Nuclear safety in France is not perfect ... Ah well?

[econololo]

2) if we forget that, for a maximum power of 1 MW gives if 650% of the sun used at 100kW / m1 2Km1,650 for the same peak solar power received.
At 10% efficiency, this is 10 times more than 16,5 km2, for nearly 1 million households, approximately 1,6KW each, or approximately 16,5m2 per household, a garage.
With a boiler and solar thermal concentration, we can reach 30%, 3 times less.

- 1650 KW of nuclear power produces around 12000 GWh / year regularly over the year.
- 16,5 km² of PV produce around 2600 GWh / year depending on the weather / season / hour in the day.

[stipe]

I'm against nuclear, but this kind of article I find that in bad faith ...
1 / yes nuclear safety in France as elsewhere is not perfect, it has never been considered or mentioned as such.
(there are studies which give a probability of accident, obviously wrong, but if there is a probability which is given and you are not able to understand that it means that the safety is not perfect, it must question yourself)
2 / Our little president praises our fleet as being the safest in the world, it is a subjective judgment, but personally I have no argument or knowledge to say if the other countries have a nuclear power even less than the our or not ...
3 / In my opinion in any case in perfection perfection does not exist, and if nuclear continues to exist (which I do not wish in its current form or to come in the near future), it seems logical to me to continue indefinitely to improve this security and to put the means to it.

[Gaston]

it seems logical to me to continue indefinitely improving this security and to put the means to it.

Until the cost becomes so high that nuclear will no longer be economically profitable

[dedeleco]

Always green, who do not read carefully, to run the renewable with misleading and false arguments, until the future Fukushima in France, inevitable sooner or later, since men are not foolproof in perpetuity :

16,5 km² of PV produce around 2600 GWh / year depending on the weather / season / hour in the day.

without specifying at all that they take a yield of 157KWh / m2an where?
(factor 3 between South and North of France)
I do not take photovoltaics, unsuitable, low yield for the moment, not storable, which is not the solution (typical of the French, even green, PS, who lack the right solution, arcbouté on nuclear, which is very careful to push towards additional solutions, to say a misleading lie: look, only nuclear is possible), but at solar thermal concentration with much better efficiency, especially stored underground over a long period, and nuclear power plants or not, do not work at all at 100% all year round, you have to take what is actually consumed and not lost in power plants, transport wires, even dreamed of with 100% use, etc.
The surface is available (garages, parking lots on the top surface), etc. and the land is even more available in volume.

And especially stop seeing only what exists on a large scale instead of www.dlsc.ca despised , existing often badly chosen, instead of what is possible with the sun on a financial scale, current power plants, very expensive, polluting, dangerous to the point of sterilizing and emptying an entire region for centuries and millennia, a real French madness, which means that I refuse to vote PS as long as it does not change on nuclear power, because I cannot approve of continuing nuclear power by electoral manipulation.

[chatelot16]

I do not present photovoltaics as the best solution: it is even the most expensive

but I find it interesting to note that nuclear requires a starting investment of the same order of magnitude as the most expensive renewable energy

so there is something to do with the idea better than photovoltaics ... solar thermal, exploitation of photosynthesis by forests, wind ...

considering the enormity of the cost of nuclear, it is an economic error to insist on this path

and even if we believe we are strong enough to manage nuclear power safely here, it is an even more serious mistake to try to sell it to countries that risk doing anything ... and even if it goes far from home it pollutes the whole earth

if we invest to develop new energies it is immediately salable to the whole world!

[dedeleco]

Completely agree and it is necessary rush in this good direction like the Germans !!!
In addition we can tinker at home simple, inspiring by simplifying www.dlsc.ca to at least lower your energy bill in perpetuity,
heating with a Canadian well preheated in summer under a parking lot,
and then electricity with another superheated in summer, not solar concentration, to run a Stirling or turbine 24/24 to have current on demand.

[Flytox]

3 / In my opinion in any case in safety perfection does not exist, and if nuclear continues to exist (which I do not wish in its current form or to come in the near future), it seems logical to me to keep improving this safety indefinitely and put the means to it.

Me it seems logical to mestop immediately, when our "elites" go completely wrong, especially if they wear a blindfold, earplugs, and they do not have the intellectual honesty to recognize that this energy is a vast and extremely dangerous scam . The only real justification that pushes them to continue to run headlong into this impasse ... is that it helps finance their re-election ...

The costs to "secure" increase exponentially but the real security only increases proportionately .... Hopefully this stupid model quickly finds an end .... before "Dedeleco's justified chorus"

..evacuation of entire regions .... since men are not infallible in perpetuity ...

etc ....

[dedeleco]

Ce

"Justified chorus of Dedeleco"

has a fundamental problem: I am the only one to say it, not even the thoroughbred ecologists, nor the greens, nor GreenPeace, nor econology, however true scientific demonstration rigorous and simple to understand, of this nuclear madness which will continue in France, left as well as right, until the next Fukushima in France, inevitable sooner or later !!!


So refrain from hissing everywhere, !!!

[Janic]

has a fundamental problem: I am the only one to say it, not even the thoroughbred ecologists, nor the greens, nor GreenPeace, nor econology, however true scientific demonstration rigorous and simple to understand, of this nuclear madness which will continue in France, left as well as right, until the next Fukushima in France, inevitable, sooner or later !!!

You shouldn't push; all anti-nuclear movements have said it, say it again and will say it again. Anti nuclear is a branch of ecology, but not the only one.
On the other hand, it is true that left and right have always been pronuclear by political calculation because energy-consuming consumers of electricity are also potential voters and represent the largest part of the population ... i.e. most of them we!

[Did67]

this additional cost will serve as a pretext to increase the price of electricity

This is what is wrong: it is not a "pretext" !!!

Let's reason for two minutes like Proglio (and its predecessors):

- its objective is not to raise prices!

- its objective is to increase its profits, nuances

- so if he could sell not more expensive (or even less expensive) but 3 times the value of the cost price, he would do it, olonatiers! It would "crush" its competitors (TotalFinaElf, boiler manufacturers) and it would cover the entire land of PAC !!!

- if he and his predecessors "row" to increase prices (announcement of a 20% increase in 3 years by the one who was fired), it is simply that in order not to go bankrupt (Edf is a extremely indebted financial monster!), it must obtain the agreement of the State (for a moment still) to increase the prices in order to finance: a) the development of the existing power stations (to extend them by about twenty years ; the bill was 40 to 50 billion, it has just been extended by 10 billion according to EdF - say, 20, following the recommendations of the ASN); b) at the same time, in its logic, launch the future EPRs - at the rate of 5 illiards each, we can guess the fcature); c) despite everything to make believe that all this is "green" because this is what customers demand = sell "renewable" even if the margins are lower; advertise, etc ...


So no no, it's not a pretext. It is the admission of a model which shows for the first time its "stupidly" economic "limits (in a very classic Sarkozian liberal economy logic!). EdF is privatized, no longer has the State which erase the slates; State which in any case can no longer pay anything ... Finally, it may not be the "green people" who will have the skin of the system ???

Areva fires! And puts wind turbines on its site (3rd background image when the site is left running: http://www.areva.com/ ).