The one that really breaks my heart is the SNR-300, a cutting-edge liquid metal sodium-cooled breeder reactor capable of unlocking the full potential of the majority isotope (U-238) rather than just the minority (U-235), giving us literally billions of years of current-day whole-earth power from known uranium resources (including seawater and erosion). It was 100% completed and ready to come up to power, but then Chernobyl happened and the people (of Germany) revolted. It is now an amusement park.<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNR-300" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNR-300</a><p>Another related timing coincidence is that a smaller sodium-cooled reactor in the USA (the EBR-2) demonstrated completely passive shutdown in loss of flow and loss of heat sink accidents without any control rods going in just 2 weeks before Chernobyl happened. Of course today almost no one has heard of it.<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_Breeder_Reactor_II#Passive_safety" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_Breeder_Reactor_I...</a>
Same story as Shoreham Long Island<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoreham_Nuclear_Power_Plant" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoreham_Nuclear_Power_Plant</a><p>Built and powered up, but never used..<p>"...the state taking over the plant and then attaching a 3 percent surcharge to Long Island electric bills for 30 years to pay off the $6 billion price tag"<p>"Had the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station gone into operation as planned, it would have prevented the emission of an estimated three million tons of carbon dioxide per year"
Similar to WNP3 in Washington state: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WNP-3_and_WNP-5" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WNP-3_and_WNP-5</a>
imho (!) ...<p>nice articles ... but - there is always a but ;))<p>yes, part of it was the "anti-nuclear sentiment" ... but i would say, only a smaller part.<p>the "real" reason was internal austrian politics.<p>you have to know the background: during the 1970ties a left-leaning socialist government propelled the country into the future - implemented a large package of reforms -, after decades of societal backlash & stagnation following the 2nd world-war and at first only marginal influence of the late 60ties and early 70ties worldwide students protests etc.<p>* <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruno_Kreisky" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruno_Kreisky</a><p>so after zwentendorf was build chancellor kreisky throw all of his popular weight behind it and did something remarkable (i would say: stupid): he said, if the popular vote ends against zwentendorf, he will resign => the liberal-conservative austrian peoples party saw the light to get rid of him and invested heavily into this ... the rest is history...<p>just my 0.02€
Since the article adds no value besides a rage bait, I would like to add that the resulting decision to not build any nuclear power plant without consulting the population first was a significant step for the Austrian population's participation in democratic processes. Resulting in for example this: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Hainburger_Au" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_the_Hainburger_A...</a>
Do we need nuclear power anymore? It dose not seem to occupy a very efficient spot as part of the grid anymore due to long spool up and power down times it has to always run at a steady load where what the grid really needs is something that can quickly spool up and down like gas or battery.<p>Its also really expensive because you need all the infrastructure for nuclear plus the infrastructure for steam turbines which all needs to be built and maintained and is very expensive
I've been noticing writing styles in stuff I read. This article, geez...<p>Three paragraphs seem to convey the same message "they built it, the public said no, so it never got switched on".<p>> Completed in mid-to-late 1970s, the plant in Zwentendorf cost around a billion euro to complete.<p>This sentence begins and ends with basically the same word. Feels like a highschooler level writing...
The irony is that a good chunk of Austria's electricity imports have a nuclear origin. Many of those reactors are a stone's throw away from the border.
YouTuber Tom Scott did a video about it:<p>This billion-euro nuclear reactor was never switched on<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUVZbBBHrI4" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUVZbBBHrI4</a>
It’s mind boggling how a country can be so rich as to spend millions of manhours on a project and never use it. Maybe we have become too rich as a species.