Experts say world is ‘past peak fossil power’ but warn against uneven development of energy projects

Experts say world is ‘past peak fossil power’ but warn against uneven development of energy projects

Nuclear power generation is likely to break records in 2025 as more countries invest in reactors to fuel the shift to a low-carbon global economy, while renewable energy is likely to overtake coal as a power source early next year, data has shown.

China, India, Korea and Europe are likely to have new reactors come on stream, while several in Japan are also forecast to return to generation, and French output should increase, according to a report on the state of global electricity markets published by the International Energy Agency (IEA) on Wednesday.

Electricity demand is also expected to increase around the world, fuelled largely by the move to a low-carbon economy. Electric vehicles and heat pumps, as well as many low-carbon industrial processes, require electricity rather than oil and gas.

  • Waryle@jlai.lu
    31·
    10 months ago

    This cube contains 98% of the radioactivity in all French nuclear waste, produced over 60 years.

    • 90+% of it can be re-used in the future EPRs and 4th gen reactors, and transformed to low-level waste which are way less radioactive.
    • The most radioactive waste are those which deplete the fastest. You don’t have to store those ones for millions of years, we’re talking about decades or 2-3 centuries at most.
    • It’s sealed and not going anywhere and it can definitely wait years, even decades, for something like Cigéo to be built.

    Stop pretending it’s some kind of unsolvable problem, nuclear engineers have solved it decades ago, it’s just anti-nuclear folks that oppose all solutions provided.

    • Diplomjodler@feddit.de
      22·
      10 months ago

      90+% of it can be re-used in the future EPRs and 4th gen reactors, and transformed to low-level waste which are way less radioactive.

      None of this stuff exists and there is no timeline as when it might be made into reality. Just another pipe dream.

      The most radioactive waste are those which deplete the fastest. You don’t have to store those ones for millions of years, we’re talking about decades or 2-3 centuries at most.

      So how are you going to separate out the technetium? Just because something is doable in a lab, doesn’t mean it’s doable on an industrial scale.

      It’s sealed and not going anywhere and it can definitely wait years, even decades, for something like Cigéo to be built.

      Yeah, let’s let the future generations sort it out. At the same time, let’s work at bringing down civilisation. What could go wrong?

      Stop pretending it’s some kind of unsolvable problem, nuclear engineers have solved it decades ago,

      No they haven’t. Not at all. You obviously have no clue what you’re talking about.

      it’s just anti-nuclear folks that oppose all solutions provided.

      Yeah yeah yeah, same old bullshit. The reality is that this stuff just doesn’t work economically.

      • Waryle@jlai.lu
        22·
        10 months ago

        None of this stuff exists and there is no timeline as when it might be made into reality. Just another pipe dream.

        Super-Phénix was a fully-working prototype cancelled by anti-nuclears. It produced and pushed 3TWh in the French national electricity network back in 1996 before being shut down. And there are built and working EPR in the world right, you’re just denying reality at this point.

        So how are you going to separate out the technetium? Just because something is doable in a lab, doesn’t mean it’s doable on an industrial scale.

        Technetium is literally extracted from nuclear waste to be used in numerous medical field, such as marking cancerous cells in bodies. You’re throwing random terms trying to find some point here.

        No they haven’t. Not at all. You obviously have no clue what you’re talking about.

        See? Another anti-nuclear shill that denies the reality. Most geologists and nuclear scientists have agreed on a solution for years : they’re just so little to bury, it’s so easy to contain, just bury it in an inert ground and it will not move for millions of years.

        We’re literally finding millions-years old unprotected fossils of dinosaurs that are almost intact. Nuclear waste will be sealed in containers which are made for this.

        We’re finding gigantic pools of gas and liquid that stayed in the same place for millions of years. Nuclear waste will be either solid or liquid, so it is way easier to contain than gas, and sealed in containers.

        Even if the containers break for some reason, the solid waste will just no move, and radiation can be stopped by a few centimeters of water. The liquid waste would not move either, but let’s say it moves for some magical reason, then there is only one way it would move : down. There is gravity and pressure, you know.

        Yeah yeah yeah, same old bullshit. The reality is that this stuff just doesn’t work economically.

        130 billions of euros for 60 years of french nuclear, everything included. EDF net profit is averaging billions every year. 10 billions of euros in the first semester of 2023 alone. And that’s with ARENH, which forces EDF to sell at loss 25% of its nuclear electricity to its competitors.

        Nuclear can be economical and profitable, when you don’t perpetually throw wrenches in the works.