°Kerma
banner
kermamaker.bsky.social
°Kerma
@kermamaker.bsky.social
260 followers 180 following 4.8K posts
🇪🇺🇩🇪 Neugierde war sein Schicksal. Feeding your cognitive dissonance free of charge. It will get worse.
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Pinned
There are two types of people.
One thinks that the world owes him something,
the other thinks the other way around.

Only one of these concepts is sustainable.
China is also building coal plants.
Is that a coal revival? No, clearly not, just like its not a nuclear revival.
China does invest much more into green tech.
desperate measures, just like in belgium, france etc.
They're all buying time to ramp up green tech.
For those who are curious: The failures and corruption can be read in the wikipedia article.
Solar is good with storage and guess what, the combination is cheaper then nuclear.
And it requires less grid. And no waste disposal. And no fuel conditioning. No global fuel supply (russia is waiting for you).
What a game changer.
not.
The list is on wikipedia (pr-bullshit-free-version). It is almost only 🇨🇳.
There are just no real projects because nuclear is now more expensive then renewables with storage - and slower to build + requiring more expensive grids + not sustainable.
Wait until all the old crap npp get decomissioned.
Yeah, using russian nuclear fuel. Under a russian government. With russian lifestyle.
Have fun.
Yeah, sweden. As is told you before, there may be scenarios up in the north where nuclear may be more suitable than elsewhere because solar is less efficient there.
But a plant here and two more over there do not change the trends.
There are a lot more plants to be decomissioned in the next decade.
Why don't you come back when all those plans did finally materialize? See you until then.
Also i notice the humour of that list, showing Mochovce-4 as under construction. This reactor is a huge security risk and its history is full of failures and corruption.
Its production was planned for this year - which is almost over.
yep, but almost only in China. China is following a strategy, that not necessarily is economically the best.
And even China is investing much more into renewables + storage than into nuclear. It is not even clear if all of their projected npp will be finished.
Lesenswerte Zusammenfassung und Resumée.
(dank @bunkerhunter.bsky.social für den link)
Warum die Ukraine den Krieg so nicht “gewinnen” kann🧵

Forderungen nach Taurus und Tomahawk sind mit der Hoffnung auf einen militärischen Durchbruch der Ukraine verbunden.
Der ist aber wegen fragwürdiger strategischer Entscheidungen ausgeschlossen.

Wir brauchen einen Strategiewechsel:
1/20
yes, there are a shitload of cases proving that.
i kept it a bit short when saying "for nuke purposes", should have been "for geostrategical purposes".
And I'm sure russia has the means to dispose all that waste they would take back in a very safe manner 😂
Oh, you could prove me wrong! But you'd need to include Russia for that. They built two blocks in Belarus and some more somewhere in western russia.
But they all took around 8-11 years each and don't comply to western standards.
The third was a clever one. It is the only one that is producing electricity today, but already had emergency shutdowns.
The country pushed the contractor into a ruinous contract, the debt is now being paid off by that contractor country's tax payers.
The 2nd planned block has been cancelled.
The second also was hilariously expensive and awkwardly late, it even comes with unrepairable defects on the security containment but will nevertheless go live soon - probably. But it won't help the country, because they need dozens of them to replace their old junk npp fleet.
Won't happen.
In Europe, in the last decade there have been build three npp only, of which only one reactor is live today.
The first was hilarious expensive, chinese investors dropped out, its electricity will be extremely expensive so it will never be competitive. Expect premature shutdown.
You should ask yourself just one question: If it is economical, why doesn't it happen already?
Despite all that past-time plans and announcements about that bright nuclear future.
To make it short, there is not enough money, not enough time, not enough place and not enough fuel supply, just to end with the conclusion that nuclear power is absolutely incompatible with our residual load grid.
There are some facts that many of you always ignore:
1. Time scale: In Europe it takes >10 yrs to build a npp.
2. Energy scale: Germany alone would need some 30-40 reactors.
3. Ressources scale: There's no place nor money for them.
4. Supply scale: The fuel dependency is not sustainable.
Have fun.
While I'm entertained about you taking those obvious pr claims as given future.
The rule is very simple: if it isn't economical, it won't happen (or only for nuke purposes).
Why not meet in ten years and then look at those plans that went south.
Horrible, thank your for the reponse. I'm already keeping myself informed about the situation.
Ja, der Endkundenpreis.
Ich würd' beide nehmen 😁
An der Börse sprang er wohl von 0,4 auf 6,7 ct.
I'm happy to learn the name of that religion.
Feel lucky for having such opportunities in your country. It's very difficult in crowded europe today.