Yes, and? That is a rather minour inconvenience in relation e.g. of lumbering a few woods, that you do all the time, and putting farms there. Hint: a lake is a habitate, too. There is nothing lost, bottom line you could argue it it is a net gain.
I simply don't understand your perspective. That is all. The summary clearly stated that Germany (and Swizerland) only power down a few plants and don't completely shut off any. And you claim the summary is wrong: because you don't see the 5% load dip... so again: what is your point you want to make?
cases where there is a significant impact from nuclear plants are rare and affect a small area for a short duration. Exactly, because we shut the plants down.
Its quite easy to manage as well. Its not a serious problem. Fully true, because we shut the plants down.
If we saw similar high temperatures in nuclear, which fourth generation designs can reach, then we'd see nuclear still operating in the heat. And where would those miraculous nukes put their waste water?
I stand corrected. Well, last year Germany produced 38% of its power from renewables. I guestimated that that means 30% from wind and 8% from other sources. As nuclear is a little bit above 10% that would be a factor of 3. No idea why the graph is showing a different number, perhaps it shows the total produced power from which 30% - 50% got exported and that distortes the graph. Hm, makes no sense either... as the nukes are basically running at full capacity and their "baseline" stays constant. Another "internet mystery":D
France has over 60 GW of electrical generation capacity from nuclear, which produces over 80% of its electricity. France produces about 65%of its power with nukes. No idea why you always post things where you have no clue about. The maximum was 75% and that that was 20 years ago...
The biggest problem is that the average person born after 1950 is simply put: super dumb. The only "extreme" we have at the moment is that the "heat wave" covers all Europe. But the temperatures in themselves are no really that extreme (exceptions: some points in Greece, Spain and Portugal). The easy way to handle heat like that is old school: a foot bath with cold water. Or if you really are that touched by a little bit of heat, a cold water (ice?) filled towel on your forehead, or putting your arms into cold water. Can't be so hard. But as I said above: people are to dumb in our times, you have to spoon feed them simple "tricks" like this. 100 years ago that was common sense!
Main exports: machinery and instruments, meat and meat products, dairy products, fish, pharmaceuticals, fashion apparel, furniture, windmills, Christmas trees, potted plants, mink and fox skin, salt, various specialty niche products
You miss the point. Germany has stupidly shut down nuclear plants, but nuclear is still available when needed, unlike wind. I think you miss the point. German population fought to get rid of nuclear power since 50 years. When the red/green government under Schroeder finally planned the exit, we all were happy. Then came Merkel and canceled the exit. Then came Fukushima and Merkel reintroduced the exit.
There is nothing stupid in that.
Why you pick cherry picked graphs to prove a point which you don't have, is beyond me. Over the course of a year nuclear produces about 10% of our power, wind about 30% and renewables in total over 40%.
For the heat wave weeks, nuclear generated more than wind. Yes, because Germany is one of the few European countries that does not need to shut down nuclear power plants at the moment... due to relatively high water in the rivers.
Look at France on the other hand, 65% of all power comes from nukes... they will probably shut down 20% - 30% of them during August... and buy coal power on the European market. So much for your beloved nuclear power.
It is not the "schools money" they lost in the case, but "tax payers money", aka "some one else's money"... and the people involve are to stupid that they are the "tax payers".
Yeah, but is amazing that people go to courts for a no brainer.
Windmills arent made from concrete, but steel and carbonfibres. Ofsetting their CO2 footprint takes 2 or 3 years. You could have googled that yourself...
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, and?
That is a rather minour inconvenience in relation e.g. of lumbering a few woods, that you do all the time, and putting farms there.
Hint: a lake is a habitate, too. There is nothing lost, bottom line you could argue it it is a net gain.
I simply don't understand your perspective. That is all. ... so again: what is your point you want to make?
The summary clearly stated that Germany (and Swizerland) only power down a few plants and don't completely shut off any.
And you claim the summary is wrong: because you don't see the 5% load dip
cases where there is a significant impact from nuclear plants are rare and affect a small area for a short duration.
Exactly, because we shut the plants down.
Its quite easy to manage as well. Its not a serious problem.
Fully true, because we shut the plants down.
I still don't get what your ranting point is ....
The main problem is not the temperature per se but the oxygen level.
Higher water temperature mens lower oxygen, the fishes simply suffocate.
In some parts of Germany we are picking out fishes by the tons each day. Around Cologne, e.g.
