Post AvMvEhMNo8l7HMtbF2 by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
 (DIR) More posts by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
 (DIR) Post #AvMvEecE0meGldHi1A by collectifission@greennuclear.online
       2025-06-21T18:23:45Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       We have a heatwave and, right on cue, antis are scaremongering again on French nuclear reactors shutting down.A few facts, to inoculate yourself against the FUD:- The French nuclear fleet has seen production losses of 0.3% annually since the year 2000 due to warm weather [1]. This is expected to rise slightly in the coming decades due to climate change.- The summer has traditionally been a slow season for EDF, with lower demand compared to winter. EDF uses this time to put reactors into maintenance.- Yes, 2022 was an exceptional year, with issues found in the piping of a few units, which triggered a wider ad hoc maintenance program.- The problem is not that there isn't enough cooling water. The issue is protecting wildlife, which may be affected if too much warm water is released in an already hot river.- The solution is known: build cooling towers. The affected Bugey NPP that is now circulated in media as being affected, has cooling towers for units 4 and 5, but uses water from the Rhône river directly for units 2 and 3. The latter are affected. Building cooling towers for them is always a possibility, but isn't done (yet) because of the low impact annually (see point 1).Hope this helps![1] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/aug/03/edf-to-reduce-nuclear-power-output-as-french-river-temperatures-rise#Nuclear #NuclearEnergy #Climate #ClimateChange #France
       
 (DIR) Post #AvMvEfTOp5BPQYAAts by Changaco@mastodon.cloud
       2025-06-21T19:08:42Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @collectifission I would add that French nuclear reactors are slowed down a lot more because of insufficient electricity demand than because of heatwaves. They've been outputting significantly less than they could have for more than two months because there isn't enough demand.Source: my own regular observations of https://energygraph.info/d/q7IpAJHVz/overview?orgId=1&refresh=30m and https://app.electricitymaps.com/zone/FR/72h/hourly
       
 (DIR) Post #AvMvEgGJtCJZsH3F9U by collectifission@greennuclear.online
       2025-06-21T19:11:35Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @Changaco Quite right! That would be the downside of having nuclear energy dominate your grid: your capacity factors tend to be rather low because it has to follow consumer demand.
       
 (DIR) Post #AvMvEgp3o26Vc1IzIm by Changaco@mastodon.cloud
       2025-06-21T19:23:44Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @collectifission That downside isn't inherent to the dominance of nuclear power in a grid. It wouldn't exist if there was enough storage capacity (pumped storage, hydrogen, batteries) to absorb the nuclear surplus.
       
 (DIR) Post #AvMvEhMNo8l7HMtbF2 by publius@mastodon.sdf.org
       2025-06-21T22:17:24Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @Changaco @collectifission Yeah, but storage to carry over a surplus for a month or more is more expensive than an idle nuclear plant. So no reason to build it.
       
 (DIR) Post #AvNmMjkI7Jm8Z6nSjo by Changaco@mastodon.cloud
       2025-06-22T08:12:43Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @publius @collectifission That may have been true in the past, but with intermittent renewables on the rise, plus the need to produce large quantities of hydrogen without releasing CO2 into the atmosphere, we should probably be building a lot more storage and power-to-gas capacity nowadays.