Germany: Nuclear power plants to close by 2022

Dogbert

Helsinki Smash Rod
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
6,458
Location
N38? 43', W90? 22'
Car(s)
Roger Dean's Rocks
there is a video floating around of a plane flying into nuclear reactor grade reinforced concrete and completely atomising
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMyPC5wVvbs[/youtube]
 

hajj

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2005
Messages
2,952
Location
Hamburg
Don't worry Germany, France will happily sell you power.

We may see those virtual power plants after all. :p I think this is a pretty stupid decision, and I hope that the companies affected will try their luck in court, those court costs are tax deductible anyway.
 

Doctor Blade

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
600
Location
SE US of A!
Car(s)
92 Nissan Sentra XE (of Doom!)
and here I thought America had the corner on stupid politicians. Thank god for Germany.
 

WillDAQ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
2,725
Location
Ukania
Sadly I think ours are likely to be similarly stupid. :(

http://www.hse.gov.uk/nuclear/fukushima/interim-report.htm

The UK has no BWRs. With the exception of Sizewell B (a PWR) they all use gas-cooled technology, The UK's gas-cooled reactors have lower power densities and larger thermal capacities than water-cooled reactors, which with natural cooling capabilities give longer timescales for remedial action. Additionally, they have a lesser need for venting on loss of cooling and do not produce concentrations of hydrogen from fuel cladding overheating."


Under fault conditions, significant quantities of hydrogen are not generated, as water is not the coolant. The direct causes of the nuclear accident, a magnitude 9 earthquake and 14m-high tusanami, are far beyond the most extreme natural events that the UK would be expected to experience

Even the Health and Safety Executive think any sudden change would be bullshit.
 
Last edited:

Hidden_Hunter

Needs more IceBone
Joined
Oct 7, 2006
Messages
8,614
Location
Melbourne, Australia
Car(s)
'13 BMW 125i, '26 Buick Standard Six

Cobol74

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
17,507
Location
The banana republic of Ukania
Car(s)
Honda Accord 2.2 i-Dtec Sport Estate.Hyundai Ix20
It seems that I am in a minority on this.

I agree with Germanies' decision in that Nuclear power should be closed and all further investment should be redirected to better solutions.

For Cost reasons (I know we have disagrrements over this but I think governments hide the true costs, when Ukania did their privatisation it was found that the total de-commissioning costs of the nuclear power plants we higher that the total value of the remaining assets, so no one would buy it - Mrs Thatcher sacked Lord Marshall on this very point). In the end they extracted the Nuclear Plants from the privatisation.

As for safety concerns, the safety is very good and getting better the trouble is that there is a (OK very slim) possibility of a catastrophic accident. I am sure if you asked the Soviets of the time of Cherynobil about the safety of their power plants they would have said what the present safety experts say about Nuclear safety that they are all are perfectly safe. Well that was wrong.
 

GRtak

Forum Addict
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Messages
21,924
Location
Michigan USA
While I am not a big proponet for nuclear energy as we currently have it, this is a bit knee jerk and may also have negative consequences. Are they suddendly going to have a few hundred wind turbines pop up overnight for each plant they shut down? Me thinks not.
 

Cobol74

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
17,507
Location
The banana republic of Ukania
Car(s)
Honda Accord 2.2 i-Dtec Sport Estate.Hyundai Ix20
Yes bigger problem for Germany, Ukania is surrounded by the oceans, with loads for wind, more wind than we know what what to do with.

We could open the mines again and get the coal out then burn it and use carbon capture - expensive but doable.
 
Last edited:

MWF

Now needs wood
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
28,309
Location
MWF HQ, Ukadia
Car(s)
MX-5 1.8i Indiana SE, update pending
Interesting that you should mention Maggie Thatch.

Cast your mind back to her early days in power when OPEC had us over a barrel (literally) and Scargill and the miners' unions had her by the short and curlies.
She knew we couldn't rely on oil and coal for our power, but at the same time the Green hippies we getting quite vocal and in hand with CND (remember them?) didn't want the atomic option.

Until that is she found a little known theoretical study by a Scandinavian scientist who had suggested that in the event of the next ice age which would have serious consequences for that part of the world it might be possible to stave off the ice age by pumping billions of toms of CO2 into the atmosphere to create a greenhouse effect. This was then hijacked to become an argument against fossil fuels to push nuclear power agendas by handing the Greens something they could be scared of and divert their attention towards.

This ultimately led to the IPCC and all this global warming/climate change rhetoric aka bullshit and the additional taxation we petrolheads are now having to suffer if we want to have any fun on the roads.

Yes bigger problem for Germany, Ukania is surrounded by the oceans, with loads for wind, more wind than we know what what to do with.

Or B.......

"Renewables" are unreliable because weather is unreliable. Now that might be because of man-made climate change, or natural climate change, but it is a fact. We've had the driest spring on record and we haven't got any wind here either - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/en...ind-farms-Britain-is-running-out-of-wind.html - so what are we to do? Even if you aren't a peak oil believer we need to do something and sooner rather than later.

Sorry, Germany, but you have got it very wrong here.

Also some very interesting reading and comment here.
 
