this post was submitted on 25 Oct 2023
1000 points (93.6% liked)

Europe

8324 readers
3 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡Ί

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, πŸ‡©πŸ‡ͺ ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
1000
Well, this is something! (files.mastodon.social)
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by Masimatutu@lemm.ee to c/europe@feddit.de
 

Meanwhile in Germany:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Domkat@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Except that if you calculate the complete cost including building the plants it's stupendously expensive compared to renewables even including energy storage.

[–] Gabu@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Which is irrelevant, unless you're representing a profit-seeking corporation (if that were the case, fuck off, then).

[–] rchive@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I do like nuclear, but of course the costs matter regardless of profit seeking. If you have two options that are same benefit but one costs more, to go with that one is just wasteful.

[–] Gabu@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

They're not the same benefit. The cost of extracting the materials for building renewable infrastructure is also immense, and that infrastructure must be completely swapped out every couple decades.

[–] Domkat@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why is that irrelevant? These plants don't run forever and are very expensive. You wouldn't buy a car either that costs 15 million Euro, but in return just uses 1liter of diesel per 100km.

[–] Gabu@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

These plants don’t run forever

Compared to solar and wind, they may as well last forever. We're talking the difference between a century or more (nuclear) to complete exhaustion in just a couple decades (solar).

You wouldn’t buy a car either that costs[...]

I wouldn't buy a car, period.

[–] Domkat@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago

That is factually incorrect. The oldest reactors still in service are around 60years old and have to be maintained and repaired at high costs as safety relevant parts are heavily deteriorated.

With rising safety measures new plants get more expensive from year to year all the while renewables get cheaper and cheaper in production.

[–] Nobsi@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nuclear costs double per kilowatt than solar tho??
And Nuclear Plants are always built by for profit companies?

[–] Gabu@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Nobsi@feddit.de 0 points 1 year ago

I can. But I'm not gonna. I'm lazy.
Here's one of many(pdf inside)