Can someone explain in layman terms what could be the worst possible outcome for letting these nuclear power reactors run for many more years? I don't see the "green party" connection to these...
Can someone explain in layman terms what could be the worst possible outcome for letting these nuclear power reactors run for many more years? I don't see the "green party" connection to these reactors, are they polluting the environment or affecting climate in any way?
With proper ConOps and upgrades, none. The U.S. has several reactors undergoing life extensions to 60 or 80 years. I’ve heard some comments that Electrabel has a bad record, but I haven’t looked...
With proper ConOps and upgrades, none. The U.S. has several reactors undergoing life extensions to 60 or 80 years. I’ve heard some comments that Electrabel has a bad record, but I haven’t looked too far into it.
In 2003, the Federal Government [Belgium] passed a law that nuclear reactors would have to stop producing electricity 40 years after their installation.
This was in part an agreement to appease the Green parties in government who have been noteworthy for their long-standing opposition to nuclear power.
In spite of this, the Doel 1 and 2, as well as the Tihange 1 reactors (that started producing power in 1985) were allowed to extend their operations until 2025.
The same extension was then applied to Belgium's most recent reactors, Doel 4 and Tihange 3, earlier this year. This decision comes in light of the energy crisis that has engulfed Europe and is intended to guarantee energy security in Belgium. Discussions between the Belgian Government and Engie are currently taking place to decide how they will now run until 2035.
[...]
All eyes are now turned to the Doel 3 and Tihange 2 reactors, whose shutdowns were scheduled for 2022 and 2023 respectively. After strong arguments on both sides, it was announced on 23 September that Doel 3 will be permanently dismantled and will cease all production by 1 October onwards.
Can someone explain in layman terms what could be the worst possible outcome for letting these nuclear power reactors run for many more years? I don't see the "green party" connection to these reactors, are they polluting the environment or affecting climate in any way?
With proper ConOps and upgrades, none. The U.S. has several reactors undergoing life extensions to 60 or 80 years. I’ve heard some comments that Electrabel has a bad record, but I haven’t looked too far into it.
I don't know, but presumably it's the risk of an accident if safety upgrades aren't sufficient.
From the article:
[...]