natmaka

Approximately 80% of the released cesium-137 (half-life: 30 years) was dispersed eastward by winds and deposited in the Pacific Ocean (far from human settlement), where the enormous volume of water and strong currents reduced its concentration. Other studies, such as those by Yasunari et al., confirm these undisputed facts, which are also accepted by nuclear agencies.

The sole cleanup may cost up to 660bn USD ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_nuclear_accident_cle... ).

To begin with.

Comment · 6 months ago

A nuclear accident with far more devastating consequences is possible.

The debate isn't about "nuclear or coal?" but about "nuclear or renewables?"

Comment · 6 months ago

> Three Mile Island was a success in the sense that even the worst case scenario

No, as it involved a partial meltdown, not a complete meltdown.

Comment · 6 months ago

> 1. Lead to basically zero direct deaths

"Fukushima Daiichi Accident: Official figures show that there have been 2313 disaster-related deaths among evacuees from Fukushima prefecture. Disaster-related deaths are in addition to the about 19,500 that were killed by the earthquake or tsunami."

According to the "World Nuclear Association" (mission: to facilitate the growth of the nuclear sector by connecting players across the value chain, representing the industry’s position in key world forums, and providing authoritative information and influencing key audiences)

Source: https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-sec...

Comment · 7 months ago

> - For the last 2 decades, EDF was privatised and give back to the state an average of 2bn€ per year in dividende

Where in the referenced document do you read this?

According to the court of Audit ( https://ccomptes.fr/sites/default/files/EzPublish/Rapport_th... ) EDF's equity was strengthened by regular capital contributions from the State until the end of the 1970s (page 31).

The return on state capital endowments, ranging from 3% to 6%, represents a low real return, significantly lower than the theoretical rates of 8% or 9% (excluding inflation) projected at the time by the General Planning Commission for public enterprises (page 33). Handouts!

The payment of meager dividends is sometimes cancelled or postponed (2015, 2016, 2017, 2019: https://www.latribune.fr/economie/france/edf-l-etat-va-renon... ), or partially made in the form of EDF shares ("in securities", for example between 2016 and 2022) therefore in monkey money because it does not replenish the public coffers at the time or later: EDF is very indebted and the bulk of its assets (nuclear power plants) are unsellable.

Then new handouts: https://www.lepoint.fr/societe/edf-va-etre-renfloue-a-hauteu... , kludges https://web.archive.org/web/20240805011254/https://www.lepar... and tricks https://www.ouest-france.fr/environnement/nucleaire/quel-est...

> loi NOME in 2010 even offred to the competitor of EDF an access to nuclear energy at fixed low price

'Low'? Nope. It happened in 2012 and this price was set at €42/MWh

The total production cost of a MWh in 2010 was €22 (see the French Court of Auditors' report "The Costs of the Nuclear Power Sector," page 81). Since the existing generation fleet is considered fully depreciated, the €20 difference covers the extension of its operating life (Grand Carénage) and the renewal/expansion of the new nuclear power plants (EPR series).

According to EDF, the average spot price of a MWh in 2014 was €34.60 at base and €43.80 at peak ( https://www.edf.fr/sites/default/files/contrib/groupe-edf/es... , page 6).

In 2015, according to EDF itself, the wholesale market price was €38/MWh ( https://web.archive.org/web/20200926191300/https://www.edf.f... )

> Nobody sane of mind and reasonable take hydrogen and Power2Gas seriously in the energy sector

Projects and investments are aplenty: https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtNA_b540b580-43c5-4024-923d-df...

> The general efficient is low

Nope: hydrogen vehicles are easy to criticize because the mass and size of the tank are prohibitive, and compression significantly increases the cost.

This leads some to condemn all forms of hydrogen use. However, in the case of backup power, not having to store it in a small mobile tank or even transport it, and therefore being able to store it in a stationary industrial tank (where mass and volume are relatively unimportant), is not only possible but already being achieved (record: Air Liquide, and the competition is intensifying) and, incidentally, improves efficiency.

Efficiency:

- Electrolysis (PEM or alkaline): 0.75

- Storage: 0.95

- Conventional combined cycle turbine (gas + steam) with efficiency similar to that achieved with natural gas: 0.6

Overall: approximately 0.4 (just like a very recent nuclear reactor, and without any waste-producing fuel...)

> electrolizers strongly hate the spike style usage pattern necessary for a coupling with intermittent energy

See PEM.

> no installations of the required scale has even been tried

Indeed, however all components are ready.

> France's transition to nuclear power began in 1963 and is now complete.

> The Messner plan started in 1974

France's transition to nuclear power begain before this Plan. Details and sources: https://makarevitch.com/msmrenTheMessmerPlan

> It finishes with over 50 reactors in 15 years

Nope, it took from 1963 to 1999 (see above)

> The cost of the plan Messmer was estimated at 100bn€ in 2012 money.

This is the sole building cost. R&D is estimated at 55 billions (1945-2010) and the Court wrote that it is very difficult to assess, (page 35, footnote) "the scope of analysis does not cover research expenditures in the military field, nor those related to basic research.".

> Germany > energiewende > 400Bn€ burned

Nope: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47620957

> The results are so bad that Germany started to subsidies its own industry

Just like France massively subsidies its nuclear sector (among others) since the very beginning.

> results speak for themselves.

Indeed: since the 1980's France's industry fell down way more than Germany's , and taxes are in France way higher than in Germany. Such a win!

Comment · 7 months ago

> making a profit by selling valuable nuclear energy

EDF adjusted economic debt at the beginning of 2026: €81.7 billion After decades of massive help (nationalisations building it, monopoly, gift-loans, debt cancellation...

> the profitability of solar operators will sink to the ground due to the overcapacity causing negative price

Wait for storage (V2G...) and hydrogen to kick in.

> France > Germany

France's transition to nuclear power began in 1963 and is now complete.

In other countries (Germany...), transitions to renewables began with the advent of their industrial versions, around 2005. The current context makes these transitions more challenging, and they are still underway.

Therefore, any comparison of their results, for example, greenhouse gas emissions, must be based not on snapshots (which currently favor France since its transition is complete), but on their progress: speed, costs, impacts, etc.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/carbon-intensity-electric...

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-generation-fr...

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-based-carbon-...

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita?t...

Comment · 7 months ago

> the German energiewende cost

The cost of the energy transition in Germany is sometimes cited as €300 billion, €500 billion, or even €1.5 trillion.

These figures are worthless because no reputable source publishes a specific figure along with the scope of the project (some aspects of the investments needed for the electricity grid are independent of the energy source) and at least a timeframe.

These figures are actually projections published by various sources, covering distant deadlines (2050, etc.) and the entire electricity system, including non-renewable energy sources (whose additional costs are often overestimated).