SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
According to the AP, NY Times and a boat load of other AP carriers, the country boasting the loudest about how much of their energy needs are fulfilled by renewable sources, coal may be about to win out over one of the oldest forests still standing in Germany:
BERLIN (AP) — A court in western Germany says an ancient forest near the Belgian border can be chopped down to make way for a coal strip mine.
Cologne's administrative court ruled Friday against a legal complaint brought by the environmental group BUND that wanted to halt the clearance of much of the Hambach forest.
Hambach forest has become a focus of environmental protests against the expansion of a vast mine that supplies much of the coal used in nearby power plants.
The coal, a light brown variety called lignite, is considered one of the most polluting forms of fossil fuel.
Meanwhile their reactors are being systematically shut down and dismantled. But dirty coal use shows almost no decline.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 26 2017, @07:32AM (3 children)
More apt word: waivers.
If the nuke industry had to buy insurance on the open market, no nuke plant would ever have been built.
N.B. Vehicle operators have to carry insurance and, unlike a nuke plant, a driver can't irradiate an entire region.
anti-science
Deny. Deny. Deny.
Chernobyl. Fukushima. Three [stanford.edu] Mile [googleusercontent.com] Island. [counterpunch.org]
Willful ignorance is one thing.
Shilling for an irresponsible industry is quite another.
cheapest
You are woefully ignorant and more than a year behind the curve.
Renewables are now the cheapest.
...and nukes have ALWAYS been the most expensive--despite the industry propaganda.
greener
You have managed to omit the of tons of radioactive waste that sits beside each nuke plant--tens of thousands of tons in total since 1943, with none of it EVER permanently dealt with.
Quit repeating the propaganda.
It makes you look foolish.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 27 2017, @03:27AM (2 children)
Insurance companies happily sell insurance with things with a greater probability for disaster, but they don't sell insurance for things that would require payout that exceeds the worth of the insurance company. Basically, you need a larger insurance company. Find a company worth a $trillion, and you can buy insurance. If no such private company exists, the government can do the job.
Chernobyl was a fuckup of Soviet proportions, playing around with a known-bad reactor design in known-bad ways. Fukushima was absurdly bad luck with an obsolete 1960s reactor, and it really wasn't bad compared to all the other damage caused by the earthquake and tsunami. The "disaster" at three mile island hurt exactly nobody; American containment worked as designed.
We do have a problem: opposition has made us unable to modernize. We can't replace the nuke plants because of protesters and lawsuits. We really need to do this.
The radioactive "waste" is there because of President Carter's ban on reprocessing. It isn't really waste. Roughly 95% of the fuel is unused, but it can't be used without removing the 5% that has been used. President Carter banned this, effectively throwing away 95% of our fuel and increasing fuel costs by a large factor. (should be about 20x depending on relative costs of reprocessing and mining)
Meanwhile, coal plants emit far more radiation. Coal contains thorium, uranium, radium, and other awful things. This all goes up the smokestack to be spewed across the land. If we apply the radioactivity regulations of nuclear plants to coal plants, all the coal plants must shut down due to being in violation.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 27 2017, @05:51AM
> Coal contains thorium, uranium, radium, and other awful things. This all goes up the smokestack to be spewed across the land. If we apply the radioactivity regulations of nuclear plants to coal plants, all the coal plants must shut down due to being in violation.
Unless, you know, the flue gases are filtered.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 27 2017, @06:57AM
You have missed (or, more likely, evaded) the point.
Nukes have been given waivers on liability by gov't so that they can go ahead and produce material for bombs.
Chernobyl was a fuckup
You'll get no argument from me on that.
...but if that place had used renewables as the source of energy, the worst that could have happened would have been completely benign.
That technology is now available and, for a year now, it's been as cheap as what's in second place, and more recently passed that for cheapness.
There will never again be any viable excuse to build a terrestrial nuke that PRODUCES waste.
Fukushima was
...built on The Ring of Fire. [google.com]
There was a magnitude 9 event on The Ring of Fire in 1964 (Alaska; the ground shook for 20 fucking minutes).
Locating a nuke anywhere near the Pacific plate was just plain stupid.
...and they put it on the side of the island that faces the ocean where a tsunami could clobber it.
It's like these people got their engineering degrees out of a Cracker Jack box.
...then they had a Capitalist company running it, cutting every corner to maximize profits.
Anyone with half a brain would look at all of that and say "a disaster waiting to happen".
...and, again, had that place used renewable technology, the worst that could have happened would have been benign.
Nukes are obsolete.
Another should never be allowed to be built.
Shut down all the existing crap as soon as possible.
really wasn't bad
Real estate in Fukushima is now extremely cheap.
Got a photocopy of your deed for the "bargain" property that you bought there?
Put up or shut up.
three mile island hurt exactly nobody
Already rebutted by experts, shill.
It isn't really waste
When Capitalists start building plants that CONSUME that shit, THEN we'll have a starting point for a discussion.
Not holding my breath on that.
Again, nukes remain the most expensive way to boil water and renewables are where investment is going these days.
coal plants
...are obsolete.
Renewables are cleaner and cheaper.
The only bozos who mention coal are shilling for (obsolete) nukes.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]