@Sunshine The EU commission is on mastodon though, over at @EUCommission :GigaChad:

@liiwi

@elena@fedia.io @_elena @elena@lemmy.world I have most experience with Lemmy which does what I need it to and what I expect from it, which is: being able to post long format texts with the occasional pictures. I maintain the community over at https://feddit.nl/c/nuclear

@Draedron
Really? Tell us more. I never ever heard these arguments before. I also never ever refuted them a thousand times already. Please, tell us, as we never heard these very original takes!
@Emil

"India plans to ramp up nuclear capacity from 7.48GW to 22.4GW by 2031."

That's awesome.

This could be huge! Uranium from seawater could power humanity with the current technology for millennia and hundreds of millions of years (essentially forever) using breeder reactors. It would be great if we could use this on a commercial level.

@Diplomjodler @Emil Sure, let's check the white elephant in the room, systems cost:

Bank of America research: "Industry research suggests that, after accounting for efficiency, storage needs, the cost of transmission, and other broad system costs, nuclear power plants are one of the least expensive sources of energy."

👉 https://advisoranalyst.com/...

(The graphs on page 12 are quite damning for solar and wind).

@Krusty @Emil Is it not a problem with war areas in general?

@KevonLooney Ok, let's assume you're not trolling and you genuinely don't know that the tertiary cooling piping has zero contact with the reactor.

The primary cooling network goes through the reactor. The secondary network powers the turbine and already has no contact with the fuel rods in the reactor. The tertiary network is then used for the district heating.

So, there is no "nuclear steam" involved.

So, let's reverse our places and hope you weren't acting you didn't understand this.

@Emil

@Emil “A common European market for nuclear power plants would enable the benefits of serial production, and this requires a technology-neutral climate and energy policy from the EU, as well as cooperation between nuclear safety authorities in harmonising requirements.”

This is what I'm talking about! A European cooperation like this would be great idea!

@Emil This is a pretty big change from the EU. If anything, it's still way too timid (we need hundreds of new big units in Europe, not merely 30), but this is already a watershed moment compared to just a few years ago when nuclear was the black sheep in Brussels.

They're finally starting to get it!

@Emil Of course, the work only just begins. Decades of dependence on Russian nuclear fuel has decimated Western industry on this. The ban makes room for Western nuclear fuel companies to exist, especially American ones. It'll take around a decade to build up this industrial infrastructure.

@Emil The EU is killing it lately with massive legislative steps forward ⚛️

@Emil Anti-nuclear activists must be really in a bind explaining this one away.

"But isn't there smore sun in Bangladesh? But isn't solar cheaper? But but ..."

Nuclear provides dispatchable energy in a densely populated country. This is a smart choice.

@Emil Another pair extended to 80 years! 👏

@Emil This is a major development. So far it was Russia that dominated the HALEU market, that many new SMR designs are counting on. Now the West can cut this tie with Russia as well.

@Emil "Kortom: laat alles wat links is: Amnesty International, Extinction Rebellion, Greenpeace, de NPO, alle milieu-organisaties, alle linkse politieke partijen, SP, PvdA/GL, PvdD, de krachten bundelen voor die ene grote strijd. Laat links strijden tegen de neoliberalen van NRC, en de grootkapitalisten van Shell, en strijden vóór de aanleg van kerncentrales."

Dit is mijn missie. Mooi stukje.

@Emil LCOE, de 'levelised cost of energy' is altijd een vertekend beeld geweest, maar wel het primaire argument dat zon en wind zo goedkoop zijn. Immers gaat het enkel over de kosten van de wind- en zonneparken zelf en is infrastructuur en achtervang niet meegenomen. Uiteindelijk worden die kosten natuurlijk wel betaald, door consumenten, wij dus. Dus "al is de LCOE leugen nog zo snel, de waarheid achterhaald haar wel".

Desalniettemin deel ik toch even dit overzicht (zichtbaar op mastodon).

€90 miljard. Dat zijn 11 EPR's, misschien wel meer, die gezamelijk 275 TWh aan elektriciteit en lage temperatuur warmte kunnen leveren. Oftewel 50% van de elektriciteit en 40% van de totale energiebehoefte tegen 2050.

En dit gaat alleen over de infrastructuur van wind-op-zee he? Wat een klucht.

@Emil If we want, we could actually develop a domestic uranium mining industry in Europe. There are several places where this can be done.

Source of map: https://remon.jrc.ec.europa.eu/...

"Toen deze, huidige centrale in 1969 gekocht is, is tegen leverancier KWU gezegd: bouw wat je hebt. Het was een turn-key opdracht.” De bouw van de kerncentrale Borssele duurde maar vier jaar."

Dit is hoe je het goed doet. Geen experimenten, gewoon bouwen wat is uitgekristalliseerd en waar ervaring mee is.