Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst ... 23456 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 58

Thread: green energy (Germany) beat nuclear energy(France) in cost effiency!

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    you make a big mistake here you think a Solar power plant can not operate 24/7 right? you are wrong!
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_updraft_tower
    this is solar power and operate 24/7 in full load.
    Check the power rating. This is woefully insufficient. Moreover it does not really operate 24/7 even if it uses thermal storage, it will generate almost nothing in the winter when the demand is highest.

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    also Osmotic power plants and wave power plants also operate 24h/7day per week.
    The innumeracy of nuclear opponents never fails to amaze me. The largest and only osmotic power plant ever constructed produces barely enough power for two electric kettles. Even if its output was doubled as suggested in the article you linked to, 125000 such power plants would be required to replace just one nuclear reactor.

    Wave power is just as intermittent as wind power. It generates substantial energy only when there are large waves.

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    wrong a updraft tower is a solar power plant and operate 24/7 ! also a smart grid network worldwide makes it unlikely that there isn't any wind blowing WORLDWIDE.
    A smart grid is supposed to be about demand management, so that when there is no wind, the poor who cannot afford to pay more for electricity are cut off first, and the rich are unharmed. It is not about a worldwide grid, which is technically impossible - the transmission losses would make it impractical, not to mention the incredible cost of this scheme.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tweenk View Post
    What is the source of these numbers? These sums are several times the construction costs of all German nuclear power plants. Links to German-only videos are not very useful.
    not useful for you. but I'm german lol.
    the source was: ZDF the german Government TV (but independent)
    another video with similar tropic :


    in fact you can never beat the german "ZDF"

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZDF

    in fact about this tropic the ZDF would never bring up a lie.

    the facts are clear nuclear power plants are FAKE up to 100%!

    Quote Originally Posted by Tweenk View Post
    This is completely unintelligible to me. What exactly are you arguing? That renewable energy is given extra money, yet it is actually cheaper than fossil fuel burning?
    my point is the "truth" there are valid power sources and there are stupid power sources.

    cold-fusion is valid compared to this hot-fusion is "stupid"

    also nuclear power plants are "stupid" its only useful for weapons or medicine but not for a energy source.

    there are so much more powerful energy sources like "Osmotic power" really no one need nuclear power plants.

    we need a great mix of different energy sources but we have to opt out "obsolete" power sources like "nuclear power"

    if you compare it to cold-fusion its 100% obsolete.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tweenk View Post
    If a leftist / Green politician is your idea of a reliable source on nuclear power, then you are a lost case.
    i don't care about "leftist / Green politician" i care about the Truth you can read the truth in his words in the LAW!

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tweenk View Post
    Check the power rating.
    this is not a valid criteria the only valid criteria is: its "cheap"

    also you can double the power output with the same "tower" if you compare the updraft tower with a downdraft tower!
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_...28downdraft%29
    you only need to push water into the hot stream at top of the tower and let it fall into second part of the tower.
    then you get 166% of the overall power output and its very "cheap"

    Quote Originally Posted by Tweenk View Post
    This is woefully insufficient.
    this doesn't matter its a cheap and unlimited power source.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tweenk View Post
    Moreover it does not really operate 24/7 even if it uses thermal storage, it will generate almost nothing in the winter when the demand is highest.
    it also works in the Winter it only don't have 100% of the output but this doesn't matter because its still cheap.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tweenk View Post
    The innumeracy of nuclear opponents never fails to amaze me.
    wow you really beat me hard.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tweenk View Post
    The largest and only osmotic power plant ever constructed produces barely enough power for two electric kettles. Even if its output was doubled as suggested in the article you linked to, 125000 such power plants would be required to replace just one nuclear reactor.
    if you put the same 400 billion dollar (only for Germany ) in research like the nuclear power gets then you will get a great technique.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tweenk View Post
    Wave power is just as intermittent as wind power. It generates substantial energy only when there are large waves.
    some systems are focused on small waves but that not the point in a smart grid you need many power sources to backup them to make a fail impossible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tweenk View Post
    A smart grid is supposed to be about demand management, so that when there is no wind, the poor who cannot afford to pay more for electricity are cut off first, and the rich are unharmed. It is not about a worldwide grid, which is technically impossible - the transmission losses would make it impractical, not to mention the incredible cost of this scheme.
    transmission losses tend to be ZERO if you use high-voltage, direct current (HVDC) electric power transmission or High-temperature superconductivity

    the german right now change their current cables from AC current to DC

    they plan a Super high-voltage, direct current network all over Europe.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-te...erconductivity

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-vo...direct_current

    " It is not about a worldwide grid, which is technically impossible"

    you are wrong it is Possible! IT IS Possible with a HVDC Network!

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    882

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tweenk View Post
    If a leftist / Green politician is your idea of a reliable source on nuclear power, then you are a lost case.
    Because the other side of the aisle is the pinnacle of honesty. Which is why Greece elected Nazis.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yogi_berra View Post
    Because the other side of the aisle is the pinnacle of honesty. Which is why Greece elected Nazis.
    true but the german "Left-wing party" isn't like "Nazis" LOL ...

    but even a "Nazi" can tell you the truth about a "tropic"

    and nuclear power isn't a tropic about nazis or left its a technical tropic in fact the German "Lefts" are not generally against nuclear power its just that all LAWs in Germany are "fake" (means the laws are so complex and most of the time the rich WIN and the poor lose. )

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tweenk View Post
    ....
    dear Tweenk there are more power plants with the ability to backup and do base load:

    Tidal power for example and a wood-gas-diesel power plant as another example.

    and "Marine current power" and Geothermal energy works to in island for example.

    also GAS driven power-plants can be used to backup with methane synthesis

    http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/EE-Gas

    and Diesel power plants can also be driven with wood if you use a alpfakat http://www.alphakat.de/temp/index.php

    German AlphaKat with a German Diesel engine fix your "Base-load-nightmare" problems instantly!

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    3,092

    Default geothermal and hydroelectric plants are pretty good

    But your base needs to be nuclear.

    70% nuclear, 30% green is about right.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    101

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qaridarium View Post
    cold-fusion is valid compared to this hot-fusion is "stupid"
    Hot fusion isn't ready yet. Cold fusion will never exist period.

    Also, you probably oppose "hot fusion" because it would make nuclear reactors highly efficient and low waste. It would almost make nuclear power impossible to criticise. Oh no.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Even though Germany won't build anymore reactors, the rest of the world will. I'm wondering if the green revolution will also improve safety, considering this statistic suggests at least 18 more nuclear reactors will be constructed in the vicinity of Germany.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •