retain its competitive edge over gas, which costs 10 euro per MWh more. GABA ghoul posted:Germany's renewables share for 2021(up to this week) is 48%. Great. Germany considers cutting down forests in Africa and burning them in power plants to be "renewables" https://globalforestcoalition.org/plans-for-burning-namibian-wood-in-german-power-plants-denounced/ Phanatic fucked around with this message at 21:06 on Oct 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 21:04
|
|
|
It’s rough to transport heating water over long distances like that. The heat losses are huge. The most efficient thing would be to convince a population to let you build a nuclear generating station in the middle of the city. Municipal heat would be straightforward, and you’d utilize nearly 100% of the energy extracted. Good luck with that first bit. You also still need a way to remove 100% of the plant’s heat in the event that the district system has a problem, or during the summertime when heat demands are lower. That system needs to be maintained regardless of how often it actually gets used, so the extra complexity of a district heating system is often (nearly always) unattractive. This also circles back to how western society is structured to pursue short term investment returns, even to the detriment of long term costs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 21:08
|
|
|
Note that what he asked for is cleverly specific: Germany burning wood in *coal plants*. Dedicated biomass-burning plants don't count. And none of this counts, either: https://apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainapi/api/Report/DownloadReportByFileName?fileName=Biofuels%20Annual_The%20Hague_European%20Union_06-29-2020 Germany burned 2.3 million metric tons of wood pellets in 2019. Germany actively subsidizes this for residences and businesses, because after all it takes stress off the grid and who cares where the carbon goes or comes from. Also, German law requires all new buildings since 2009 to use renewable energy to cover a portion of their heating/cooling requirements. Since wood is considered renewable, Germany has effectively been saying since 2009 "If you build a new building it needs to burn wood for heat." Meanwhile, I believe this is the first power plant in Germany that's meets his requirement: http://biomassmagazine.com/articles/18369/koehler-converts-german-coal-fired-plant-to-biomass quote:The Koehler Group is to convert its power plant at the Koehler Paper site in Greiz, Germany, from pulverized lignite to fine wood fraction fuel. The experts at Koehler Renewable Energy, a part of the Koehler Group, have succeeded in developing an innovative technique that will allow a type of biomass to be used as fuel in the existing coal‐fired power plant in a completely new way. It is an innovation on the market. Yes, burning a fuel that people have burned since prehistory is certainly innovative. Advanced reactor designs? gently caress it, we're burning wood. Also, regarding pellets: quote:While the EU produces nearly thirty percent of world production, EU demand represents nearly fifty percent of the global market. So the EU is importing forests from other countries. Do you think all that biomass is being replaced by new trees? I don't. I don't at all. Phanatic fucked around with this message at 21:27 on Oct 11, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 21:21
|
|
|
Biomass is part of the base load in Germany - electricitymap.org doesn't consider it extremely green  
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 21:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 21:09 |
|
|
Phanatic posted:I did. I even quoted it to you: What is your point? The the metric for renewables generation should be cherry picked days or seasons, instead yearly totals and averages? Kaal posted:This is how biomass works, if you don't know that then it really brings into question your awareness of the topic. So you don't have a source and just made it up completely? Yeah, that's what I thought. Phanatic posted:Note that what he asked for is cleverly specific: Germany burning wood in *coal plants*. Lol, he didn't ask "cleverly specific". The claim was literally that Germany is "leaning hard on burning lumber in old coal plants", which is a weird rear end claim and smelled like bullshit. I live in this idiot rear end country and try to follow developments in the energy industry so something like this would have had to slip pass pretty much all domestic media outlets. So I asked for a source, which he obviously couldn't produce because it's made up bullshit
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2021 21:58
|
|