New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
You play Who's Moar Stupid so well... my turn now!
Me country pizza pasta mandolin we accept green color on the map if bags of green banknotes are dropped at the right doorsteps and throw pizza pies in face of clowns with whistles and put them to jail.
That was hard! Your turn!
I can show you videos where old people are fighting over garbage in russian.
Google "obmanut rossiyanin", he has tons of videos where the same people that were just fighting over some shit turn around and say "thank God we're no in Europe or America because those people have it worse than us". The same mentality like yours.
Here, you're showing a video where the woman said in russian that these are mostly migrants. The food they're given is better than what a middle class in russia can afford. Think about that for a minute. You have people in russia going bankrupt because of heating bills and you're here talking about 6 cents/kw. russia, where 1 in 3 hospitals have no running water.
So are we creating a GiveSendGo for our resident right-wing Finn to run his data center, or is he going to pull himself up by his bootstraps and go to a civilized country like Norway with cheap power? (necessary dig coming from a Norwegian)
I love ruble trouble, but let's get back on track of how it's hard to run a DC in a country you hate - or love? Can you get long term pricing, and when the cheap N100's coming, or did Biden take those?
I have no idea how this is related BUT.
Even taking a virtual tour of Moscow over Google Street feels depressing and Moscow is the poster child of Russia. When anything important goes awry, Russian national news air the current weather of Moscow to counterbalance the mood of the nation and pacify the whole federation east to west. Imagine someone sitting on the toilet in Norilsk reading the news that Putin has cancer for the 10th time this month, don't despair, he flips the page and is comforted by learning that in Moscow it's raining. The strategy ought to work, because anything northeast of Chechnya and Chechnya itself are open-air shit holes that somehow are even more depressing than Moscow.
Affected is one thing, being in a crisis is quite another. Recently the Finns fucked their spot pricing by selling energy they didn't have:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-11-23/trader-error-causes-huge-plunge-in-finnish-power-prices
That is a regulatory issue allowing for such fuck-up. In Romania, which is also connected the the EU grid, we don't have such issues, at least not recently, and my supplier is 91% green, 9% nuclear. Recently, they hiked prices from 5 cents per KWh to 5.6 cents per KWh.
Of course, that is only the energy price, then it adds the grid costs which are substantial as I live in the mountains, and it goes up to 16 cents a KWh final price with all taxes, transport, VAT and whatnot. For industrial customers that is much lower, of course, around 9-11 cents per KWh, 50/50 mix, not renewable, renewables and nuclear are much lower still, albeit I don't have the latest numbers, it was about 7 cents at the beginning of last year, probably lower now.
That being said, Finland has about half the average power costs of Romania:
https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/finland/finland-news/domestic/24708-electricity-prices-in-finland-return-to-normal-levels-in-2023-down-64-from-previous-year.html
In Romania we have about double that, but also the energy mix is still close to 50% fossil fuels.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1314553/romania-monthly-wholesale-electricity-price/
The nuclear power will not solve the problem. Yes, nuclear is needed in the mix, at least until we have good storage solutions, but it ain't gonna be cheap. For now it is, because the NPPs are old and already paid for themselves, but NEW nuclear capacity costs an arm and a leg to build due to new regulations and safeties.
The reason new power plants are not being built is that they cost way too much and we have much cheaper alternatives, even at current technology and prices, storage is way cheaper than nuclear generation in order to account for the spikes in consumption.
The modular SNRs are a possible solution, but only if implemented at a scale which would bring down the costs.
So, 100% green.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-11-23/trader-error-causes-huge-plunge-in-finnish-power-prices
That is a regulatory issue allowing for such fuck-up.
Yea the spot market is broken, that's well established. You guys use similar system too, about every country in the world has some sort of market for electricity.
This is all true, but beyond; Due to green politics permits for new nuclear plants are not given. That's why Olkiluoto 3 became so vastly oversized, overspent; They only got permit for 1, so it was going to be latest and greatest in the world.
OL3 is first of this generation nuclear plants, the technology did not exist back when French promised to deliver it. Hell, even the turbine didn't exist and i think it was Valmet + Siemens in conjunction who developed the largest turbine ever in existence. No seriously.
Turns out now that OL3 is too big to be put on full power.
This is all because someone gave greens just enough power 2 decades ago that they could stop most permits for nuclear power plants.
All the regulatory hurdles makes nuclear so damn expensive. Nuclear is by far (orders of magnitude) safest form of energy.
But yeah correct, you need others as nuclear power levels are not really adjustable.
