Two thirds? Why do you pull such strange numbers out of your arse?
In the article you have linked it is clearly stated that Germany was a net exporter of electricity just a month ago before the temporary shutdown of German nuclear power plants. According to Wikipedia 26.1% of German electricity production is nuclear, so it is more like one fourth rather than two thirds. Since Germany was a net exporter, it will need to import significantly less than one third of its energy needs.
Except that reprocessing is currently more expensive than uranium mining and breeder reactors are very difficult to build and maintain. If operators would be forced to reprocess fuel and to actually pay for complete dismantling of old reactors, nuclear power would be suddenly way more expensive than solar power.
It is not as simple as you describe it. In the 1980ies Gorbachev more or less introduced alcohol prohibition to the USSR. And while it indeed lead to moonshine contaminated by poisons and alternative drug abuse, it actually lowered criminality somewhat, raised birth rates and boosted life expectancy to the highest value in the whole history of Russia before or after it.
Here in Germany the power companies basically had a choice: either they shut down all their reactors by a set date or they transfer operational time between reactors so newer and safer ones can run longer, and older could be shut down sooner.
What did the power companies do? They transfered the operational times from new reactors to old ones since they were cheaper to operate, already written off decades ago and thus generated pure profits of about one million euros every operating day.
Here in Germany a nuclear phase out was decided about 10 years ago. Nuclear reactors got some amount of remaining run-time, the amount IIRC depending on how old the reactor already was. The law had an option to transfer the run-time from one reactor to the other - policy makers probably have thought that it would be sensible to transfer time from older reactor to the newer ones so older and unsafer designs could be shut down earlier, and safer reactors could run longer.
Well, the government was very surprised when the operators preferred to transfer the run-time from newer reactors to older. They operators didn't care about safety, in fact they often tried to cover all the problems with old reactors. All they cared about is that older reactors were cheaper to operate and if their shutdown would come later, the decommission cost would hit the operators later.
Tell me, would you call an engineer with a Ph.D., who has worked as a head of department for nuclear power at numerous large companies like AEG, Siemens and General Dynamics, and who was responsible for building a fast breeder reactor among other things, ignorant about nuclear power?
WM2003 was quite powerful for its time, way better than anything Palm made, along with real multitasking and easy development in Visual Studio.NET WM2003SE was basically the same as WM2003 with nicer icons and VGA support, but felt not as stable as the previous Windows Mobile. WM5 was bad. Really bad. Only AKU3.5 was usable, but by then the WM6 beta was out and it was better. WM6.1 felt a bit dated, but still rocked in some aspects - the Microsoft Bluetooth stack in WM6.1 was way better than pretty much anything else. Even modern Android phones have it worse, not to speak of desktop Windows or iPhone. WM6.5 was superfluous and I don't care about Windows Phone.
The explanation is easy: I am not a that large consumer of electric energy (3000 kWh per year due to electric water heating and a fish tank, otherwise 1000 kWh would suffice), in my proximity there are also no large consumers of electric energy. Therefore it would be a waste to place a power plant in my proximity instead of the proximity of large consumers of electric energy - due to transmission losses. It would be most sensible to place power plants near large electric energy consumers, such as factories, aluminium smelters and so on.
Now pray tell why a facility to make electric energy should be placed near me - except because you want it to for the sake of the argument?
I'd prefer to ban bad drivers first. But you are right, one could take the path of lower risk, which I personally do by using a train when I go to work.
Oh, they said that nothing could ever happen to a western reactor, those are safe, and then something unexpected came up. Now you say that Germany is safe from tsunamis, but something else might happen, that is also unexpected. And then it will be a huge problem considering how densely populated Germany is.
You see, a catastrophe is always something that was not expected. Otherwise it wouldn't be one.
I hear this complaint for over a decade now, but for some reason the last time I had problems with ATI drivers was with Mach64 and OS/2 3.0 back in 1995. Now Creative drivers do suck.
Slashdot Mirror
Two thirds? Why do you pull such strange numbers out of your arse?
In the article you have linked it is clearly stated that Germany was a net exporter of electricity just a month ago before the temporary shutdown of German nuclear power plants. According to Wikipedia 26.1% of German electricity production is nuclear, so it is more like one fourth rather than two thirds. Since Germany was a net exporter, it will need to import significantly less than one third of its energy needs.
So are CLI programs.
Can you run an install programm on hunderds of computers or alter permission of a directory with that ImageMagick? Guess not.
8 years actually
Also Windows Mobile.
I think this is more among the lines of "Guantanamo was not as bad as a Soviet gulag".
