Posted on 07/08/2023 5:22:05 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
Sweden has figured out a way to produce reliable energy without fossil fuels. It’s looking to build new nuclear power plants.
The European Union has been extremely aggressive in pushing to reduce carbon emissions. By 2030, it wants to reduce emissions by 55 percent compared with 1990 levels. Then, it wants to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.
Not surprisingly, this hasn’t gone well. Some countries worry about job losses from eliminating gas-powered cars. Prices on things from food to air travel are likely to increase, perhaps dramatically. The cost pressure is contributing to a destabilization in European politics.
[...]
Sweden is taking a different approach. It recently changed its energy production policy from “100 percent renewable” power to “100 percent fossil-free.” Around four decades ago, it voted to move away from nuclear energy. This vote signifies a reversal of that policy.
“This creates the conditions for nuclear power,” Finance Minister Elisabeth Svantesson said. “We need more electricity production, we need clean electricity, and we need a stable energy system.”
Within 20 years, demand for electricity is expected to double. New nuclear plants can accommodate that growth while not producing carbon emissions. Not that it matters much. In 2021, China produced almost 50 percent more carbon emissions than the EU and United States combined.
But at least this plan puts Sweden on course to have a reliable power system. Nuclear energy is an admittedly a severely damaged brand. But it’s also decades-old technology that’s a foundational part of U.S. and world power generation. In 2022, more power in the United States came from nuclear energy than wind and solar — combined. And that’s after decades of expensive subsidies and mandates. It’s widely used by some European countries, too. Around 70 percent of France’s power comes from nuclear plants.
(Excerpt) Read more at reviewjournal.com ...
Does Greta Thunberg approve this policy. If she does I wonder if the nuclear power industry bought her $$$.
That said, she might be shifting her opinions about nuclear energy (but IIRC she used to despise it--calling it dangerous).
As an aside, from what I have been reading, nuclear looks like a very solid answer to our energy problems and got a bad rap in the past because of overblown fears and hysterical exaggerations emanating from Three Mile Island, Fukushima, and Chernobyl.
I always say.. I will consider an EV when my state has as many nuclear plants as France per sqr mile.
My truck doesn't even have electric windows. That's one of the reasons I bought it.
Best response against Covid as well. They didn’t do the “stupid vax” .
We already knew how to produce electrical energy abundantly and reliably without tapping into hydrocarbon fuels, and the new technology available should be introduced and deployed throughout the world at earliest practical date. The newer Small Modular Reactors replace all the big, cumbersome built-in-place light water reactors designed fifty or sixty years ago. The newer designs can be built in a factory, shipped by rail or on semi-trailers to the site, be up and running in WEEKS, not years, and they take up a much smaller footprint on the earth’s surface.
https://www.nuscalepower.com/en
https://www.energy.gov/ne/advanced-small-modular-reactors-smrs
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/04/westinghouse-announces-a-small-nuclear-reactor.html
That combination makes the accidental problem seem less of a threat.
Wow, why didn't we think of that? S/OFF
One nuclear power plant can produce more usable and totally reliable electrical power {when required} than every windmill in the world.
The windmills can produce electricity but not on demand, which is when we want it, when it's too cold or too hot or too wet or too snow covered.
I'm not against new ideas, I love the hybrid auto, but the all electric car is a toy that belongs on a warm flat surface {like a golf course in Florida}.
Natural gas and oil and coal are still the three most used fuels for power in the world and will continue to dominate long after the end of the world {in 2033 according to AOC}.
Japan can tell the all about how to deal with nuclear energy waste byproduct.
Nuclear power requires a balanced view of things here where I live is TMI and in 1979 there was a giant scare show in the neighborhood.
Were there any follow-up studies on TMI to determine the negative effects of its radiation? Were any people actually killed by TMI?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.