But do you know how much habitat Hydro power has displaced by comparison?
Zero?
Because the hydroplants are still full with fish?
Why do you compare apples with stones is beyond me.
No idea why you cite a fake news site, when you can get the correct numbers by using google: https://energy-charts.de/power...
If we saw similar high temperatures in nuclear, which fourth generation designs can reach, then we'd see nuclear still operating in the heat.
And where would those miraculous nukes put their waste water?
Solar PV output drops with heat.
And why is that relevant when we now have 18h sun every day since 10 weeks?
I stand corrected. ... as the nukes are basically running at full capacity and their "baseline" stays constant. Another "internet mystery" :D
Well, last year Germany produced 38% of its power from renewables.
I guestimated that that means 30% from wind and 8% from other sources.
As nuclear is a little bit above 10% that would be a factor of 3.
No idea why the graph is showing a different number, perhaps it shows the total produced power from which 30% - 50% got exported and that distortes the graph. Hm, makes no sense either
France has over 60 GW of electrical generation capacity from nuclear, which produces over 80% of its electricity. ...
France produces about 65%of its power with nukes. No idea why you always post things where you have no clue about.
The maximum was 75% and that that was 20 years ago
The biggest problem is that the average person born after 1950 is simply put: super dumb.
The only "extreme" we have at the moment is that the "heat wave" covers all Europe. But the temperatures in themselves are no really that extreme (exceptions: some points in Greece, Spain and Portugal).
The easy way to handle heat like that is old school: a foot bath with cold water. Or if you really are that touched by a little bit of heat, a cold water (ice?) filled towel on your forehead, or putting your arms into cold water.
Can't be so hard. But as I said above: people are to dumb in our times, you have to spoon feed them simple "tricks" like this. 100 years ago that was common sense!
That is why we are replacing them with renewables since decades, Mr. Obvious.
They produce wind mills :D
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Main exports:
machinery and instruments,
meat and meat products,
dairy products,
fish,
pharmaceuticals,
fashion apparel,
furniture,
windmills,
Christmas trees,
potted plants,
mink and fox skin,
salt,
various specialty niche products
Christmas Trees sounds nice :D
Your fridge is a heat pump. ... an engineer would know that.
A power plant using a steam turbine is not
You provided links for the steady output of nukes in Germany.
Not for Europe
Why that concerns you, is beyond me.
You miss the point. Germany has stupidly shut down nuclear plants, but nuclear is still available when needed, unlike wind.
I think you miss the point. German population fought to get rid of nuclear power since 50 years. When the red/green government under Schroeder finally planned the exit, we all were happy.
Then came Merkel and canceled the exit.
Then came Fukushima and Merkel reintroduced the exit.
There is nothing stupid in that.
Why you pick cherry picked graphs to prove a point which you don't have, is beyond me.
Over the course of a year nuclear produces about 10% of our power, wind about 30% and renewables in total over 40%.
For the heat wave weeks, nuclear generated more than wind. ... due to relatively high water in the rivers.
Yes, because Germany is one of the few European countries that does not need to shut down nuclear power plants at the moment
Look at France on the other hand, 65% of all power comes from nukes ... they will probably shut down 20% - 30% of them during August ... and buy coal power on the European market. So much for your beloved nuclear power.
Not in Europe ... moron.
Fair use is fair use.
Copying something that someone posted on the internet: is not fair use. Why would it?
It is not the "schools money" they lost in the case, but "tax payers money", aka "some one else's money" ... and the people involve are to stupid that they are the "tax payers".
Yeah, but is amazing that people go to courts for a no brainer.
You have a strange idea of "efficiency".
Nuclear reactors don't have a heat pump, what would be the purpose?
I would love to know the power consumption of a nuclear facility's coolant pumps.
In relation to the power a plant produces: zero.
Germany produces 3 times more power from wind than from nuclear. ...
Moron
Which is pretty clearly visible on your cherry picked graph.
And I read it is 30 - 50 billions ...
Europenhas doubled its import of coal frommthe US.
Actuslly, I don't belive that.
Anyway: it only means we import now from somewhere else ... idiot!
Windmills arent made from concrete, but steel and carbonfibres. ...
Ofsetting their CO2 footprint takes 2 or 3 years.
You could have googled that yourself
Only too cheap to meter.
Power will never be to cheap to meter, half the costs are grid costs, they don't go away.