快把握機會，買到賺到唷！！ (第10頁)

shimingc
個人積分：14分
文章編號：76079958

14分

91樓

2020-01-07 23:41

icchenk wrote:
icchenk 2020-01-07 11:39

1樓

有圖有真相！！
瑞士能為什麼台灣不能！！
瑞士與台灣
火力發電比例2.3%：38.8%
中部人民你們用肺撐起台灣經濟！！謝謝你們的奉獻！！

我想先請教一下，當你做這種比較時，為什麼要拿瑞士2016的發電比例舉例，卻不提瑞士在2017年(剛好是你引用的2016年統計的次年）已經公投廢核通過，要以再生能源逐步替換掉核電廠，且在去年年底，已經關閉了第一座核電廠確定要拆除，所謂的瑞士能台灣為什麼不能，應該是說瑞士能以綠替核，台灣為什麼討論公共議題要用舊的或錯誤的資料試圖誤導。

shimingc

shimingc
個人積分：14分
文章編號：76080114

14分

92樓

2020-01-07 23:59

aronyang wrote:
1. 歐盟已經在考慮將核能列為綠能

這也是錯誤的資訊喔，歐盟沒有考慮過把核電列為綠能，而是將核電跟燃煤並列，並不會干涉成員國的政策，但是要使用核電與燃煤發電必須符合無顯著傷害原則（也就是說，歐盟並非考慮將核電視為綠電，而是跟燃煤發電一樣的發電方式。

https://www.greenpeace.org/taiwan/update/12188/破除謠言！歐盟永續金融手冊未將核能視為綠能/

再說一次，國家政策當然可以討論，但是不要引用錯誤的資料（無論是有意或無意的）

keypower

keypower
個人積分：450分
文章編號：76080122

450分

93樓

2020-01-08 0:00

樓主怎麼不乾脆一起問為什麼不能跟瑞士一樣所得?

明明硬體大大不同，硬要兩相比較

當然我們改進空間有，但是拿這個來比根本就像台媒下標題一樣

aronyang

aronyang
個人積分：7681分
文章編號：76080133

7681分

94樓

2020-01-08 0:02

shimingc wrote:
卻不提瑞士在2017年(剛好是你引用的2016年統計的次年）已經公投廢核通過，要以再生能源逐步替換掉核電廠，且在去年年底，已經關閉了第一座核電廠確定要拆除，所謂的瑞士能台灣為什麼不能，應該是說瑞士能以綠替核，台灣為什麼討論公共議題要用舊的或錯誤的資料試圖誤導。

"已經關閉了第一座核電廠確定要拆除" <=== ???

1. 瑞士的電力供應結構為54%水力發電、40%核能發電、4%來自其他，只有2%屬於再生能源。瑞士目前擁有5座核子反應爐。位於北邊貝茲瑙（Beznau）核電站的1號 2號反應爐，建於1969年最是老舊，在311日本核災發生之前，原來預計要在兩座反應爐附近增建第三座反應爐，但福島核災發生後瑞士掀起了強烈的反核浪潮。
2. 綠黨在2016年發起公投連署要求廢核，而公投的結果是，有54.2%的反對票拒絕了綠黨提出的廢核訴求。
3. 2018年的3月20日，瑞士停運三年最老舊的貝茲腦核電站又再次啟動，直到現在仍在運轉。

The world’s oldest nuclear power plant

shimingc

shimingc
個人積分：14分
文章編號：76080166

14分

95樓

2020-01-08 0:06

aronyang wrote:
"已經關閉了第一座核電廠確定要拆除" <=== ???

1. 瑞士的電力供應結構為54%水力發電、40%核能發電、4%來自其他，只有2%屬於再生能源。瑞士目前擁有5座核子反應爐。位於北邊貝茲瑙（Beznau）核電站的1號 2號反應爐，建於1969年最是老舊，在311日本核災發生之前，原來預計要在兩座反應爐附近增建第三座反應爐，但福島核災發生後瑞士掀起了強烈的反核浪潮。
2. 綠黨在2016年發起公投連署要求廢核，而公投的結果是，有54.2%的反對票拒絕了綠黨提出的廢核訴求。
3. 2018年的3月20日，瑞士停運三年最老舊的貝茲腦核電站又再次啟動，直到現在仍在運轉。

是的，已經公投成立，而且真剛好你又跳過了，2016廢核公投失敗，2017年廢核公投成立

https://technews.tw/2019/12/23/muhleberg-nuclear-bye/

就在半個月前，位於伯爾尼州的米勒貝格核電廠正式關閉準備拆除。

DandelionJack

DandelionJack
個人積分：7251分
文章編號：76080172

7251分

96樓

2020-01-08 0:07

icchenk wrote:
有圖有真相！！瑞士能(恕刪)

