Chernobyl balance sheet, cost, maps and contamination (France)
- GuyGadeboisTheBack
- Econologue expert
- posts: 14925
- Registration: 10/12/20, 20:52
- Location: 04
- x 4341
Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)
But how can you defend all these bastards from CEA, EDF and Areva who constantly lie and have blood on their hands ??? How? 'Or' What ???
0 x
-
- Econologue expert
- posts: 13692
- Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
- Location: picardie
- x 1515
- Contact :
Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)
The subject is the lies following Chernobyl which contributed to destroy the French nuclear industry (which had a level of safety beyond reproach, by the way) and by the way that of French agriculture, thanks to the slanders of CRIIREM and the IARC ...
Here, always the same troublemakers at the origin.
Don't you feel like you're going around in circles with your nauseating qualifiers, gadebois?
Here, always the same troublemakers at the origin.
Don't you feel like you're going around in circles with your nauseating qualifiers, gadebois?
0 x
- GuyGadeboisTheBack
- Econologue expert
- posts: 14925
- Registration: 10/12/20, 20:52
- Location: 04
- x 4341
Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)
Ah this completely "scientific" denial, this contempt for the dead and the victims of the atom. The worst part is that you really think this is all "clean". Alas, this deadly industry is not ready to disappear and if Areva and EDF are almost ruined, they owe it only to themselves, them who wasted public money by tens of billions, poof, gone up in smoke in phantom uranium mines and huge projects that never worked. WE have paid, are paying and will pay more and more with Project Hercules while one click digs deep. And the morons applaud!
0 x
-
- Econologue expert
- posts: 13692
- Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
- Location: picardie
- x 1515
- Contact :
Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)
Study the real numbers instead of endlessly repeating the sounds of bells heard by there. You have no verifiable arguments.
And you don't even wonder why, before the privatization of EDF, we had the cheapest electricity in Europe.
It's the first one found but by looking a little you should be able to find the right numbers https://energie-online.fr/nucleaire/gui ... eaire.html
And you don't even wonder why, before the privatization of EDF, we had the cheapest electricity in Europe.
It's the first one found but by looking a little you should be able to find the right numbers https://energie-online.fr/nucleaire/gui ... eaire.html
0 x
- GuyGadeboisTheBack
- Econologue expert
- posts: 14925
- Registration: 10/12/20, 20:52
- Location: 04
- x 4341
Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)
(Vaccination causes terrifying side effects ...)
0 x
- GuyGadeboisTheBack
- Econologue expert
- posts: 14925
- Registration: 10/12/20, 20:52
- Location: 04
- x 4341
Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)
izentrop wrote:Study the real numbers instead of endlessly repeating the sounds of bells heard by there. You have no verifiable arguments.
And you don't even wonder why, before the privatization of EDF, had cheapest electricity in Europe. <<< And yes, it was but it is no longer the case
It's the first one found but by looking a little you should be able to find the right numbers https://energie-online.fr/nucleaire/gui ... eaire.html <<< 30 € / MWh: Bogus figure, not sourced, totally bogus site
Figures 2021:
Cost of nuclear
Nuclear plant
The spearhead of French energy policy, the average cost of nuclear power for plants already built is € 49,50 per MWh. This figure is up compared to the estimates of the Court of Auditors, which estimated the cost of production per MWh before the Fukushima accident at 42 euros per MWh. For power plants under construction (the Flamanville EPR in France), the Court of Auditors estimates the cost of electricity production for new reactors in a range of 70 to 90 euros, based on construction costs. of the EPR, constantly raised, and quantified at the beginning of 2014 at 8,5 billion euros - again since raised to 10,5 billion in 2016. To consider the sale price negotiated by EDF Energy in October 2013 with the British government for other plants under construction (€ 109 per MWh), the cost of producing electricity via the new plants would be closer to € 120 per MWh. Something to cast doubt on the famous competitiveness of the atom, even if EDF hopes in the long term for a price per MWh between € 60 and € 70 for the series construction of its new EPRs.
https://prix-elec.com/energie/production#couts
0 x
Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)
GuyGadeboisLeRetour wrote:(And the other tench of Bozo who believes that I will provide again figures already published here to hear again that there is no proof of the incidence, that the sources blabla etc, etc and that we are going to him serve the soup so that he relieves himself in vain on pages and pages ...)
I didn't really believe it to be honest, but Izzy is right that this is not how you're going to prove something. But hey after all if that's not what you're trying to do ...
