Gas prices - Where is gas still affordable?

I have the suspicion,

Hello Myrna_Loy then come on, be concrete with your level of knowledge! Or did you get that from your trampoline jumper? The one who suspects the goblins on the net? Steven

Hello

Exactly: "It's always the same in such debates."
There is hardly any highly radioactive waste in modern nuclear power plants.
That is a myth of the Greens.
We (Germany) were once a leader in controllable nuclear power. This was discarded for ideological reasons. The Chinese say thank you.

Steven

Well, the Major is right if you take it literally (phew, that hurts)

The highly radioactive waste is stored (mainly) in the two central interim storage facilities Ahaus, Gorleben, additionally in Jülich and Lubmin, as well as directly AT twelve nuclear power plants. So virtually nothing is stored IN the NPPs.

That does not mean that no HIGHly radioactive waste is produced.

Anyone claiming otherwise has probably been exposed to too much of it themselves; the probability in the armed forces is unfortunately higher for that than in the rest of the population (ammunition, old radar devices, etc.)

Hello Myrna_Loy

then come on, be specific with your level of knowledge!
Or did you get that from your trampoline jumper? the one who suspects goblins on the internet?

Steven

Ahahaha. Clever, clever.
It seems to me that not only the technical equipment of the Bundeswehr has major weaknesses.
You better bring a source that today's nuclear power plants could basically be operated with good butter and that the waste could also be mixed into children's muesli.

Edit: Butter pretzel greasy fingers are not suitable for error-free typing.

Deleted due to wrong thread. Sorry.

Could we not gradually all stop with the insults and slanders of other forum participants and possibly also political opponents? That doesn't get us anywhere. Let's please be idealists and not ideologists. ;-)

From a physics perspective, nuclear power is a double-edged sword. It reliably provides base load, and in its most modern form, a worst-case scenario is not only less likely but also smaller than before. It is practically CO2-free in energy production. Of course, not in investment and disposal. But wind turbines are not either in those aspects. It has a very high energy density, which makes it efficient.

Nevertheless, there is the disposal problem and no, it has not been solved even with the latest technology.

Reactors that recycle former nuclear waste as raw material in molten salt reactors into non-radioactive residues are only available on paper. A series-ready technology according to our safety standards does not yet exist. Time horizon: 30+ years. Nuclear FUSION is even completely ruled out in the next two generations.

Nuclear energy has hidden costs, because one does not pay for the storage, managing potential worst-case scenarios, etc., in the electricity price. It is therefore seemingly cheap. That must not be forgotten.

There is a trade-off here: reduce global warming at the expense of the final repository problem and a non-zero risk of a worst-case scenario?

I find it difficult to decide, but only in principle. For the above question and also for supply security in the coming winter, it is a red herring, since it is not available in the short or medium term anyway. Those who have it, have it, and those who do not, do not need to "build quickly" now.