this post was submitted on 12 Jul 2025
21 points (64.4% liked)

Green Energy

3046 readers
77 users here now

Everything about energy production and storage.

Related communities:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I mean im guessing its because it may not be as profitable, or atleast at first, boycotts or directly just capitalism fucking everything up? i legit always imagine aliens seeing us still use coal while having DISCOVERED IN 1932

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago (8 children)

It is also massively uneconomical. Even with existing subsidies, like free insurance and long term storage, plant operators don't want to keep going.

Modern day nuclear advocates are like the Japanese soldiers in the 70s refusing to admit the war was lost decades ago.

[–] astropenguin5@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (7 children)

Tbh I'd still rather have something economically unviable funded by my taxes than pumping CO2 into the air. And it's not really that much of an either or thing with renewables, both can/should be done but the important thing is to stop subsidizing fossil fuels (which are to this day highly subsidised which makes the comparison even worse)

[–] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 day ago (6 children)

With the same amount of money you can build so much more renewable generation and storage than nuclear.

[–] iii@mander.xyz 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

The worlds production of storage isn't even sufficient to power germany for a week. Hence why germany is heavily dependent on gas. Mostly US liquified natural gas, and russian pipeline gas.

To me, it's a surprising statement that, for the same amount of money, one can buy something that doesn't exist. 🤔

[–] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I am not arguing that nuclear should have been phased when it was, as that resulted in more coal and gas, but that clinging to it now is a mistake.
Building a new nuclear power plant in Germany would take a decade if things went well. Until then grid battery storage can mature and demand adjustment projects can be rolled out. It's probably also easier to convince germans to accept pumped hydro where they live over nuclear.

[–] iii@mander.xyz 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Sadly, others have argued so and still are. Here in Belgium the Green party is still trying to close existing, running nuclear power generation. In favour of building new subsidised "emergency" gas generation 🙄

Until then grid battery storage can mature and demand adjustment projects can be rolled out.

In my experience, people tend to severily under estimate the size of the storage problem. To power germany for a week it takes about 7TWh. There's around 0.1TWh of storage installed in the whole of Europe.

[–] anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Why would we need to store energy for more than an day? We only need to smooth out the difference between supply and demand.
The mayor advantage of the European grid is the disconnectedness over long distances. There are always enough places where the sun shines or the wind blows.

[–] iii@mander.xyz 1 points 15 hours ago

The mayor advantage of the European grid is the disconnectedness over long distances

I'd say the disconnectedness cross-border is a disadvantage as the grid already is saturated (1). It can be windy in poland, the generated power can't make it to france.

7 days is an understatement if going solar + wind + storage is the plan. Germany has longer periods of no sun and no wind on record.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)