Europe has survived 3 energy shocks in 4 years. The only way out is to stop buying power from its enemies | Fortune
fortune.com
Oil above $100. Gas prices up 70%. Every crisis has a different trigger—and the same vulnerability. Europe must become the world's first Electro-Continent.
  • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    2·
    2 days ago

    Well what will you use for power generation before we have enough renewable energy? You say it yourself: “can” be reliant. Yes but we are not, so what’s the way forward? Nuclear til we have enough renewables, or you know, my question : shall we burn coal up til then?

    And nuclear energy is less expensive than coal, oil and gas IMO.

    • WoodScientist@lemmy.worldEnglish
      31·
      2 days ago

      What are you on about? We don’t have the nuclear we’re talking about. This is about future plant construction. And new renewable capacity can be deployed in a fraction of the time that nuclear can.

      • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        1·
        2 days ago

        France have upped their production massively, you don’t always need to build a whole new nuclear central to augment production.

        • wewbull@feddit.ukEnglish
          1·
          1 day ago

          France went all in on nuclear in the 80s and 90s. They’re upping their production now to replace their aging stations that are needing to be decommissioned. Their power generation has been 90+% nuclear for a looong time. That was a good time to do it. Renewables weren’t practical like today.

          You seem to think that renewables only help when we have enough for 100%, but that’s not true. Take the UK for example. It currently has about 32GW of installed capacity. Of course the wind doesn’t always blow, but over the last year it generated about 10.5GW on average. That’s all fossil fuels not being burnt. CO2 not being emitted. Today.

          For comparison: That’s 6-10 nuclear reactors worth. Modern ones. And it’s mainly happened in the time period that the UK has been building one 3.2GW nuclear site (2 reactors) that had an opening date of 2025. If they’d not invested in wind, and just gone nuclear, starting 10 or so reactors around the country, we’d have been burning fossil fuels at full rate for the last 15 years and only now be able to switch off coal and a bunch of gas. Going from 6-700g of CO2 per kWh to todays 125g.

          This image wouldn’t be a transition, it would be a sharp step to the left at the end. (From here)

          Unfortunately that nuclear site is delayed 5 years to 2030. So we’d still be burning fossil fuels. No reduction. By that time it’s planned that 50GW of wind will be installed, so about 15-16 GW on average. Another 4-5 reactors worth, but that doesn’t stop the reductions we have today.

          • Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
            1·
            21 hours ago

            You forget that France is also exporting power to countries who have not yet got onto the renewables bandwagon, all your data is worthless without that in mind.

            And thank you for not putting words in my mouth again. Ask if I think this or that instead of just going with some gut feeling about what you think I do in fact think. I usually answer!