I call Berlin, Germany and the Internet my home.

  • 1 Post
  • 10 Comments
Joined 3 months ago
cake
Cake day: August 17th, 2026

help-circle
  • lot of those expense are unnecessary self inflicted burocracy

    What do you mean?

    Hinkley Point C in the UK is way over budget and time at an estimated cost of £49B and an estimated build time of 13 years. It’s still not operational, so the final numbers may be a lot higher still.

    Flamanville 3 in France was also way over budget and time, at somewhere between €13B and €24B (latter includes financing costs) and a build time of 17 years. Yes, both were built during COVID, so ideally things would go a little smoother just due to a lack of a pandemic.

    But - those are 2 different countries, both taking ages and ridiculous amounts of money to build a single nuclear power plant. What exactly is self-inflicted in these 2 instances?


  • Germany is drowning in requests for large commercial batteries to be built and/or connected to the grid (source, e.g.: https://www.smard.de/page/home/topic-article/444/221208/entwicklung-bei-uenb-und-vnb). We are talking about a give or take 10% approval rate.

    I’d speculate the reasons are a mix of backward-thinking or when it comes to Katharina Reiche, possibly corrupt, politicians and a grid that isn’t prepared to handle this kind of load.

    Either way, these fluctuations in renewables are extremely lucrative to investors. Store power when the sun shines or the winds are strong, release it in the night hours and pocket the difference.

    So, what is actually in the way of renewables apart from a good and controllable grid and some conservative politicians? I don’t think there’s much.

    As for nuclear, even if you leave the risks of meltdown out of it, the upfront and running costs do not allow it to be competitive.

    And yes, French power is cheaper, but take a look at the taxes and fees added to power in Germany. The actual power generation makes up only 41.3% of its household price.


  • This is a controversial topic but nuclear is absolutely not the way forward.

    Compared to renewables, nuclear is expensive, will get even more expensive due to a very limited supply of pure uranium, has issues with safe long-term storage of radioactive byproducts and the potential to melt down comes with terrible consequences to the environment. Yes, it produces the same power day and night.

    But - we live in the 21st century. We have microchips, the Internet and plenty of ways to collect and store energy. No, it’s not as easy as a power plant that goes brrrrr 24/7, but building up a smart power grid is absolutely possible with our current tech.

    With rooftop and balcony solar, we have finally found a way for people to decentrally generate (or even store) their own or their neighbors’ energy.

    Yet, nuclear fission to heat up water to spin a turbine is still being flaunted as the future by some people. Makes no sense to me.