
Helsinki Energy Challenge - T-A
https://energychallenge.hel.fi/
======
speedgoose
> A global one-million-euro challenge competition to answer the question: How
> can we decarbonise the heating of Helsinki, using as little biomass as
> possible?

Use renewable energy or nuclear energy. Where do I get my money ?

~~~
tuukkah
Nuclear is not so easy: "In February 2005, the Finnish cabinet gave its
permission to TVO to construct a new nuclear reactor, making Finland the first
Western European country in 15 years to order one.[17] The construction of the
unit began in 2005. The start of commercial operation was planned for 2010,
but has been pushed back several times. As of December 2019, the estimate for
start of regular production is March 2021."
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olkiluoto_Nuclear_Power_Plan...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olkiluoto_Nuclear_Power_Plant#Unit_3)

~~~
speedgoose
Yes the EPR design is a disaster that may end the French civilian nuclear
industry.

Renewable energies are very competitive nowadays, and once we have good energy
storage solutions at scale, I don't see why anyone would buy a new nuclear
reactor.

~~~
tuukkah
Then we ordered another reactor, a VVER, from the Russian Rosatom in 2013.
It's already 4 years behind the schedule and won't open before 2028.
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanhikivi_Nuclear_Power_Plan...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanhikivi_Nuclear_Power_Plant)

------
beefield
I really do not understand the point of this. It is not like the problem needs
some novel ideas to be solved, there are a handful of well known solution
types[1] and it is a question of how and when they are feasible to implement.

[1] Basically, there are two solutions, nuclear district heating and seasonal
storage of heat. In both cases largest hurdles are political, not technical.
In both cases, a million dollar price is not going to do any good, but a
binding offer to purchase a system would be completely feasible to implement
and would pretty likely produce significant results within 10 year time frame.

~~~
tuukkah
Obviously, the point is to find something that is feasible for the city of
Helsinki and to attract an implementer to Helsinki.

As for nuclear, see my other comments.

Also, the city is already doing a lot, but it's not enough: Most of the city
is covered by a district heating (and some cooling!) system, there are large
underground heat storage facilities etc. It's a city of 0.7M people so not
that big, at 60° north meaning cold climate (average 6°C/42°F including the
warm summers).

------
malux85
Nearly a year and a bunch of webinars and presentations to allocate only 1M?

No wonder climate change is upon us. When the crops are failing, areas
becoming uninhabitable and sea level has risen the paper pushers will still be
filling their forms out

(No no! This doesn’t qualify on section 32.3A, Trash it!)

Absolutely no sense of urgency, and such a small amount isn’t going to move
the needle for the city, or the climate

~~~
chrisco255
The crops aren't failing. Far from it, they are thriving under the elevated
levels of CO2. Indeed, this gas forms an essential ingredient in the
photosynthesis process and plants all grow more efficiently with elevated
levels of CO2. There is absolutely no risk of crop failure on account of CO2
levels. Just the opposite, yields are at near all time highs and have more
than doubled in the past few decades for most crops!

~~~
adrianN
There is a risk of crop failures not because they can't handle the CO2, but
because the areas where we plant them have a _changed climate_ that is no
longer suitable, for example because it becomes too dry, too wet, or too hot.
Right now we're only at 0.8° of warming give or take, so these effects are not
particularly pronounced. But the CO2 we emit today cumulatively effects the
climate for millennia to come.

~~~
chrisco255
All it would do is cause the growing area to expand towards the poles. It
would lengthen the growing season in many parts of the world. As for dry / wet
conditions, which are variable and shift with oceanic oscillations like the
Atlantic Multi-decadal Oscillation, PDO, etc. We have technology to deal with
those. Irrigation, desalination, drainage, etc.

The CO2 we emit today used to very much exist in the biosphere. It got trapped
underground as an accident of evolution. And then it turned into coal. Plants
evolved under conditions with CO2 as much as 10x higher than current levels.

~~~
imtringued
Solar insolation increases over time as the sun gets older. Levels of CO2 that
were safe in the past will result in higher temperatures today. We aren't
talking about a few ten thousand years here and there. Millions of years have
passed since these historical levels of CO2,

