Slashdot Mirror
France's Oldest Nuclear Plant To Close This Year (phys.org)
mdsolar writes: France is to close down its oldest nuclear power plant, at the center of a row with neighboring Germany and Switzerland, by the end of this year, a green minister said Sunday. "The timeline is one the president has repeated to me several times, it's 2016," said Emmanuelle Cosse, who was named to President Francois Hollande's cabinet last month, referring to the Fessenheim plant. Cosse was speaking to French media after a row sparked Friday when Germany demanded that France close down Fessenheim following reports that a 2014 incident there was worse than earlier portrayed. France's Nuclear Safety Agency said that safety at the plant was "overall satisfactory" but that the government's energy policy "could lead to different choices" regarding the facility, which is near the German and Swiss borders. It said there was "no need" to shut the plant from a nuclear safety point of view. France has promised to cut reliance on nuclear energy from more than 75 percent to 50 percent by shutting 24 reactors by 2025, while stepping up reliance on renewable energy.
I hope they don't replace it with 50 km^2 of solar panels...
Germany and France arguing... what could possibly go wrong? It's not like there's any historical precedent or anything... where, you know, Germany was in the wrong in the past...
hey at least there is no veil, the agenda is right out there in the open for you to add grains of salt to at your own discretion. far preferable and infinitely more honorable than 1000 anonymous and on the payroll sock puppets spreading hatchet jobs.
posting a/c for the enjoyable sniff of irony
cease fire.. truth+mercy=justice.. all life matters
As long as they are not polluting, and it's not too close to the France/Germany border, how France powers their grid is France's business. I see no reason why Germany should have a say.
Better titles "France's power becomes less reliable, more expensive", " France now so ruled by the rest of Europe it can't even stand up to Switzerland", and "French president to lose next election, nuclear power plants to be brought back online".
whichever occurs first.
Chernobyl anyone? The Ukraine was too late for that one. What a BP-style mess that is.
just saying genocide is big business... so many of us unchosens so much time....
Emmanuelle Cosse wants Fessenheim to be closed. That's for sure.
But she is not in charge of Energy or Industrial department. She's just in charge of the Housing department
We'll be able to happily run on renewables in about 50 years, when the whole population of the Earth will be 1% of what it is today. Guess which 1%...
France electricity comes mainly from atomic plants with a very low share of "green power". In Germany, on the other hand, "green power" has greater share than nuclear and they are planning to phase out nuclear plants by the 2022. German power is much more expensive than French. Their power sector seems to be in pretty bad shape, since to transfer electricity from wind farms in the North to factories in the South they are using Polish power net. By forcing closure of French nuclear plants Germany is trying to make French power less attractive. That's how things are done in EU.
15 Anti-nuke FUD submissions this week alone.
Do you not have a job or something?
France's oldest nuclear plant is Brennilis. It ran from 1967 to 1985. It is still not fully decommissioned, this work being more complex and more expensive than foreseen...
And there is also Superphénix, running from 1986 to 1996 and far more complex to dismantle, because of plutonium and sodium.
After all, if the russian missiles were not polluting, tell the USA to fuck off.
Fessenheim is an old plant which had many accidents in recent years. For example they had to introduce large quantities of Bohr into the reactor cooling to inhibit chain reaction because they were unable to insert the regulator rods. Yes I know Bohr is also used during regular operation. However, in much lower quantities. They also neglected to report all details which would have been necessary for Germany to prepare in case of an accident. Fessenheim is directly at the border to Germany.
Solar produces during daytime when prices are higher than at night time, when it doesn't produce much, if any (solar thermal et al can still produce quite happily). France gives taxpayer money to EDF to subsidise the cost of production so they can afford to dump excess at night when it's not needed but you can't turn the nuke station off, and purchases at peak when there's not enough nuclear power from Germany.
