derGottesknecht

joined 5 months ago

Ah gotcha, yeah that works :D

[–] derGottesknecht@feddit.org 10 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Whats wrong with LED display?

[–] derGottesknecht@feddit.org 8 points 5 days ago (2 children)

The German Grundgesetz.

[–] derGottesknecht@feddit.org 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If I understood the supreme Court right, one legal option would be to kill them all officially... /s

[–] derGottesknecht@feddit.org 3 points 1 week ago

We won't get batterys developed and built in Germany, but we can still buy them from others. But yeah, fuck the FDP and triple Fuck Linder, May his Porsche always be broken.

[–] derGottesknecht@feddit.org 4 points 1 week ago

Do you know how old they were? We would have to shut them down anyway because they started reaching end of life. There was no new project for decades already. It's a complicated political situation and it's fucking arrogant for you to come in, scream about "nUcLeAr Is BesT" without knowing the details. Even the energy companies didn't want to keep the plants running at the end. So please let us try to do our Energiewende, we progressives in Germany have enough trouble with our stupid conservatives

[–] derGottesknecht@feddit.org 4 points 1 week ago

I don't have faith our governments will switch to 100% renewable,

But you have faith they will be responsible for a nuclear power plant and won't allow any shortcuts in maintenance and keep it safe?

We need to actively start scrubbing CO2 out of the atmosphere, and we're going to need as much power as we can generate for that.

Technical scrubbing is way to inefficient. It is powers of magnitude more efficient to invest in plants which build up the humus layer of fields, you can store way more CO2 that way.

Nuclear is expensive because it's relatively rare. Economies of scale don't apply to it as is. If we start building, it will become cheaper. Not cheap, perhaps, but cheaper. And it's a cost worth paying. We are already paying the price for the "cheap" fossil fuels.

But if we spend the same amount of money for renewables+storage we get more power per dollar.

[–] derGottesknecht@feddit.org 5 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Yeah, right now. But not in 10 years when the first npps could be ready. And you would also need storage for npps when there is a lot of wind or sun, cause you can't shut down the npps all the time or thermal stresses will cause damages to the pipes. And renewables are here now, it's the storage that needs to catch up.

[–] derGottesknecht@feddit.org 5 points 1 week ago (3 children)

We can get more bang for our buck with renewables+storage.

[–] derGottesknecht@feddit.org 6 points 1 week ago

why do nuclear diehards always pretend it’s nuclear or fossil fuels only, like renewables are nonexistant?

Is not the same as

pro nuclear arguing against renewables

They mostly don't argue against it (only sometimes on reddit) but they always ignore its existence and accuse everyone who is not a nuclear fanboy on wanting more CO2 emissions.

[–] derGottesknecht@feddit.org 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)

But still false, because we had a short, small uptick while switching away from russian gas. Now Germany burns less coal than ever in the last 50 years.

https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/de/presse-und-medien/presseinformationen/2024/oeffentliche-stromerzeugung-2023-erneuerbare-energien-decken-erstmals-grossteil-des-stromverbrauchs.html

[–] derGottesknecht@feddit.org 12 points 1 week ago

But still more expensive than renewables + storage, so what's your point?

view more: next ›