Last edited:

Interrobang

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 5, 2007
Messages
8,150
Knee jerk reaction much?
Nuclear power plants closing (till 2021) was Law since 2002. Law changed 2010 for longer running times. Law (will be) changed again now, basically back to limit running times to 2022.

I think "knee jerk reaction" is pushing it a bit. The german public has been pushing for an exit from nuclear power for decades.
For a small anecdote from germany and nuclear power -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNR-300
 
Last edited:

Cobol74

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
17,507
Location
The banana republic of Ukania
Car(s)
Honda Accord 2.2 i-Dtec Sport Estate.Hyundai Ix20
CND were against Nuclear Weapons not Nuclear Power stations per se - I was friends with the son of a n original member (His dad was a communist - a proper one, fought in Spain and everything).

CO2 is but one contributory factor to Global Warming and not even the most important factor IMHO so why build CO2 saving Nuclear Power stations?

So the conclusion is to keep Gas Plants going, not build Nuclear, the true costs of which have always been hidden (in Ukania) and de-commission costs "glossed over". The real purpose of building the original Magnox stations was to get Plutonium for Bombs so they would pay anything to get it.

Renewables, OK not my favourite approach really until more money has been spent, but I am sorry - tide comes in - tide goes out roughly twice a day every day - that is not unreliable. Couple it with water pumped storage to smoothout supply and demand. Wind blows 300+ days a year on the coast, if we use wave power same for the waves about 300 days of useful power available.

There is something very dodgy going on remember the nodding donkeys that were really looking like a good way to generat electricity in the 1970s? Just when it looked like it was getting somewhere the Government binned investment - very suspicious.

EDIT/ Just checked CND web site - they are now against Nuclear Power too, and loads of other things, do not seem to be for anything much.
 
Last edited:

MWF

Now needs wood
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
28,309
Location
MWF HQ, Ukadia
Car(s)
MX-5 1.8i Indiana SE, update pending
Wave power has been mooted since the 70s. I remember seeing Michael Rodd do stuff about it on Tomorrow's World. And it still doesn't work.

And even if it did you'd have to keep replacing bits because it would be in a highly corrosive, salt water environment. Maintenance costs would be huge.
 

otispunkmeyer

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
4,829
Location
Loughborough UK
Car(s)
'03 Skoda Superb (farewell :(), '06 Honda Civic ES
Arent germany building a ton of coal fired power plants? Way to go greens!
 

otispunkmeyer

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 15, 2006
Messages
4,829
Location
Loughborough UK
Car(s)
'03 Skoda Superb (farewell :(), '06 Honda Civic ES
More people have died from burning Peat than have died from Nuclear and they are designed to take a hit from a large plane, there is a video floating around of a plane flying into nuclear reactor grade reinforced concrete and completely atomising. Regardless of what people who like to scaremonger say, nuclear is safer than all other large scale forms of energy production at the moment, the facts are out there for all to see.

Waste production is a problem, but the next generation of nuclear plants in development either use existing waste as fuel (Travelling Wave Reactor) or produce waste than can be disposed of in 20 years instead of 2000 years (Thorium Reactors). The reactors that are creating the waste problems of today are 1950s technology.

Someone correct me if I am wrong on this:

Isnt some of the waste problem also to do with laws about re-processing spent fuel rods? I know the rods arent completely spent and that they can be refined and reused but because this is also what you do if you want to make some weapons grade plutonium or such like, someones decided that actually you're gonna have to bury it in the ground and let it decay instead just incase some nut job dictator gets his mits on it.

I watched a wicked program the otherday about the spent fuel store built in Forsmark deep underground (at least I think it was a real program and not a what-if-docu-drama thing)

Interesting that you should mention Maggie Thatch.

Cast your mind back to her early days in power when OPEC had us over a barrel (literally) and Scargill and the miners' unions had her by the short and curlies.
She knew we couldn't rely on oil and coal for our power, but at the same time the Green hippies we getting quite vocal and in hand with CND (remember them?) didn't want the atomic option.

Until that is she found a little known theoretical study by a Scandinavian scientist who had suggested that in the event of the next ice age which would have serious consequences for that part of the world it might be possible to stave off the ice age by pumping billions of toms of CO2 into the atmosphere to create a greenhouse effect. This was then hijacked to become an argument against fossil fuels to push nuclear power agendas by handing the Greens something they could be scared of and divert their attention towards.

This ultimately led to the IPCC and all this global warming/climate change rhetoric aka bullshit and the additional taxation we petrolheads are now having to suffer if we want to have any fun on the roads.



Or B.......

"Renewables" are unreliable because weather is unreliable. Now that might be because of man-made climate change, or natural climate change, but it is a fact. We've had the driest spring on record and we haven't got any wind here either - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/en...ind-farms-Britain-is-running-out-of-wind.html - so what are we to do? Even if you aren't a peak oil believer we need to do something and sooner rather than later.

Sorry, Germany, but you have got it very wrong here.

Also some very interesting reading and comment here.


Agreed.