Except that reprocessing is currently more expensive than uranium mining and breeder reactors are very difficult to build and maintain. If operators would be forced to reprocess fuel and to actually pay for complete dismantling of old reactors, nuclear power would be suddenly way more expensive than solar power.
It is not as simple as you describe it. In the 1980ies Gorbachev more or less introduced alcohol prohibition to the USSR. And while it indeed lead to moonshine contaminated by poisons and alternative drug abuse, it actually lowered criminality somewhat, raised birth rates and boosted life expectancy to the highest value in the whole history of Russia before or after it.
Insightful my fat arse.
Here in Germany the power companies basically had a choice: either they shut down all their reactors by a set date or they transfer operational time between reactors so newer and safer ones can run longer, and older could be shut down sooner.
What did the power companies do? They transfered the operational times from new reactors to old ones since they were cheaper to operate, already written off decades ago and thus generated pure profits of about one million euros every operating day.
PLA plastic is biodegradable and waterproof. Unfortunately, it is not heat resistant in its current form.
Only with these?
HTC Athena had something like that years ago.
I don't have GPS signal in my bedroom. DCF77 on the other hand, is reliable.
The reactor 4 in Chernobyl was also only a few years old.
Nothing to do with frightened people.
Here in Germany a nuclear phase out was decided about 10 years ago. Nuclear reactors got some amount of remaining run-time, the amount IIRC depending on how old the reactor already was. The law had an option to transfer the run-time from one reactor to the other - policy makers probably have thought that it would be sensible to transfer time from older reactor to the newer ones so older and unsafer designs could be shut down earlier, and safer reactors could run longer.
Well, the government was very surprised when the operators preferred to transfer the run-time from newer reactors to older. They operators didn't care about safety, in fact they often tried to cover all the problems with old reactors. All they cared about is that older reactors were cheaper to operate and if their shutdown would come later, the decommission cost would hit the operators later.
Tell me, would you call an engineer with a Ph.D., who has worked as a head of department for nuclear power at numerous large companies like AEG, Siemens and General Dynamics, and who was responsible for building a fast breeder reactor among other things, ignorant about nuclear power?
RBMK is also a reactor of boiling water type.
Yep. I actually liked WM2003 and WM6.1
WM2003 was quite powerful for its time, way better than anything Palm made, along with real multitasking and easy development in Visual Studio .NET
WM2003SE was basically the same as WM2003 with nicer icons and VGA support, but felt not as stable as the previous Windows Mobile.
WM5 was bad. Really bad. Only AKU3.5 was usable, but by then the WM6 beta was out and it was better.
WM6.1 felt a bit dated, but still rocked in some aspects - the Microsoft Bluetooth stack in WM6.1 was way better than pretty much anything else. Even modern Android phones have it worse, not to speak of desktop Windows or iPhone.
WM6.5 was superfluous and I don't care about Windows Phone.
The explanation is easy: I am not a that large consumer of electric energy (3000 kWh per year due to electric water heating and a fish tank, otherwise 1000 kWh would suffice), in my proximity there are also no large consumers of electric energy. Therefore it would be a waste to place a power plant in my proximity instead of the proximity of large consumers of electric energy - due to transmission losses. It would be most sensible to place power plants near large electric energy consumers, such as factories, aluminium smelters and so on.
Now pray tell why a facility to make electric energy should be placed near me - except because you want it to for the sake of the argument?
I'd prefer to ban bad drivers first. But you are right, one could take the path of lower risk, which I personally do by using a train when I go to work.
I would not want any power plant in my proximity, making your point moot.
Yep. And the other one suffered pebble breakages, control rod deformations and radioactive dust forming from the pebbles.
Only if there is no scrubber at the power plant. Modern coal power plants are quite clean.
<sarcasm>Yeah, that pebble bed reactor in Jülich worked just fine, as did the one in Hamm.</sarcasm>
Oh, they said that nothing could ever happen to a western reactor, those are safe, and then something unexpected came up.
Now you say that Germany is safe from tsunamis, but something else might happen, that is also unexpected. And then it will be a huge problem considering how densely populated Germany is.
You see, a catastrophe is always something that was not expected. Otherwise it wouldn't be one.
I hear this complaint for over a decade now, but for some reason the last time I had problems with ATI drivers was with Mach64 and OS/2 3.0 back in 1995.
Now Creative drivers do suck.
I've bought a passive 5770 mentioned by GP two months ago, no problems whatsoever. Best video card I ever had.
Thanks for the correction.