390
🎶36 degrees and it's getting hotter🎶 (discuss.tchncs.de)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/memes@lemmy.world
81 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 32 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (6 children)

To me, your take is completely uninformed, so allow me to enlighten you. When Russia attacked Ukraine, oil prices spiked and conservative media were trying to cause a panic that Germany hadn't enough natural gas to get through the winter. Tangent: The natural gas levels are much lower today than they ever were 2022, but because we now have a conservative government, conservative media doesn't care. Anyway, because the start of the Ukraine war was such a volatile time and to assuage any fears, the last government decided to give the last 3 operational nuclear power plants a 6 month extension and to bring back coal power plants as backup. And that is what they ever where. A backup. And building nuclear power takes decades and costs billions. They help neither in the short-, nor long-term.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    Afaik after Fukushima they abandoned nuclear no?

    After the March 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster and subsequent anti-nuclear protests, the government announced that it would close all of its nuclear power plants by 2022.[7][8] Eight of the 17 operating reactors in Germany were permanently shut down following Fukushima.

    While nuclear power was gradually phased out of the German power mix, Germany increased its use of fossil fuel energy by 7% over the period 2002–2022, with a massive increase in usage of natural gas and only modest reductions of coal power and oil power.[9] By some estimates, Germany could have achieved a 73% reduction in its carbon emissions by retaining nuclear power during the period 2002–2022 and could have saved €696 billion on its energy transition.[9]

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Yeah well, that's the conservative government for you. We could've just as easily transitioned from nuclear to renewables, which don't have the nuclear waste problem that is still unsolved. And Germany was for a brief time leading renewable energy innovation. But when the conservative government was faced with the cost of providing the infrastructure for this up-and-coming industry branch of the future, they instead cut all funding. This directly lead to the downfall of the German renewable sector ("Altmaier-Delle"). So while you are correct, when taking into account the entire time span from 2002, that Germany increased its reliance on coal and natural gas especially, it is incorrect to say that not sticking with nuclear was the sole reason for this. Betting on renewables was absolutely feasible even back then, as the current boom of renewables aptly demonstrates. But the conservatives do what conservatives do best: Stifle the future by fearing the up-front investment cost and sticking to the old and familiar instead of betting on the new and future-proof, even when the old way of doing this has already been shown to be unsustainable.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Regardless how you see it, keeping nuclear plants running would have considerably reduced the need for coal and gas, which should be the damn absolute priority.

    One actually infuriating thing is, the EU set targets and penalties over installed renewable capacity, not over emissions. So while Germany is generating considerably more emissions that most of western Europe, they were the "good citizen", but France had to pay penalties for not having installed enough renewables.

    You can see how much sense it makes at any time:

    https://app.electricitymaps.com/map/live/fifteen_minutes

    That's what I call a cynical policy written by people who want to score points but don't give a flying fuck about climate.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 0 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    France has to shut down NPPs every summer because the rivers used for cooling overheat.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    1.No. Most of the time they just reduce their power level, without shutting down completely. This is not a technical limitation of the plant. It's to avoid heating too much the water locally, that would impact wildlife. But granted it will only get worse over time.

    2.All water boiling based PP will have issues under extreme heat. Their efficiency depends on a difference of temperature with the outside. That's valid for nuclear, gas and coal plants.

    3.I'm not saying nuclear is the best ever solution. What I'm saying is given the urgency of climate change, shutting down nuke while installing more coal was absolutely criminal. If you wanted to get rid of nuclear, you should still have started by replacing coal and gas with renewable sources before replacing nuclear with renewable.

    4.I'm pissed by that decision, but Germany is not even a bad actor compared to other countries.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent