• pedro
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    What kind of risk are you talking about?

    The electrical network connecting all your federated renewable infrastructures is managed by one entity already, isn’t it? That’s the same kind of risk you describe.

    I get why people don’t like nuclear power and there are many valid arguments against it but yours is not

    • bstix@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The overall grid is managed by governments cross countries in Europe. The production is not. While the producers do have an obligation to provide enough electricity at all times, the consumer is free to purchase the electricity from any distributor they want. This creates a free market for pricing while keeping the production regulated. For a small country like Sweden, producing everything in nuclear would destroy the market mechanism on pricing, leaving then with a monopoly.

      The risks towards energy production are stuff like war, natural disasters and terror. All of which have been relevant within the last ten years somewhere in the world and increasingly so. The only way to maintain a functional distribution of electricity in these situations is to have the production de-centralised.

        • bstix@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t have anything particular against nuclear as a source of energy. I just don’t think it can done fast enough and in an economically feasible way. Even if they do make more nuclear plants, they are going to need something else in the meantime before the new plants can be ready if the forecasted increase is to be trusted.