this post was submitted on 28 Jan 2026
208 points (96.0% liked)

Europe

9111 readers
1077 users here now

News and information from Europe ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡บ

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Azzu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It is still absolutely stupid to get rid of nuclear power before coal, I guess that's what they're talking about.

[โ€“] einkorn@feddit.org 4 points 1 day ago

Our coal usage is at an all time low and continues to decline. In fact the decline in recent years is greater than the contribution of nuclear power has ever had to our energy mix (roughly 2% per year).

[โ€“] JensSpahnpasta@feddit.org 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Let's be honest here: The last nuclear plants in Germany (and most of the western world!) were build in the 70s and 80s. The last german nuclear plant was finished in 1989 and switched off in 2023 after 34 years. Every other reactor was even older. Even if other countries are running reactors that are old as fuck, that is not safe. So there was no way to keep them running into the 2030s or 2040s.

(and I know that other countries are running their old reactors and that is also not safe)

[โ€“] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Those reactors get refurbished frequently. The site may be 34 years old but the reactors and cooling are newer.

No, they are not. What gets refurbished is everything in there (pipes, cables etc.), but you can't replace the reactor vessel and containment.

[โ€“] Azzu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

How do you know that? Are you an expert on nuclear power technology? I at least see absolutely no reason why proper maintenance wouldn't allow reactors to work infinitely. That's kind of the definition of "proper maintenance".

[โ€“] JensSpahnpasta@feddit.org 2 points 1 day ago (2 children)

There are several reasons: Those reactors were planned for a runtime of 30-40 years. And you can't prolong those runtimes by "proper maintenance" due to some hard facts introduced by the radioactivity. The steel in the containment & pressure vessel will get radiation damage with time. That is something you can monitor - but the pressure vessel is the reactor and if that is damaged, you can't simply replace it. So there is a hard limit on runtime. You might get a few years more out of them, you might be lucky, but that really is not a safe way to run a reactor.

You can take a look at what that actually means when you look at France: They have build nearly all of their reactors between 1977 and 1994 and that means that most of their reactors have reached those 40 years they were designed for. France totally failed to start building replacement reactors - Flamanville III is not enough and was extremely expensive and way late. And they need to run those reactors - if there are problems with too many reactors, they have not enough capacity. We already saw that a while ago when too many of those old reactors developed cracks. So if there is a big issue, french politics need to ensure that there is enough electricity generation. And that political pressure is something that is not compatible with a safe way of running nuclear reactors, esp. when you're running old reactors.

[โ€“] Azzu@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

I get that. But if proper maintenance means "replace the reactor pressure chamber", then that's what should be done. I'm sure building a new reactor pressure chamber every 40 years and replacing it creates less CO2 than 40 years of coal power generation.

And anyway, everyone seems to miss the part where I only said that coal should be phased out before nuclear, not that nuclear never needs to be phased out. Both coal and nuclear need to go, but overall, coal is worse. The only reason coal is kept for longer is because it's cheaper than properly maintaining nuclear.

[โ€“] JensSpahnpasta@feddit.org 2 points 13 hours ago

You can't replace the pressure chamber. The way to do this is to build a new reactor block with a new pressure chamber and this is exactly what is not happening.

[โ€“] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago

Ontario has this issue and we are building SMRs for this reason.