Hmmm, I was thinking about this number last night. You said earlier on in this thread that nuclear power plants reject 96% of their heat into the atmoshphere:
Well, if we have a nuclear power plant with a thermal power output of 3400MWt, and it's electrical power output is 1000MW (see the European DCD for the AP1000 for the figures) then I make that a thermal efficiency of just short of 30%. So, is the AP1000 super efficient, or were you just wrong?
The EPR is even better, with a thermal efficiency of 36%.
Now, how is that rejecting 96% of the heat into the atmosphere?
ok we set "36%" as the efficiency and then comes some arguments against it:
wikipedia: "Durch den Umstand, dass es sich bei einem Kernkraftwerk um ein Großkraftwerk handelt, ergeben sich zudem im Durchschnitt längere Leitungen zum Endverbraucher, womit auch das Total der Übertragungsverluste steigt; in Deutschland gehen durch Netzverluste rund 6 % der bereitgestellten Elektroenergie im Stromnetz verloren."
"↑ Monatsbericht über die Elektrizitätsversorgung Statistischen Bundesamts, Wiesbaden, Stand 4. Quartal 2008"
oh you lost another 6% now we calculate 36% -6%= 33,84 now you only have 33,84
now comes the maintenance work and the heat goes not into electricity now what?
Another wikipedia argument:
"Der Wirkungsgrad des gesamten Systems wird wie bei allen Energieerzeugungsanlagen reduziert durch den Energiebedarf zum Bau, Betrieb und Rückbau des Kraftwerks. Der Aufwand des Uranabbaus steigt aufgrund des knapper werdenden Rohstoffes stetig."
you have to build it and you have to run it and you have to dispose it and you have to get uran.
and a last argumentation: you lost energy by radioactivity
so what? your number ""36%"" is broken I'm so sad about your number
Originally Posted by Shielder
Oh, and I find the Wikipedia entry on costs of generation fascinating. How much are you really paying for your solar energy? (Note: I trust Wikipedia about as much as I trust the sanity of Quazimodo here, but he seems to believe whatever Wikipedia says. He can't pick and choose what facts to belive can he? Strike that, he will.)
how much we are paying for solar energy is not the question the question is how much is the profit for the companies.
i calculate it the cost is 32€ per 1MWh the EEG law market price is 95€
the Germans pay 95€/1MWh for 2011 build up solar power plants but the real costs are only 32€/1MWh.
i for example get 450/1MWh for my solar power plant because I'm a Technological pioneer.
this Technological pioneer bonus was make to explore the technology.
Sorry about the double post, but I was too late to add this to my last post.
Looking at the figures from ENTSO we can calculate the following (please pardon the formatting):
German Electricity imports and exports (in GWe)
Period Exported Imported Balance
Q1/2011 18557 10463 8094
Q2/2011 10045 13698 -3653
July 2011 2582 3384 -802
Hmmm, looks like Germany is a little reliant on it's European neighbours for electricity all of a sudden. I wonder why?
the last German with the fantasy of German autonomy was Adolf Hitler and this ended in the second world war.
and again and again you don't understand that no company ever pay it!
Germany companies with high energies usage do not pay "EEG" and they do not pay MWST -19%
and they get extra bonus from KFW-Bank to do there own power plants.
if the normal price is for example ((29€ its -19% MWST )-3,5% EEG) +KFW-bank credit for own power plant.
and if BMW drive there own solar power plant payed by KFW bank they get the 32€/MWh!
In the end energy producer is paid cost + profit and energy users are paying that. It really doesn't matter what acronyms in middle handle the money. Cost of producing is all that matters.
People 100+ Km around Fukushima plant and 50 Km around Tchernobyl plant, probably think than Nuclear plant is so greenish energy, and so fun !
Look at the green babies in those areas... you will probably like it, far better than coal diseases . Any way coal usage is mostly used during a transition period between nuclear and renewable energy.
But even in France, the most nuclearized country (about 70% of electric energy is nuclear), this is only 8% of the total energy used in the country. Oetroleum is the first one, as on other part of the planet (after the sun for growing plants), far less green than coal for domestic usage.
But in germany they develop smart grid, wind turbine, push water at top of the hill during low usage time, so a dam can produce energy during peaks, without the need to conserve with dirty batteries. And they have there are ton and ton of local solution for free & renewable energy. The more important, is to reduce consumption, with a better isolation, and so, reducing heating & cooling systems (the most consuming ones far behind plane and road (not on rails) transportation. Other way is to use solar oven that works pretty well with moderate sun and other simple green tech. Reduce space between cooked matter and heating surface in other ovens.
thats it! thank you! Germany now starts the fight the people will get results in 10 years.