• bstix@feddit.dk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    20
    ·
    1 year ago

    An electric grid based on renewables is a federated network.

    Why anyone wants to put all the control and risk into one big nuclear company is beyond me.

    • pedro@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      What kind of risk are you talking about?

      The electrical network connecting all your federated renewable infrastructures is managed by one entity already, isn’t it? That’s the same kind of risk you describe.

      I get why people don’t like nuclear power and there are many valid arguments against it but yours is not

      • bstix@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The overall grid is managed by governments cross countries in Europe. The production is not. While the producers do have an obligation to provide enough electricity at all times, the consumer is free to purchase the electricity from any distributor they want. This creates a free market for pricing while keeping the production regulated. For a small country like Sweden, producing everything in nuclear would destroy the market mechanism on pricing, leaving then with a monopoly.

        The risks towards energy production are stuff like war, natural disasters and terror. All of which have been relevant within the last ten years somewhere in the world and increasingly so. The only way to maintain a functional distribution of electricity in these situations is to have the production de-centralised.

          • bstix@feddit.dk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t have anything particular against nuclear as a source of energy. I just don’t think it can done fast enough and in an economically feasible way. Even if they do make more nuclear plants, they are going to need something else in the meantime before the new plants can be ready if the forecasted increase is to be trusted.

    • Sylvartas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most renewables can’t produce energy at a large scale on demand. Nuclear is the king of that domain. I don’t see the issue with plugging nuclear to that federated network in order to meet demand when the renewables can’t

      • bstix@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I agree. Sweden already has 6 nuclear plants providing 30% of the energy. Hydro power is 50% Together this is more than enough to meet baseload demand.

    • Carighan Maconar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I cannot comprehend how someone would think a dezentralized power network can be anything but a disaster waiting to happen. I would reckon even the crypto fanbois would figure out how bad an idea that would be.

      And mind you, the type of power doesn’t matter in that case. If your network isn’t centralized (enough), you’re fucked.