Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Swiss Vote to Phase Out Nuclear Power

posted by martyb on Tuesday May 23 2017, @01:06AM   Printer-friendly
from the End-of-an-Era dept.

An Anonymous Coward writes:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/switzerland-votes-phase-nuclear-energy-121710224.html

Swiss voters have backed government plans to replace the power from ageing nuclear reactors with renewable energy.

A total of 58.2 per cent of voters supported the phaseout of nuclear energy in a binding referendum on Sunday. Under the Swiss system of direct democracy, voters have the final say on major policy issues.

The plan will provide billions of pounds in subsidies for renewable energy, ban the construction of nuclear plants and decommission the country’s five existing ones, which produce about a third of the country’s electricity.

[...] The move echoes efforts across Europe to reduce dependence on nuclear energy and has been in the making following Japan’s Fukushima disaster in 2011. Germany has announced it will close all nuclear plants by 2022 and Austria banned it decades ago.

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Swiss Vote to Phase Out Nuclear Power | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 37 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 23 2017, @09:59PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 23 2017, @09:59PM (#514543)

    >Q to all the watermelons posting in this thread
    >How long must a "renewable" resource run to offset the carbon
    >generated in mining and processing the rare earths used in its construction? Show your work.

    Oh, break-even analysis. This article looks pretty sweet.

    http://www.powerfocuseng.com/downloads/P1-1030r1-SolarThermalBreakEvenAnalysis.pdf [powerfocuseng.com]
    >The break even analysis is conducted in such a way that the quotient in years, is equal to the time required to have saved, recovered, or offset spending equal to the capital investment deployed. A simplified version of the equation is shown below to illustrate the two drivers in the analysis. Where t is the number of years required for an annualized return of A to equal the initial investment of P.

    Also: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy10osti/46909.pdf [nrel.gov]
    Seemed a good read.

    >Extra credit: Contrast your analysis with mean time to failure for the renewable system analyzed.
    We passed that hurdle some time ago, we've got pv installs slated for 30 some-odd years. You tend replace an inverter in 10-20 years or so.

    The most important thing is to keep the panels clean. It might knock 10-20% off of the output, if not shut it down alltogether. Also, the new stuff is intended to be very hailstone resistant.

    PS: I am not a watermelon, I am a meat popsicle.