86
Romania blasts rock to divert water from drought-hit Danube to nuclear reactor
(www.theguardian.com)
this post was submitted on 03 Aug 2026
86 points (97.8% liked)
Europe
11734 readers
460 users here now
News and information from Europe πͺπΊ
(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)
Rules (2024-08-30)
- This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
- No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
- Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
- No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
- Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
- If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
- Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
- Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
- No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
- Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.
(This list may get expanded as necessary.)
Posts that link to the following sources will be removed
- on any topic: Al Mayadeen, brusselssignal:eu, citjourno:com, europesays:com, Breitbart, Daily Caller, Fox, GB News, geo-trends:eu, news-pravda:com, OAN, RT, sociable:co, any AI slop sites (when in doubt please look for a credible imprint/about page), change:org (for privacy reasons), archive:is,ph,today (their JS DDoS websites)
- on Middle-East topics: Al Jazeera
- on Hungary: Euronews
Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media (incl. Substack). Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com
(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)
Ban lengths, etc.
We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.
If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.
If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the admin that applied the rule (check modlog first to find who was it.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Wow, all that super stable, super reliable base load energy is just mindblowing!! Let's build more nuclear power plants!
If we had done that early on we wouldn't have global warming and there wouldn't be a cool water shortage.
It's more relevant what we should/can do now than what we should've done years ago, no?
I mean, obviously learn from history and not make the same mistakes, but it's also not necessarily the case that whatever would've been the solution back then, still is today.
If the same people are still in power and don't show acceptance of their mistakes or a willingness to correct them then it is relevant. There are solutions but it should be clear that they won't implement them.
but that's not true. Electricity only accounts for about 18% of emissons, its non renewable, you'd have a waste pile the size of a mountain, would have run out of fuel by now and you'd need to start decommissioning most of them and rebuilding them
There's a persist myth that some technology can just magic a fix here, nothing short of vastly reduced energy consumption, and lifestyle changes can work, 10000 aging nuclear reactors that need replacing ain't going to cut it.
an example ?
we'd get a 30% reduction in emissions if the richest 10% loved like the average European, not enough but an excellent start
You have to switch all processes to electricity or hydrogen like steel making or fertilizer.
Best results come from not abusing the third world and letting them have a future that allows them to only have two children.
another 30% if work from home was standard
Hi big oil, propaganda still paying off?
Fissile resources would have been depleted a long time ago if everyone would have went with nuclear. Don't be so daft.
No they wouldn't, plus the drive to nuclear would have pushed us to thorium and breeder reactors far sooner, using those we could power the Earth for billions of years, they can even use nuclear waste as fuel, don't be daft and actually educate yourself instead of carrying water for Big Oil.
Accounting for breeder reactors your answer is only off by about 4 billion years.
It was a good guess though.
if you looked at what is going on, you would see that bulk of the missing energy in hungarian grid is supplied from czech and slovak grids, where half or so energy is supplied from nuclear powerplants that don't have such problems https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/zone/CZ/72h/hourly
not to mention the french, who put bunch of their reactors near shore and won't ever have problems with cooling, and so export 10-15GW every day
About that: https://www.france24.com/en/france/20260712-france-temporarily-shuts-down-three-nuclear-reactors-over-heatwave
This happens literally every hot summer.
This is to avoid overheating river, seashore powerplants or those that rely on evaporative cooling towers don't have this problem. Also, it's as good time for maintenance as any other, and they still exported loads of electricity the entire time
You make this sound like they do it for laughs and giggles, not because increasing the temperature in already hot bodies of water even more literally kills wildlife.
Plenty of thermal powerplants use cooling towers and don't have this problem, this is not a limitation of NPP
"Look at all that renewable green solar generation! Sure doesn't work so well when it's buried under a mudslide lol"
That's what you sound like
Even if solar panels get buried under a mudslide, you can just build new solar panels very quickly. If that would happen to a nuclear plant, you would need to wait 10+years for a new one.
The thing is that this is a really desperate measure. The danube is one of Europes biggest rivers. That nuclear power plant was build with water inlets. That plant has been there for ages as every nuclear plant in Europe is old as fuck. That rock has been there also a long time. Having to blast it to help a little bit in order to save the reactor producing so much energy that the other plants in the country can't take over, is desperate as fuck
Yeah, they're responding to a (not-so-) natural disaster. Of course infrastructure built half a century ago under wildly different conditions is at risk.
Yeah, right. Those totally predictable mud slides that happen every summer and are expected to increase in frequency and duration with climate change... π€£