That is true. We see 90 years (first photoelectric effect discovered) and trillions of dollars and STILL the green tech ponzi scheme does not float in a free market system. The massive costs of manufacture in China using coal is doting it with billions of tons of CO2 annually that cannot be recuperated due to power balance issues, and the poor EROEI when counting in backup makes it FAIL in competition with ANY power source.
This is true. We see 78 years and mnay trillions of DOLLARS but still the nuclear ponzi scheme does not float on a free market system. The massive cost and the high CO2 and low EROI for nuclears power makes it FAIL in comeptition with green and clean technologies.
You must no become angry that your atomic dreams fail. This is the realitiy.
Green tech cannot keep running without subsidies - nuclear was invested in research and then is built on commercial scale in the US. Unlike the green tech, it does not require subsidies to keep operating. The reason its not built is uneducated imbeciles that do not know basic physics do not want it in their back yard.
Also we see the true cost of nuclear with the catastrophes of Tschernobyl and Fukushima which cost together over $732 billion -- but still the cost for these grows.
Free energy from the green power industry now dominates new energy productions. You cannot deny this truth.
That's right, after 50 years of investment and 1$ trillion in subsidies worldwide to green power, it contributed less total power generated worldwide than nuclear did in 5 years! The toxic hazard waste made from mining nyobium and others for green tech (unlike nuclear power) will NEVER decay, meaning it will remain and bioaccumulate for as long as earth lasts!
They cost more CO2 per watt generated and are an unsustainable financial bubble. Dont cry for your green dreams.
the economy, as we now see green tech abandoned outright, or in the case of Spain outright fraud as light is bought from the grid to shine onto solar panels to have them re-sell the power back to the grid! This patter clearly shows the inferior economic performer.
As you rightly claim, green is absolutely unsustainable without continuing subsidies for even basic operation - while nuclear does not need subsidy for normal operation.
This was exactly my reaction (I was in favour of nuclear power before anyway).
I couldn't understand Germany's reaction to this, who I usually consider to be a relatively rational country.
jamma246 2 weeks ago
@DogCognition
That is true. We see 90 years (first photoelectric effect discovered) and trillions of dollars and STILL the green tech ponzi scheme does not float in a free market system. The massive costs of manufacture in China using coal is doting it with billions of tons of CO2 annually that cannot be recuperated due to power balance issues, and the poor EROEI when counting in backup makes it FAIL in competition with ANY power source.
You must be sad that you green dream fails.
52111centrumcz 1 month ago
@52111centrumcz
This is true. We see 78 years and mnay trillions of DOLLARS but still the nuclear ponzi scheme does not float on a free market system. The massive cost and the high CO2 and low EROI for nuclears power makes it FAIL in comeptition with green and clean technologies.
You must no become angry that your atomic dreams fail. This is the realitiy.
DogCognition 1 month ago
@DogCognition
Green tech cannot keep running without subsidies - nuclear was invested in research and then is built on commercial scale in the US. Unlike the green tech, it does not require subsidies to keep operating. The reason its not built is uneducated imbeciles that do not know basic physics do not want it in their back yard.
52111centrumcz 1 month ago
@52111centrumcz
Exactly correct!! This is why nuclear power now falls for many years but the renewable technologies grow at AWESOME rate!!
The atomkrafte dream dies before you.
DogCognition 1 month ago
@52111centrumcz
Also we see the true cost of nuclear with the catastrophes of Tschernobyl and Fukushima which cost together over $732 billion -- but still the cost for these grows.
Free energy from the green power industry now dominates new energy productions. You cannot deny this truth.
DogCognition 1 month ago
@52111centrumcz
Very true -- we see now the truth of clean technologies which bring economic benefit exposing the lies from nuclear ponzi scheme.
After 75 years and $1.3 trillion in subsidies now atomic power can not comepte with the green energy revlution.
DogCognition 1 month ago
@52111centrumcz
Correct again -- this is why renewables grow as nucler fails globally. This pattern acceraltes now.
DogCognition 1 month ago
@DogCognition
That's right, after 50 years of investment and 1$ trillion in subsidies worldwide to green power, it contributed less total power generated worldwide than nuclear did in 5 years! The toxic hazard waste made from mining nyobium and others for green tech (unlike nuclear power) will NEVER decay, meaning it will remain and bioaccumulate for as long as earth lasts!
They cost more CO2 per watt generated and are an unsustainable financial bubble. Dont cry for your green dreams.
52111centrumcz 1 month ago
@DogCognition
the economy, as we now see green tech abandoned outright, or in the case of Spain outright fraud as light is bought from the grid to shine onto solar panels to have them re-sell the power back to the grid! This patter clearly shows the inferior economic performer.
As you rightly claim, green is absolutely unsustainable without continuing subsidies for even basic operation - while nuclear does not need subsidy for normal operation.
52111centrumcz 1 month ago