The Swiss reject rapid phase-out of nuclear power

[webfact]

The Swiss reject rapid phase-out of nuclear power

 

 

BERN: -- The swiss have rejected the Green Party’s initiative to speed up the phasing out of the country’s nuclear power plants by 54.2% in a nationwide referendum.

 

Only six out of the country’s 26 Cantons in predominantly French-speaking areas came out in favour of the proposal.

 

The country’s five nuclear plants currently provide around 35% of its electricity with almost two-thirds coming from hydroelectric power thanks to the alps.

 

The movement to speed up the phase out was born in the wake of the Fukushima disaster in Japan, when Germany eliminated 40% of its nuclear reactors.

 

‘No’ supporters argued that the early closure would simply mean that Switzerland would be more reliant on imported fossil fuels and nuclear power from France.

 

The Swiss government said that the initiative would have left insufficient time for the development of solar and wind alternatives.

 

A yes vote would have seen the reactors Muehleberg and Beznau I and II closed next year, followed by Goesgen in 2024 and Leibstadt in 2029.

 

Now the plants will be able to operate according to their owner’s commercial plans pending approval from safety regulators. Some will now likely continue operating until they are over 60 years old in the 2030s and 2040s.

 

 

-- © Copyright Euronews 2016-11-28

[Grouse]

Sensible people, the Swiss!

[khunano]

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

Sensible people, the Swiss!

....until something goes wrong!!!

[blazes]

Yes, a sensible lot, unlike their German neighbours, whose knee-jerk response to the Japanese tsunami has meant that Germans now have to pay millions more euros for their electricity since the close-down of their nuclear sources.

 

Another reason to vote Merkel out in next year's elections.

[Grubster]

10 minutes ago, blazes said:

Yes, a sensible lot, unlike their German neighbours, whose knee-jerk response to the Japanese tsunami has meant that Germans now have to pay millions more euros for their electricity since the close-down of their nuclear sources.

 

Another reason to vote Merkel out in next year's elections.

I don't think the Swiss or the Germans were dumb enough to put their back up generators on the beach. Like the country that made the name tsunami did.

[williamgeorgeallen]

1 hour ago, khunano said:

....until something goes wrong!!!

actually nothing even has to go wrong for things to be bad. the ongoing cost of storing the waste is immense. it needs to be stored for tens of thousands of years.  

[cracker1]

"The movement to speed up the phase out was born in the wake of the Fukushima disaster in Japan, when Germany eliminated 40% of its nuclear reactors."

Did Germany have reactors in Japan, or did Germany close down it's reactors in Germany ?

[Baerboxer]

3 hours ago, Grubster said:

I don't think the Swiss or the Germans were dumb enough to put their back up generators on the beach. Like the country that made the name tsunami did.

 

Germany big country, small coastline. Japan small islands country.

 

Maybe not sensible but given the Japanese obsession with quality and zero defect understandable.

[manarak]

16 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Germany big country, small coastline. Japan small islands country.

 

Maybe not sensible but given the Japanese obsession with quality and zero defect understandable.

 

as far as I understood the problem, it seems the US designs for the Japanese reactors were a bit optimistic regarding possible Tsunami size.

all these plans date back to the sixties where US science thought itself invincible.

 

dealing with nuclear power, one would think the engineers would asses possible tsunami size, like ... okay there is a 99% probability for tsunamis stopped by 12 meter walls - let's make the wall 24 meters.

Instead they said ok, 12 meters then, screw these remaining 1%.

 

One has to wonder....

 

[KhunBENQ]

4 hours ago, blazes said:

that Germans now have to pay millions more euros for their electricity

What an understatement

This chaotic energy politics will cost double digit billion of Euros overall.

Abolish nuclear power, abolish coal, abolish fossil at all,...

Plaster the country with wind generators, solar panels.

Building expensive new power lines through the whole country from north to south, digging parts of it underground to avoid civil resistance.

Building battery complexes (huge halls) to buffer the erratic wind energy...

And what will they do if power needed: buy from the French nuclear plants.

 

[Stargeezr]

Hey Switzerland!  Canada  is getting  hit  with  the new

Carbon  Tax,  How  would   you like to buy  some gently

used Coal fired  power plants,  and all the  coal  you need?

 Geezer

[ace]

14 hours ago, manarak said:

 

as far as I understood the problem, it seems the US designs for the Japanese reactors were a bit optimistic regarding possible Tsunami size.

all these plans date back to the sixties where US science thought itself invincible.

 

dealing with nuclear power, one would think the engineers would asses possible tsunami size, like ... okay there is a 99% probability for tsunamis stopped by 12 meter walls - let's make the wall 24 meters.

Instead they said ok, 12 meters then, screw these remaining 1%.

 

One has to wonder....

 

If I remember correctly it was engineered to withstand a quake up to about 9 on the richter scale (and associated tsunami),  but not 9.5. The reason was that they didn't extend the analysis of the historical record sufficiently far back.  Japan had a relatively quiet period viz earthquakes last century,  so what they estimated to be a once in a 1000 year event was in fact a 100 year event. (approximately).  It's a textbook case in statistics now. 

[Grubster]

18 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Germany big country, small coastline. Japan small islands country.

 

Maybe not sensible but given the Japanese obsession with quality and zero defect understandable.

Japan is bigger than Germany and what kind of obsession with quality and zero defect led them to think putting their back up generators on the beach in one of the most active earthquake zones in the world would be a good idea. A ten year old autistic kid could have figured that one out.  That is the one and only reason that that Nuke melted down.      Stupidity at the highest level. Criminal also.

[manarak]

8 hours ago, ace said:

If I remember correctly it was engineered to withstand a quake up to about 9 on the richter scale (and associated tsunami),  but not 9.5. The reason was that they didn't extend the analysis of the historical record sufficiently far back.  Japan had a relatively quiet period viz earthquakes last century,  so what they estimated to be a once in a 1000 year event was in fact a 100 year event. (approximately).  It's a textbook case in statistics now. 

 

yeah - but it's still a case of managers making a decision that should have been made by... I don't know who, but certainly not managers, not investors and not politicians.

 

I'm familiar with various measurements of risk and how to mitigate risk - the more I observe, the more I think the best risk management is not statistics, it is a good risk manager.

Sometimes instead of preventing something, it is best to take risk events as granted, such as submersion of the plant, so that it can be designed in a way that it will still be operation even when underwater...