Comment by sajithdilshan
1 day ago
Hopefully Germany will follow next. It’s absurd that they rely on fossil fuel and coal when they can build modern nuclear plants that can provide stable energy for the energy heavy industries.
It would take 5-10 years to build the power plants and maybe with Chinese aid even faster
I don't think that nuclear projects of any size could pass current environmental impact assessments.
Only a severe energy shortage could motivate politicians enough to temporarily skip these, like they did for the LNG terminals. But you can't build a nuclear power plant of any size within a single legislative period so its just not going to happen.
Where in comparable countries (= in europe) did new reactors take less than 10 years (from scratch even)? So we are at at least 10 years. But more realistically, taking recent megaprojects into account, its 20 years. In that time, batteries are way ahead and you can overbuild _so_ _much_ renewables and people even do it without subsidies (strangely, nobody builds nuclear plants without subsidies).
regarding the "stable energy" point: germany has one of the most (if not _the_ most) stable grids in the world and that is even with 50+ % renewables. And given it sits in the center of europe with grid connections all around, it's far cheaper to buy from whomever has the most favourable weather anyways (and sell to them if they don't). Thats why one of the biggest issues right now is not nuclear, but grids.
It takes five years to build a wind turbine in Germany. There is a snowball's chance in hell that you can build a nuclear power plant in that time.
No thank you, we will happily continue with our investment in wind, solar and battery storage.
False dichotomy
hopefully not