True Issue At Finland's Grid: Green Moronity
The green morons managed to close 2.8GW worth of power plants in the past few years, not quite certain was it in that single 4 year period or a few before that.
Yes, 2.8GW; About exactly what we need to purchase at peak demand. Some of these were emergency power, peaker backup plants everyone else wanted to preserve but Green morons and commies (leftie party) got them all shutdown.
In conjunction the very first act of the last Commie and Green Moron government was to destroy peat (or turf? that swamp thing). They didn't ban it, that would have required new laws. They raised taxes sky high on peat plus introduced payment for scrapping the machinery.
Why You May Ask?, they claim peat is not renewable. Certainly, peat takes much time to regrow back locally in that area, but in this land of thousand and one lakes, we got more than peat than probably anyone else. Our peat reserves renews/grows so much annually that someone did the maths that our peat could power the entire friggin' europe. Not just Finland, not just scandinavia, but the entire fucking Europe.
That's net zero carbon footprint energy too, if you buy in that climate hoax.
This is the land of green gold, and the green morons have managed to ban or restrict use of it all. Forestry as well is really hindered and limited, competitiveness ruined because of regulations and limits, in the country where forests are kept best in the world to begin with.
Finland has enough natural resources to be just as rich as Norway; Green morons and commies have put stop to all of it. Because we don't any forests anymore, only what 80% of our land mass is forest.
Turns out that things that grow are renewable only when it can be used to hinder other things. Once people are using those, or there's no other things to hinder, they once again become non-renewable or like our forests are all of sudden supposedly carbon output, not a sink.
Green morons and commies(lefties) the only things they want is: Money and Power for themselves, and destroy civilization completely, destroy humanity.
One you start putting those parties stuff in those lenses, it all makes perfect sense and all of sudden you realize, these guys are not as stupid as they seem, their mission not just zero sum game but sometimes actually net negative sum game in case of green morons. Lefties see it as zero sum game, and are extremely self centered; Therefore so that they could get more power & money they see it that it has to be taken from someone else, someone needs to suffer so they could gain more for themselves.
These green and leftie parties is rot in the core of western societies.
Extremely powerful. I know people who get all their information and opinions from the top propaganda machines only.
Infact; For some it works so efficiently that i've seen smart people with straight face, with all seriousness claim that there isn't any communists in the world anymore at all. I replied just with "China"
Or, if you criticize leftie agenda, or Angela Merkel; They completely loose it.
France is known to be the world's nuclear power house, they are like 100% nuclear. If you want something nuclear? Talk to the French
The only thing they know better than their banquettes and croissants is nuclear tech XD
So that's not a fair comparison. Power is power.
True in so so many levels.
When you realize greens have a "net negative sum game" mindset it all makes sense tho. Greens want to destroy humanity, or at the very least civilization.
Some of them are brainwashed morons and will not realize that's what they are after, it's very very hard to distinguish these kind of deep psychological issues.
They are extinctionalists. The kind of people who would like nothing better than to see every human dead (except themselves ofc).
To truly love and protect nature would not exhibit this way at all; Almost to the counter (ironically). You would want more of Co2 into the atmosphere, you would want people to see and use nature, to groom nature, and use what nature provides in everything you do.
But what green morons really do, is exactly the opposite.
Pretty much, but fusion energy is just a R&D project. What Germany did was dump all their money into brown coal. The most dirty kind, with highest environmental and human cost. They have huge amounts of it.
So they closed their clean, green, safe nuclear power plants, and replaced it with brown coal and natural gas.
Thanks!
Let's not forget that Finland is also European military powerhouse, with our biggest artillery in Europe, huge huge reserves etc. Definitively one of the strongest.
We've kept peace by our own "MAD doctrine"; Make it so damn bloody expensive that Russia stays far away.
Finland apparently has a tunnel network all across the country as well; Some people just went into jail for publicizing their treks into finding them. Helsinki has enough bunker level tunnels and caverns they say it can publicly house 500 000 people. Everyone in Helsinki with room to spare.
Helsinki has even a public tunnel network you can use to drive straight through the central helsinki to it's otherside; Think boring company goals, but made decades and decades ago.
Bunkers are so common that every now and then old ones come up for sale, and you can rent space from one; as Teenager i built my first car in one of the bunkers in Vantaa.
hell, there's even rumours of powers of the atomic kind, named after ancient Finnish lore. I have my doubts, but it's military whaddya know?
The more i learn about Finnish military the more stunned i get; How did i not know this? It's all built around secrecy. There's very deep rooted military traditions and families in this country. The kind where every single person in the family is career military generation after generation.
Now Russia was distracted enough that we could join NATO safely.