You seem to be complaining that German Solar is the cause of peak prices for electricity, when it's peak electric prices that keeps nuclear even *vaguely* profitable, and is the result of a free market meeting the problems of a mismatch between production and demand.
wait til she blows then fix it;
that's what he said;
The guaranteed price is higher and there's a guaranteed inflation-plus increase in the unit price in the "deal" the UK government gave away.
France made a clear choice decades ago, has stuck with it, enjoys low costs as a result of standardization, and is not about to change. France has no oil and little coal, so the French Greens have never received that fountain of money from the fossil fuel lobby that their counterparts in so many other countries benefit from.
That "reduce nuclear power to 50%" campaign plank of Hollande's will be forgotten about as soon as Le Pen takes office.
I do hope that you get over your infatuation with someone who is clearly not for you and find a willing participant in your love life.
Fessenhiem is near Strasbourg and no where near Switerland. I think you find the Swiss want to close the nuclear plant at Bugey (see the story in french), and the luxembourgeois would surely like the plant at Cattenom to close.
Germany marched on Paris in WW I, you insensitive clod.
It's why they constructed the Maginot Line in the 1930's: "Never Again".
Renewables are much much less expensive than nuclear power. That is why France is ending plans to replace it's fleet and opting for a phase out. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/pa...
That was a perfect /. submission. An AI that could pass the Turning Test by being indistinguishable from a jingoistic blabber mouth.
No jackass, it's propaganda. You're either stupid enough to believe the propaganda at face value, or naive enough to believe those who are making a killing off government subsidies in "green" energy.
Turns out, 100% renewable energy is cheaper for France. https://100.org/100-goes-globa...
Turns out switching to 100% renewable energy is cheaper for France. https://100.org/100-goes-globa...
>France has promised to cut reliance on nuclear energy from more than 75 percent to 50 percent by shutting 24 reactors by 2025, while stepping up reliance on renewable energy.
By the standard definition of the word, nuclear power is renewable power. So France is in fact not stepping up reliance on renewable energy, but rather spending a ton of cash to shift from one form of it to another (a more dangerous version if you compare death tolls--nuclear power is the winner by far!)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_proposed_as_renewable_energy
http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html
Of course, mdsolar would disagree, but that's because he's slashdot's laughable idiot poster and we should all ignore him. You know you're doing bad when an AC beats you at logic, mdsolar.
Before we need to remix the solar core, we have another issue, the Sun will grow in luminosity until the water vapor feedback boils the oceans in about 2 billion years. So, a bit of shade or an orbit shift back into the habitable zone would be the first thing to work on. The Kuiper belt likely has enough angular momentum to achieve the orbit shift. But adjusting planetary resonances might make it a big job. We need to consider conservation of angular momentum in the sense of not wasting the resource in addition to the usual meaning.
That one is already being built and would have been dropped if it hadn't been politically impossible to do so. They won't build a new one.
Now you COULD have gone with the "Because their current build is massively over budget and delayed, not because nukes are dangerous", but you didn't, you preferred to pretend that perfect2 was wrong, when he wasn't.
That other station should have already been built, it is not a new build, it's an old one. Just one they still haven't completed.
But this refusal to think demonstrates the nuke fluffer's biggest problem (and reason for being a nuke fluffer rather than a proponent for nuclear power).
Seti story was cool too. Someone should resubmit it.
On top of all that, their neighbours are building a lot of renewable energy that really pushes prices down.
On top of all that, their neighbours are [lying about] building a lot of renewable energy [and really building cheap coal power plants] that really pushes prices down.
As the industry rots away, there just aren't positive stories around. Military propulsion advances and may soon solve another logistics problem extending nuclear power to aviation. http://science.slashdot.org/st... But the news on civilian power generation is all bad.
Guess the SOX ain't happening.
Note : France started dismantling their super-phenix reactor in 1997, almost 20 years ago, not a lot has been done yet . . .
Next nuclear plant to go boom will probably be in France.
see subject