Im not a fan of wind turbines, especially not as a replacement. Supplement.... Well OK, but the wind just isnt reliable enough to be dependant on them. And its not just a case of having no wind, having too much wind is also bad because the damn things can only spin so fast and only take so much much stress. maintanence is another issue... a steam turbine + generator can litterally go for years and years before needing much attention.

The main problem I think, is power density. I mean 1 windturbine might give you what 5MW on a good day for a couple of hours? A typical Nuclear plant, with 2 reactors, 2 turbine trains and 2 generators can give you 2GW.... and if you have money to burn you can get Alstom to build you 2 of the worlds largest turbines giving you 1.8GW per machine. Two of those on one site and you are making 3.6GW and you can run at that level 24/7/365. You need over 700 wind turbines to do that. How much space is that gonna take?

Steam turbines are old tech.... 100 years or something like that, but they are exceptional pieces of kit, extremely efficient and extremely reliable. I cant see how we can do with out them for the near and mid-future. We just need something else to generate our steam instead of burning coal/oil/gas. Nuclear doesnt pollute, but of course what does one do with the waste? and there is the chance of a really horrible accident that you just dont get with a conventional power plant.
 
Last edited:

Cobol74

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
17,507
Location
The banana republic of Ukania
Car(s)
Honda Accord 2.2 i-Dtec Sport Estate.Hyundai Ix20
Wave power has been mooted since the 70s. I remember seeing Michael Rodd do stuff about it on Tomorrow's World. And it still doesn't work.

And even if it did you'd have to keep replacing bits because it would be in a highly corrosive, salt water environment. Maintenance costs would be huge.
1. My point about pulling the funding exactly - that is why it does not work - no investment, they'd rather spend it on Nuclear. See how late the Finnish Power Station is - wonder what the costs are now vs estimate?
2. I would suggest that ths a 'simple' materials/engineering issue

The big question really are the lies told about the costs.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm198990/cmhansrd/1989-12-18/Orals-1.html

"Does the Minister agree that because of his record of advice on nuclear power and the dishonest costing of nuclear electricity, Lord Marshall's decisions and advice have cost us billions of pounds?"

So we are going to be getting more of the same.
 

MWF

Now needs wood
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
28,309
Location
MWF HQ, Ukadia
Car(s)
MX-5 1.8i Indiana SE, update pending

D-Fence

Mrs. IceBone
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,720
Location
Minga oida!
Car(s)
Bus, Train, Bicycle, A 3 Pot Polo.
Well, I for one welcome the move by our chancellor. Why? Hell no not because I want nuclear energy gone, but because it completely fucks the Green Party over, who now have two choices: Agree, and lose the hardcore enviromentalists or be against it and be labelled the "permanent naysayers". If this is what it takes to stop the Green fuckers from gaining power, so be it. They must not be allowed into a position of power, because if they are in power we lose the Autobahn forever. So right now, SPD, CDU, FDP (lol) are pulling on one string and the Greens are about to get isolated, which I welcome.

Oh, btw, Eon is already preparing to go to court, I guess RWE will follow. And don't think for ONE second this is an enviromental gain, we are using our coal/gasplants on maximum overdrive right now and will have to build new ones, CO? my ass. It is just a pure populist move to countersteer the Green parties gain in followers. How much the increased electricity prices will fuck our industry over has yet to be seen.....

Some articles you might want to read and google translate:

http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0,1518,765694,00.html
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/...e-zu-verhandlungen-mit-schwarz-gelb-1.1103701
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0,1518,765576,00.html
 

Cobol74

Forum Addict
Joined
Mar 21, 2006
Messages
17,507
Location
The banana republic of Ukania
Car(s)
Honda Accord 2.2 i-Dtec Sport Estate.Hyundai Ix20
Oh, btw, Eon is already preparing to go to court, I guess RWE will follow. And don't think for ONE second this is an enviromental gain, we are using our coal/gasplants on maximum overdrive right now and will have to build new ones, CO? my ass. It is just a pure populist move to countersteer the Green parties gain in followers. How much the increased electricity prices will fuck our industry over has yet to be seen.....
Well you Privatise and you then make a decision that bins the companies' profits of course they'll sue.

EDIT/ Found this - Ukania:

"In 2005 the cost of decommissioning these sites was planned at ?55.8 billion, with Sellafield requiring ?31.5 billion. However in 2006 the NDA reported that the cost of cleaning up existing waste was higher than previously thought, and gave a new estimated decommissioning cost of about ?72 billion over a 100 year period.[2] In 2008 estimated decommissioning costs increased to ?73.6 billion, or after taking account of discount rates ?44.1 billion.[3] A 2006 estimate foresaw ?14bn of offsetting income from reprocessing fuel at Sellafield.[2] In 2009 the NDA sold land near three existing reactor sites for expected new nuclear power stations, for over ?200m.[4]"
 
Last edited:

WillDAQ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
2,725
Location
Ukania
You can't use Sellafield as a typical example of decommissioning costs. There are all sorts of relics from the early days of nuclear power including a vertical shaft full of unknown assorted nuclear waste. The fact that the site is in such a mess is criminal, but I wouldn't use it as a representative cost of decommissioning nuclear reactors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MWF
Top