this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2026
172 points (96.2% liked)

Europe

10606 readers
1241 users here now

News and information from Europe πŸ‡ͺπŸ‡Ί

(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 When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title.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
[–] SrMono@feddit.org 23 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Except that nuclear cannot be throttled and is no base line option.

Wind, solar, batteries and gas play well together in central Europe. Other countries have other resources, like water.

In addition hydrogen is complementary for heavy industries and can be produced when all batteries are filled up.

[–] encelado748@feddit.org 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Nuclear can be throttled, we do it all the time.

[–] trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

In electricity generation, it typically can't be throttled reasonably in a way that allows quick reaction to changing demand. Most reactors' power output is regulated by changing the chemistry of the coolant, which can only be done gradually, Using quicker control rods for everyday power adjustment rather than only for shutdown and startup, is avoided to avoid uneven, and therefore inefficient fuel burn. While it could be done, it would make nuclear power even more uneconomical than it already is by forcing more frequent shutdowns for fuel changes.

[–] encelado748@feddit.org 7 points 1 day ago

Nuclear load following is routinely done in France. You can see more details here: https://www.nice-future.org/docs/nicefuturelibraries/default-document-library/france.pdf

[–] plyth@feddit.org 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Like solar, batteries can compensate for the difference between supply and demand.

[–] trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Batteries don't scale well at all.

[–] sukhmel@programming.dev 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

But only if connected to a nuclear power plant?

[–] trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works -1 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

Doesn't matter what you connect them to, they don't scale well.

They take a lot of exotic materials and energy in a complicated process to produce, have a very limited life span, don't work without highly complex controllers, and a have comparatively low energy density.

[–] msage@programming.dev 2 points 11 hours ago

No?

There are many batteries with basic materials that can do tens of thousands of cycles.

They are heavy and big, which makes them unfit for cars, but great for this use case.

[–] coyootje@lemmy.world -1 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you that the other options are better. I'm just saying that nuclear can be a good temporary step in between to buy us time to perform the complete transition. And I get what you're saying about hydrogen but with the issues surrounding drinking water I don't know if we should really lean on that too much.

[–] SrMono@feddit.org 20 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The core difference here is: if we speed things up we can increase wind and solar and battery storage in the blink of an eye. Take a look at China’s new capacity.

Nuclear not so much. Combined with the follow up questions of end storage or even getting the cheap uranium (Russia) there is no real reason to debate.

[–] VibeSurgeon@piefed.social 11 points 1 day ago

It's hardly viable as a temporary step when the time to bring a new one online is 20 years. The economics are already bad today and have been trending to be worse every year, while renewables and batteries are trending in the complete opposite direction.

The time for transitionary measures has passed. Renewables and batteries are here today. All we need to do is build it.

[–] madde@feddit.org 10 points 1 day ago

New reactors take decades to build. We need to have energy autonomy and move towards net 0 now. We can't wait for shiny new reactors, which will be ready in 2050, if we start planning now.