台灣這種島國情況，用電又用得兇，

應該加強用核電，至少要拉到百分之三十以上。

煤跟天然氣發電都要靠進口，儲存設備容量還是有限。

核能的安全庫存還比叫好搞一點。

不過，反核的聲音大，所以核能能搞，很可惜。

請多多點擊 Mobile01 網站內的贊助商廣告，有贊助商的支持才有穩定的Server和快速頻寬。

kuobill1234

kuobill1234
個人積分：1386分
文章編號：76080201

1386分

97樓

2020-01-08 0:12

DandelionJack wrote:
台灣這種島國情況，用(恕刪)

這就是洗腦成功的例子
洗著洗著才發現原來是對的
反對個屁

現在一個錯誤,要用好幾年的時間才能補回來
偏偏又不願意去改變

aronyang

aronyang
個人積分：7681分
文章編號：76080232

7681分

98樓

2020-01-08 0:14

shimingc wrote:
這也是錯誤的資訊喔，(恕刪)

EU leaders include nuclear energy in green transition

AP

Dec 14, 2019
Article history
PRINT
SHARE

BRUSSELS – European Union leaders agreed Friday that nuclear energy will be part of the bloc’s solution to making its economy carbon-neutral by 2050, allowing them to win the support of two coal-dependent countries.

EU heads of state and government agreed that nuclear energy will be recognized as a way to fight climate change as part of a deal that endorsed the climate target.

Although Poland did not immediately agree to the plan, the concessions on nuclear energy were enough for the Czech Republic and Hungary to give their approval.

The two nations had the support of France, which relies on nuclear power for 60 percent of its electricity.

They managed to break the resistance of skeptical countries, including Luxembourg, Austria and Germany, to get a clear reference to nuclear power in the meeting’s conclusions.

“Nuclear energy is clean energy,” Czech Prime Minister Andrej Babis said. “I don’t know why people have a problem with this.”

Slovak Prime Minister Peter Pellegrini insisted the EU would be unable to reach its climate targets without nuclear power plants.

Poland, which is one of the bloc’s biggest emitters and relies heavily on coal for its electricity production, was the sole holdout on the deal set out by new EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in her “European Green Deal” program.

In its final memorandum, the European Council “acknowledged the need to ensure energy security and to respect the right of the member states to decide on their energy mix and to choose the most appropriate technologies. Some member states have indicated that they use nuclear energy as part of their national energy mix.”

That line reassured the countries that are expected to suffer the most during the transition to clean power that their future nuclear power projects would be eligible for the billions in euros that will be made available as part of von der Leyen’s plan.

“This explicit nuclear mention was required by the Czech Republic and Poland,” French President Emmanuel Macron said. “I did not need it. But it is true that one can’t ask countries whose domestic production relies for 60 or 70 percent on coal to switch to all renewable overnight.”

Macron insisted the use of nuclear energy is essential to make sure EU members don’t become dependant to natural gas or electricity imports.

“We would expose ourselves to possible cut in supplies and would also increase spending on energies coming from third parties,” he said.

A low-carbon alternative to fossil fuels, nuclear energy is part of the energy mix of 14 of the 28 member states, representing some 30 percent of the electricity produced in the EU. Some scientists argue that over the past half a century, nuclear power stations have avoided the emission of an estimated 60 billion tons of carbon dioxide by offsetting fossil fuel combustion.

Some environmentalists expressed concern about the possibility of a recurrence of accidents like those at Chernobyl and Fukushima. They have urged the EU to instead embrace renewable energies including wind and solar power.

Ska Keller, the president of the Greens in the European Parliament, said: “Nuclear energy is still totally unsafe. It’s still very energy-costing — all the extraction of the uranium — and we still have no idea of what to do with the waste. It has nothing to do with renewable energy, nothing to do with the solution — it’s the absolute wrong direction.”

In recent weeks, EU countries have also split over a law aimed at channeling money into genuinely clean and sustainable investment. The main sticking point in their discussions has been whether financial products involving nuclear could be labeled as green.

This is not a fake news! 為了在2050年達到碳中和，所以正在討論核能(核分裂)視為過渡性綠能的議題，歐洲人很務實，衡量現況，邏輯討論，因時制宜。

icchenk

icchenk
個人積分：4814分
文章編號：76080245

4814分

樓主

2020-01-08 0:16

刪文刪文刪文刪文刪文刪文刪文刪文

shimingc

shimingc
個人積分：14分
文章編號：76080252

14分

100樓

2020-01-08 0:17

DandelionJack wrote:
煤跟天然氣發電都要靠進口，儲存設備容量還是有限。

核能的安全庫存還比叫好搞一點。

當台灣海峽是全世界最好的風場時，不考慮我們自己就有的資源才比較有問題，就好像德國開始在北海建立離岸風電場時，一開始的成本當然很高（因為是補貼廠商拉海底電纜建立初期風場），同一區域的後續風場價格就會大幅下滑，一樣以德國為例，前陣子離岸風場發的電甚至讓德國電價在某些時段落入負電價（電發太多）