And our industrial military complex is actually alive and kicking, doing better than ever apparently. Unlike say Germany, who doesn't even have enough ammunition to last more than a few days and no spare parts for their tanks;
Did you know that Finland even has built F18 Hornet(s)? One is known publicly and they claim only 1 was built ... But it's military, so if they say they made 1, they probably made a few ... or it was just a show piece of manufacturing capability.
Maybe because they can afford those and the banks know they will return the money. Only rich people can afford loans and the banks trust the country's economy they will be employed and able to return the money even 20 years in the future. I know it is incomprehensible for you, you never understood how a real economy works.
Lies. EDF, the biggest nuclear plant operator recently bankrupt itself by building and retrofitting nuclear plants. It was badly timed as well so it had to buy power to fulfil its contracts, but the core issue remains, the biggest nuclear power operating company in the world got bankrupt when the conventional energy sources were lacking and the power prices went sky high.
Romania is building NPP, UK is building NPP, France is building NPP, the US and so on, so forth. How could they do that if there was no permit? All those countries are lawless and everyone can build an NPP in their backyard? Also, those all share some features, they are overbudget and behind schedule.
I tend to agree here, but in order to be safe, it must have those regulatory hurdles passed, because, when shit happens, it is so damn costly in everything, including human lives. Yes, the regulation got overboard, the fear factor is exaggerated, but this is human nature, you can't do shit about it.
That being said, even without those burdens, the nuclear energy is still very expensive.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/519144/power-plant-operation-and-maintenance-costs-in-the-us-by-technology/
There is no way nuclear costs could be driven down to renewables levels, no matter how much we cut the regulations, nuclear is 4 times more expensive than wind and 6.5 times more expensive than solar, storage schemes are also way cheaper, current battery technology is much less than 50% in cost, so it still makes 0 sense to build nuclear power plants today, even with all the permits and lowering the regulation.
A good grid shifting power from areas with wind and sun to the areas without combined with good storage in places would be way cheaper, regardless of what the propaganda says.
Yea loans are a tool, and availability of loans means the finance market is working efficiently, and people can get stuff done earlier.
Say you take a mortgage at 2% interest rate but inflation is 5%. That 3% is profit.
Tho one needs to recognize which are assets and which are liabilities. House/Apartment typically is an liability, but a loan can make it an asset (lower interest than inflation) or if you also work from home.
There's good debt and bad debt. It's nuanced what is what.
Let's say we buy an server at insane 15% interest rate, taking a 10% loss compared to inflation year over year. Sounds like a bad debt right?
Not unless that same server also makes 50% annual ROI, you are actually now making 40% profit.
Stock portfolio? Take 4.50% loan, put it on S&P500 on margin, which 100 year average growth is like 10% (inflation adjusted 8%), and you are raking in 5.5% profit.
In other words; You do arbitrage.
Bad loan?
Take a 11% mortgage, inflation is 5%, no business use and buy bigger house than you could actually afford paying in interest what rent would've been in a ... less luxurious place. You take 6% loss on debt + you still loose principal.
You could afford 5000€ car, but you decide to buy new one at 40 000€ because you can get 1% interest. Sounds like 4% profit yes? NO, you bought a new car which depreciates like mad! You took 25% hit the moment you received it + 5% annually (loan is 25% bigger than the car is worth). So instead of 5k € you just spent 10k € minimum, even if you got rid of it the day you got it.
Be a producer, not a consumer.
Well, that's not what i was talking about.
I was talking about permits to build nuclear here in Finland.
I was not talking about those countries; But ironically enough -> My point still stands. All those countries have upped the regulatory needs sky high, and less permits are being given than in history, while previous plants are getting long in tooth due to their age and being disassembled.
Therefore less nuclear, as less is being built to replace those which have reached end of their lifetime; Even after extensions.
None of that is news to anyone who have followed that industry even a little bit.
You can do stuff about it; Educate people.
Nuclear disasters are not Chernobyl everytime; Actually pretty much never is. Fukushima tsunami killed 19 729, Fukushima Nuclear disaster: 0 dead.
People don't even understand what radiation is.
Nuclear is orders of magnitude safer than any other form of power generation. Even if you do not ease up the regulation, education would help getting more permits to build more. New reactor generations are a lot safer too, so i would argue some regulation could be uplifted and not made so tight.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/519144/power-plant-operation-and-maintenance-costs-in-the-us-by-technology/
There is no way nuclear costs could be driven down to renewables levels, no matter how much we cut the regulations, nuclear is 4 times more expensive than wind and 6.5 times more expensive than solar, storage schemes are also way cheaper, current battery technology is much less than 50% in cost, so it still makes 0 sense to build nuclear power plants today, even with all the permits and lowering the regulation.
