Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by RealityVoid 89 days ago
They could have... You know... Not closed the existing running nuclear power plants at all? The greens pushed a lot for that. I admit, the future looks good for solar. But to hell and back if I don't prefer a nuclear power plant to a fossil fuel one.
2 comments
notTooFarGone 89 days ago
I agree on that fully - but that is a completely different point. The Lifetime extension and the costs associated to that are not clear to me. But of course letting an already paid project run is a no brainer if the costs are not blowing up.

I don't like the assumption that this calculation was not done by the book due to the greens being in charge of that. It's always the question: Lifetime extension can cost a lot and maybe it only buys 5 years. Basically I assume there was a € price and it was too high to pay. Maybe CDU would've payed that price but I don't think either is wrong.

link
bluegatty 89 days ago
No - it's not a completely different point.

The Greens - out of ideological fear mongering - forced the end of Nuclear, just like they forced the end of new construction decades ago, and keep the German public in fear.

link
blitzar 89 days ago
> Not closed the existing running nuclear power plants at all?

How many more years would you run a plant commissioned in the 1980's for?

link
bluegatty 88 days ago
A very long time with maintenance, upkeep many are going to have 60 year lifespans and theoretically 80-100 years. Some are planned for 80 years.

In the meantime, every day that goes by without building more, is the a day without the ability to walk away from Russian or Gulf oil.

link