Electricity supplies cannot be guaranteed in Belgium in the month of November

[asus killer]

On 9/29/2018 at 7:37 PM, ElfenSky said:

I understand having to maintain and modernize, but I still disagree and don't understand the reasoning of phasing them out. Nuclear is literally the best option with our current technology, especially considering we're not that earthquake prone.

well, if you have a problem with the size of Belgium you will all become refugee. Their's also that small detail, other than that nuclear FTW.

 

"are having safety issues over the past recent years"... This damn liberals hippies. 

[jagdtigger]

2 hours ago, suicidalfranco said:

Frankly i moved to wood burning to keep the house warm in winter, gas bill had reached a ridiculous point where having the audacity to try to keep the house at 17° +/-0,5°, would cost me around close to 1000€ per month.

Wow thats nasty, we dont even pay half as much for an entire year(and ours includes hot water)....

[MoonSpot]

36 minutes ago, jagdtigger said:

Wow thats nasty, we dont even pay half as much for an entire year(and ours includes hot water)....

Waiting to find out that their house is an open door airplane hanger to justify that sort of cost/mth.

[LeSheen]

On 9/29/2018 at 8:43 PM, Donut417 said:

It sounds like they need to look in to more Solar and Wind power options. 

Seems like you are not that familiar with the geography of belgium...

We are looking in to those things. But there's is nowhere near enough free space for solar and wind power. At least not enough if we phase out nuclear.

[Donut417]

1 hour ago, LeSheen said:

Seems like you are not that familiar with the geography of belgium...

We are looking in to those things. But there's is nowhere near enough free space for solar and wind power. At least not enough if we phase out nuclear.

Its called putting solar panels on your roof. There are also new designs for Wind turbines where they can be put on the roof too, or there are the ones like Detroit Metro Airport uses that are much smaller and take up a lot less space. 

[poochyena]

On 9/29/2018 at 12:43 PM, Donut417 said:

Why? Chernobyl, Three Mile Island and Fukushima.

The fact you can name all the major nuclear power plant disasters is proof of how safe they are. Can you easily name all the coal mine disasters? Dam disasters? Oil? Solar? Wind? Natural gas? You can't, because there have just been so many deaths involving those power sources that as soon as one happens, another quickly happens and you forget about the first. Its so common, that it isn't unusual enough to remember.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_accidents

[thorhammerz]

Belgium doesn't really have a whole lot of other options if it doesn't want to retain (or better yet, go all-out) Nuclear over electricity - as primarily an energy importer they have realistically very few options left.

• Import electricity from France... generated also by nuclear power!
• North-Sea imports of NatGas via Norway (but there's only so much they can spare... Belgium generates around/over 50% of its electricity via nuclear plants for good reason! This is before the Norwegian countries have to actively expand their armed forces over the next decade, which is liable to suck up a large portion of the currently exported crude/crude-derived products).
• Import LNG (freezing Natural Gas into a container, shipping it across an ocean or two, and then unfreezing it for use, is as expensive as it sounds!) from an extra-continental source.
• Burn coal - comparatively cheaper (solid chunks of rocks typically don't have many issues/complaints about shipped in tight not-so-delicately-handled packages), but politically poisonous if the country wants to maintain any semblance of following whatever green-energy-emissions-protocol they claim to be following.
• Import Russian NatGas (not particularly viable in the long term, considering any and all petroleum-related supplies from Russia to Western Europe has a very real danger of being cut off courtesy of the upcoming game of Risk In 3D that the Kremlin will be playing in the vicinity of the Eastern-to-Central European countries over the next 5-10 years).
• Solar? Panels on houses and roads make very good green-energy porn ideals and all... until one considers the proportion of electricity generated vs. consumed (to say nothing of the improvements needed to battery capacities in order to make solar truly viable). Likewise for wind power (additionally requires favorable geography / weather patterns, laced with a generous topping of NIMBY if built near civilians).

Nuclear is here to stay - the choice between keeping the lights on (and by extension, a country running) versus the small chance (which can be further mitigated by implementing and improving proper safety procedures) of radiation leaking out isn't a particularly hard one.

[Donut417]

This guy built his own nuclear reactor. So.......... Probably not the correct solution, but it might crazy enough to work. 

[Nicnac]

Ivan! Fill up heating oil!