Again wrong, over the lifetime of a nuclear power plant there is not many cheaper energy sources available; Hydro + Geothermal(sometimes) only.
Building a nuclear power plant is expensive. Operating is not.
Green / Renewables for most part is the most expensive form of energy there is; sans hydro which might be the cheapest form. But hydro is limited.
I suggest you actually study this, and stop spewing shit.
TCOE for example, random site, first level in google results for tcoe energy: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Total-levelized-cost-of-electricity-including-external-costs-TCOE_fig7_324024237
Battery power is not energy generation and not comparable, that's apples to oranges. Battery power is infact one of the most expensive forms, since you are merely adding cost, merely timeshifting (time travel yay!) the energy produced. It makes some sense, and is needed, but it does not produce energy.
LCOE in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_electricity
Shows that Nuclear cost has been skyrocketing (regulation), that data still doesn't seem right tho. We must remember that Wikipedia is heavily politicized and is full of errors to support more left leaning political agenda (and even scientific errors! Just try to correct them ...); So needs double checking on important stuff and truck load of salt on politicized issues.
Another one again shows completely the opposite: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/34-Nuclear-energy-TCOE-compared-to-other-future-baseline-energy-shown-as-probability_fig45_255530879
Here is a very recent research paper comparing the cheapest energy forms (coal, nuclear, combined cycle).
Published 06/22, Monte Carlo simulation to build new power generation: https://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1665-53462021000400005
Finds that even when comparing to combined cycle (afaik industrial waste heat!), nuclear comes out on top :O
Finland apparently has a tunnel network all across the country as well; Some people just went into jail for publicizing their treks into finding them.
This is well known by most SPOL's who also did RUK/AUK. Chances are you get to drive Helsinki / Tampere or some other line entirely underground with ATV if you serve in correct time of the year. Obviously not all cities are connected with multiple pathways, but pretty much every major city has a tunnel network to at least 2 other cities for wartime logistics and special units. The Motti Doctrine is still very much alive.
It would be full on Vietnam 2.0 if anyone attacked since these tunnels can be strapped with explosives to collapse them from two sides and the enemy unit would get stuck inside and you can burn the remaining oxygen inside the collapsed segment to neutralize them.
I'm personally glad they published some details due to increased deterrence effect.
Plus the Underground facility of Kumpula if you know what I mean @PulsedMedia xD
Frankly, if there is something Russia does not need it's more land. So unless Finland gives the Russians a significant reason Russia won't attack you anyway.
Now, what could such a reason be? How about nato military bases in your country? I think that might work ...
But I like - a lot - how you approached it formertimes, your "MAD" doctrine. Because, very much unlike joining (read: enslave yourselves to) nato, your "MAD" doctrine was smart plus, and I like that a lot, it seems to have been useful in a civilian capacity as well.
And very much unlike joining nato it actually worked and actually helped to keep the peace, plus it allowed for fruitful business across the border too.
You're so damn brainwashed insecure. So what? The next generation or generation after will get over it. And then at some point, it won't matter anyway. West does not need/want your land either. I mean who? It's mostly in your heads anyway...
Probably not the land but resources are a very different topic (microchips and solar panels made from coal pretty much suck). You are kind of right though, taking land to get it's hands onto something isn't really western style so much. That's usually handled differently.
That's somewhat schizophrenic, isn't it? I mean, calling someone who does not want to join a military alliance insecure? Wouldn't it really be the other way around? Or do you instantly assume he's Russian just because he's voicing a dissenting opinion? Well, if that's the case, i'm pretty sure he isn't.
Did you even read who's responding to whom?
No.
Someone must be damn insecure boasting as a military superpower and then talking nonsense about Finland being his target because they joined to NATO.
Or about Finland giving him a significant reason to be attacked solely because they joined NATO.
It's just stupid for mature person to say things like that.
I don't understand that. So do you think he's Russian or what do you mean by that?
Well being attacked might be a little exaggerated. It'll bring tension though. If that's worth it is not for me to decide but NATO being hostile towards Russia (pretty much regardless of how Russia behaves short of voluntarily handing over influence + resources) and Russia going to return the favor still can't be simply ignored.
Yes, those were his own words.
OK, that's surprising. I didn't think he was. You learn something new every day, i guess.
Hetzner charges 5 euros less for servers in Finland. I wonder if the energy in Germany is still more expensive than in Finland now?