However, it is quite easy to find numbers; they actually increased by 6 to 7% per year from 1982 to 2012: https://www.santemagazine.fr/actualites ... ide-188461
... but the increase does not necessarily occur in the regions most affected by the cloud, and the interpretation is rather found in the improvement of policies and techniques of detection. So Rivasi would indeed be misinformation and lying.
1 x
To pass for an idiot in the eyes of a fool is a gourmet pleasure. (Georges COURTELINE)
Mééé denies nui went to parties with 200 people and was not even sick moiiiiiii (Guignol des bois)
Mééé denies nui went to parties with 200 people and was not even sick moiiiiiii (Guignol des bois)
-
- Econologue expert
- posts: 13692
- Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
- Location: picardie
- x 1515
- Contact :
Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)
Yes, as specified, I had not searched.GuyGadeboisLeRetour wrote:It's the first one found but by looking a little you should be able to find the right numbers https://energie-online.fr/nucleaire/gui ... eaire.html <<< 30 € / MWh: Bogus figure, not sourced, totally bogus site
This comparison is closer to the current reality:
As we can see, it is not worse than solar or wind power, but the only controllable low carbon energy, which does not require storage and which could have been used to ensure the energy transition.The average cost of nuclear power generation.
Between € 59,8 and € 109 / MWh depending on whether it is an old or a new power station not yet depreciated.
Source: Court of Auditors
The average cost of wind energy production
Between € 90 (for onshore wind) * and € 200 / MWh (for offshore wind - estimate -). Energy still expensive to produce but the prospects for cost reductions are real, in the very short term.
Source: Union of Renewable Energies
The average cost of hydropower production
Between € 15 and € 20 / MWh. It is, of all the primary energies, the cheapest to exploit by far. There is only one problem, however: the difficulty of building large numbers of dams.
Source: CRE / Court of Auditors
The average cost of solar energy production (photovoltaic)
142 € / MWh. Here again, the costs are still a bit high, especially since it is one of the easiest renewable energies to produce. But it requires the installation of huge surfaces of photovoltaic panels.
Source: CRE deliberation March 2014
The average cost of producing thermal energy from gas
Between 70 and 100 € / MWh. It is a rather expensive energy and in any case doomed in the long term, like all fossil and non-renewable energies (petroleum, coal, etc.).
Source: EDF https://www.happ-e.fr/actualites/commen ... ite-france
Russia, China, India among others have understood this well.
0 x
Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)
izentrop wrote:As we can see, it is not worse than solar or wind power, but the only controllable low carbon energy, which does not require storage and which could have been used to ensure the energy transition.
Russia, China, India among others have understood this well.
unfortunately, this is another myth, nuclear power, as we do now, is incapable of providing anything. U235 reserves only represent a hundred Gtep, or 10 years of global consumption, and in terms of saving CO2, that would only save 20 ppm, or 0,2 ° C at most.
To play a major role, we would have to switch to breeding and build thousands of breeders all over the world, and that poses a whole lot of other problems, starting with the fact that no country has succeeded in mastering a breeder sector without insurmountable problems.
All the nuclear produced so far has only prevented one to two years of global CO2 production, without obviously ensuring that this CO2 will not be produced just a little later, so in reality it has not prevented anything. at all, since the energies overlap and do not compensate each other. To be fair, it's even worse with renewable energies of course ..
0 x
To pass for an idiot in the eyes of a fool is a gourmet pleasure. (Georges COURTELINE)
Mééé denies nui went to parties with 200 people and was not even sick moiiiiiii (Guignol des bois)
Mééé denies nui went to parties with 200 people and was not even sick moiiiiiii (Guignol des bois)
Re: Chernobyl Review, Cost, Maps and Contamination (France)
above all, they understood that they needed these plants to supply military uranium and that these “civilian” plants served to cover up the real reason. Countries without the bomb do not need nuclear power plants!Russia, China, India among others have understood this well.
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
-
- Similar topics
- Replies
- views
- Last message
-
- 0 Replies
- 490 views
-
Last message by sicetaitsimple
View the latest post
14/03/24, 15:06A subject posted in the forum : Fossil fuels: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)
-
- 13 Replies
- 9125 views
-
Last message by Hydraxon
View the latest post
13/07/08, 18:14A subject posted in the forum : Fossil fuels: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)
Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"
Who is online ?
Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 205 guests