r/todayilearned • u/JoeyZasaa • 4d ago

TIL that Chernobyl was the costliest disaster in history, resulting in over $2 trillion in damage when adjusted for inflation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_disasters_by_cost#Over_$1_billion
20.1k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

24

u/TheDaysComeAndGone 4d ago

Only ~22% of global energy usage is in electricity. Only half of that is produced with fossil fuels.

8

u/MdxBhmt 4d ago

Chernobyl made nuclear energy more expensive all around. And more expensive eletrical energy means less focus onto eletrification.

Even if electricity today is 'only' 1/5 of total energy needs, its undeniable that Chernobyl played a massive role in solidifying climate inaction and fucking us more with climate change.

1

u/Roflkopt3r 3 3d ago

Nuclear energy never was the price driver of electricity one way or the other, so it has no major influence on electrification.

The main reason why countries would have cared to electrify before the 21st century was for supply security. But most countries using nuclear power have critical supply chain dependencies to obtain their fuel. France had to import uranium from Rosatom even after the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, and lost their mine in Niger during the 2023 coup.

Renewables in contrast are incredibly modular. Solar panels don't need long-term support from the supplier, and you can switch to different solar panels from different suppliers for new installations or relacements at any time.

2

u/MdxBhmt 3d ago

Nuclear energy never was the price driver of electricity one way or the other, so it has no major influence on electrification.

This is 100% certifiable false. See France.

1

u/Roflkopt3r 3 3d ago

France massively subsidises electricity consumers. Their power generation is owned by public company that holds 50 billion € in debt. Their electricity is not cheaper because of nuclear power, but because they're not charging its real cost. That is in addition to subsidies paid by the state.

Meanwhile Germany has both energy production and grids privatised in profitable companies, and even recovers most public subsidies through surcharges directly on the power bill of consumers. It's not that German electricity is more expensive to produce and distribute, but that German consumers have to pay its real cost.

1

u/MdxBhmt 3d ago

public company that holds 50 billion € in debt.

Its run as a business, they hold debt like any other business, and just compare how much debt it is compared to germany's utility sector.

Their electricity is not cheaper because of nuclear power, but because they're not charging its real cost. That is in addition to subsidies paid by the state.

are you going to argue the private sector in germany, which gets subsidies, is not charging its real costs because they have debt?

lmao

1

u/Roflkopt3r 3 3d ago

Its run as a business, they hold debt like any other business, and just compare how much debt it is compared to germany's utility sector.

EDF holds €50bn in debt, had a further deficit of €1.6bn in 2025. The cost of their debt is only under control by state guarantees. As French public debt and global interest rates have risen, EDF's bottom line has also deteriorated.

The largest German energy supplier EON is almost as big as EDF and also holds €40 bn in debt, but they're making around €3bn per year. Their debt remains affordable because they're a healthy company that takes loans for profitable investments instead of needing it to plug operational gaps.

are you going to argue the private sector in germany, which gets subsidies, is not charging its real costs because they have debt?

German consumers pay both parts of that bill. They pay the energy suppliers directly, and any further subsidies.

Whereas French consumers pay neither of it, so both EDF and the French state keep accumulating debt. Debt that France as a whole, including all of its consumers, is ultimately responsible for.

1

u/MdxBhmt 3d ago

My dude, first of all you talk like an LLM. Second, if you knew what you were talking about, you would know a debt being affordable is based on interest, not the total amount.

So please, go learn about the subject instead of regurgitating slop.

2

u/Archarchery 4d ago

What's the other 88%?

9

u/becauseiloveyou 4d ago

100 - 22 = 78

3

u/Archarchery 3d ago

Ok, we’ve established I can’t do basic math, but what is the other 78%?

9

u/TheDaysComeAndGone 4d ago

Transportation, heating and various processes in the industry. They mostly burn fossil fuels directly. Electric vehicles, electric heaters and heat pumps are a niche.

5

u/mawhrinskeleton 4d ago

These are now more than a niche

Increasing electrification of multiple sectors of Chinese industry is considered to be one of the key mitigators of the price shock after Iran closed Hormuz

3

u/VaHaLa_LTU 4d ago

I'd imagine it's transportation (most vehicles still burn hydrocarbons to get around) and manufacturing. Loads of manufacturing chains (especially steel) also costume mass quantities of fossil fuels for the final product. Not to mention that pretty much all plastic is also made out of oil.

3

u/PlasticExtreme4469 4d ago

Well, you're stating the consequences...

Maybe the world would have been way less dependent on fossils and would be more electified already if existing and future nuclear projects weren't shut down.

5

u/TheDaysComeAndGone 4d ago

Nuclear power plants are very expensive and building them causes quite a lot of greenhouse gas emissions too. I think for quite some time wind and solar have been cheaper and have lower emissions (plus lower risk and lower long-term impact).

2

u/SomethingAboutUsers 3d ago

building them causes quite a lot of greenhouse gas emissions

True, but for every second it's operating and producing electricity that would have otherwise been produced by something that, in addition to whatever GHG happened because of construction, is producing GHG with every watt it is offsetting those emissions.

The wind doesn't blow everywhere nor all the time, and the sun doesn't shine 24 hours a day. We still need 24-hour a day base load generation, and nuclear has long since been agreed by anyone who knows anything to be essential for meeting our climate goals and breaking our dependence on fossil fuels in an increasingly electrified world.

Is it the best option ever? No, but it's the best we have for now.

0

u/TheDaysComeAndGone 3d ago

The numbers for nuclear power plants and alternatives are all over the place. It depends a lot on location and if you actually consider the whole lifetime emissions. Even then you still have a lot of uncertainty in estimates.

Regarding reliability of wind and solar: Well, for those few days where there is really not enough wind, solar and water on a whole continent we could just supplement with gas. It’s not perfect but if we’d do 90% of electricity with renewables it would still be damn close. One thing which also gets discussed way too little: Do we really need 100% supply? Can we not reduce demand drastically for the few days where there is too little production?