There's a funny thought, we could have avoided decades of investment in nuclear weapons just by building a few more military bases to trigger the implosion of USSR and now Russian federation instead.
Yes. Let's remember large part of the current issues is because of Germany.
Last i heard Germany prices were on average ~triple what they are in Finland.
Full propaganda. Check the link I have provided. It includes variable (fuel) AND fixed costs (to build) per anum. Nuclear is among top 3 expensive, it has no chance to compete on price. Also, hydro is more expensive than wind and solar too, 2 times wind, 3 times solar, but it can be used when no wind or sun, so it is needed. Nuclear could also be used when no wind and sun, but at double the hydro cost at least, makes little sense.
In Finland, where there is very little sunshine a big part of the year, yeah, because the EU grid sucks so far, nuclear makes sense, but only for a small part of the needs. When the EU grid would connect to North Africa, with all windy places, then power will flow across the continent, until then nuclear can still work in some cases, but it is very hard to be used as a load-balancer, because of high time and big costs to turn on and off.
Correct, Germany still has 50% fossil fuel generation in the mix, in Finland only some 8%, Germany has a long way to go until it can afford Finland's prices.
I feel sorry for you. 🤷
Probably, but what do you expect from someone who "thinks" an ad hominem attempt ("You're so damn brainwashed insecure") can replace arguments?
Bless his heart.
As to the (side-) topic: If Russia wanted to attack Finland they could, with or without nato. nato only would drive the cost up a bit. So, evidently it was way smarter for Finland to keep the relations neutral or positive, one major reason being the question why Russia would attack Finland. The answer to that question strongly differs between Finland before ("no reason, rather the opposite") and Finland now ("nato bases threatening Russia").
The decision to join (read: enslave themselves to) nato was unnecessary (for Finland, not for nato though) and, I add, stupid because as we just learned from @PulsedMedia, (Finland did have measures in place already.
But frankly I think we should return to the thread topic because nato already has amply demonstrated its factual impotence (as opposed to their proud noise) in the current war. I might be wrong but I think that (not only) nato will sink into insignificance or even cease to exist within a few years.
But no matter whether I'm right or wrong, Russia has no reason whatsoever to worry about nato.
NATO is not enslavement or stupid idea.
This unites countries, joins forces; Therefore just the threat of violence makes things more stable in the region.
Finland also gained more access to NATO gear which was unobtainium before, further Finland gained for us, the most precious thing we simply do not have; Warm bodies.
Further i bet our military industrial complex sales are going to skyrocket as well being part of NATO. Not like that industry needed any help to begin with, but hey, more revenue to Finland == Every Finn is better off long term
Finland has less than 6M people, this has driven our strategies and doctrine heavily, and lack of soldiers has been a huge weakspot. It might seem we don't have that issue, but that's only because every man in this country is supposed to goto military or civil service, creating a huge huge reserve, but there are no replacements. These guys are gone? The whole country is more or less gone.
It's exactly like Finland bets the farm and house for victory. Russia loosing a million soldiers won't kill Russia. Finland loosing million soldiers? If we didn't loose war outright, we are going out in a whimper over the next few decades.
Also; NATO membership costs us a mere 20M $ annually, due to the fact that we already met all the other requirements. that 20M $ is essentially "office fee" for secretaries etc.
We now have several US bases with the latest and greatest gear, stuff we missed prior, and i would presume NATO v Russia war, Finland would be prioritized due to the huge border and proximity to St. Petersburg in NATO resources.
This added to Finnish security; Not took away.
It would be even more expensive for Russia to attack Finland today, they would meet the full force of NATO.
I would argue this is the first time in 80 years we can sigh in relief, we've kept the monster at bay.
Now, let's just not get any ideas getting Karelia back please. No war ok, tnx.
Well 20M is obviously nothing but if i'm not fully mistaken there is also kind of a requirement (well not all members are currently meeting it but in theory it's there) to spend 2% of your BIP on the military? That would'nt be 20M but rather something around ~6B minus whatever Finland is spending on it's military right now.
You could ask them to move the bases currently in Germany over there and while they are at it take their nuclear bombs/missiles with them. That would be pretty much win-win, i guess
4% i think it was, and we were already spending well above that. At least Germany is not meeting that obligation and i believe some others are neither in Europe.
Defense expenditures of NATO countries as a percentage of gross domestic product in 2023
https://www.statista.com/statistics/584088/defense-expenditures-of-nato-countries/
Don't worry, Germany has 100B of (totally not debt!) special-assets allocated to the military now and will surely spend it wisely on stuff like more tanks fit to be operated by pregnant women