Mnementh said:
TheJimbo1234 said:
Mnementh said:
TheJimbo1234 said:
But that doesn't change anything I said. For exmaple, making nuclear plants would have been a better option and Germany would have been able to export more power constantly.
|
Actually France (>90% power from nuclear plants) was in dire need of electricity the winter. They paid 2€ per kWh. We exported everything we could, but the cables weren't big enough, so the UK also got money out of France. 
|
That doesn't mean Wind is good though, nor my points wrong.
It just means France did not keep up with their growing power demands and Germany did. And as I said previously, Germany would have seen greater returns if it had invested in Nuclear, not wind.
|
Well, it is not that France didn't try. They develop the next generation of nuclear power - the EPR.
They build one in France and one in Finland:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_Nuclear_Power_Plant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olkiluoto_Nuclear_Power_Plant
The construction has been delayed by years and the costs in both cases already more than doubled. That sounds like a real sane investment. That's what you recommend germany?
|
Well that is only one type of Gen 3+ reactors. Why did they not opt to build other variants, new or old? The fact that a prototype reactor went over budget is anything but surprising and not exactly reason to dismiss all Nuclear Reactors.
