4 ms·

What Germans should withdraw from is coal.

by Bayart 8y ago

AmericanChopper 8y ago
A pity they withdrew from nuclear instead.
- jansan 8y ago
  Germans have a tendency to become hysterical from time to time. Nuclear power, diesel engines, they just need a new arch enemy from time to time.
- cmarschner 8y ago
  People already got washed in radioactive rain in 1986. Nuclear waste is leaking from barrels in an old salt mine. In France, the sea in front of La Hague is contaminated with plutonium. No thanks.
  - AmericanChopper 8y ago
    You’re really just spreading fud. Not that it matters, even the most extreme exaggerations of the dangers of nuclear are a drop in the bucket compared to carbon emissions. Getting cancer from carbon pollution isn’t any better than getting it from nuclear radiation, only it is far more common. If you’re against carbon emissions, and emission free clean energy at the same time, I don’t know how you’d expect to be taken seriously.
  - mavhc 8y ago
    How many people died from that vs co2+particulates+radiation from burning coal?
    - cmarschner 8y ago
      The lobby for nuclear power on HN always surprises me. In Germany these points are pretty undisputed - the question is not an OR, of course one needs to leave coal as well [1]. Which is why there is all the investment in renewables [2]. Nuclear power, however, has the potential for devastation of a whole region for many thousands of years (ask people in Pripyat), and these costs for future generations need to be internalized as well. We have no room to spare in Europe. If you internalize the costs of disasters of nuclear power they don‘t make sense anyway. [1] Current status: exit has been underway for at least a decade, although not as quickly as some would have hoped. https://medium.com/thebeammagazine/germanys-lignite-exit-strategy-16359d047392 https://medium.com/thebeammagazine/germanys-lignite-exit-str... [2] wind and solar have been growing consistently for the past 15 years and have surpassed coal two years back. See https://twitter.com/dave0dave0/status/1081101220159414273?s=21 https://twitter.com/dave0dave0/status/1081101220159414273?s=...
      - mavhc 8y ago
        Can renewables power everything though? Seems unlikely, we'd need 50% renewables + all the batteries we can make forever, and 50% nuclear to replace coal, gas, and oil. Average EU human uses 4kW of energy 24/7, including everything they eat, buy, heat, move etc. Assuming we move all use of engines to electricity and generate renewable power so don't waste 50% heating water in power stations, and get it down to 2kW, to store that power for just a day would be an electric car sized battery for every human.

What Germans should withdraw from is coal.

by Bayart 8y ago

What Germans should withdraw from is coal.

AmericanChopper 8y ago

A pity they withdrew from nuclear instead.

jansan 8y ago
Germans have a tendency to become hysterical from time to time. Nuclear power, diesel engines, they just need a new arch enemy from time to time.
cmarschner 8y ago
People already got washed in radioactive rain in 1986. Nuclear waste is leaking from barrels in an old salt mine. In France, the sea in front of La Hague is contaminated with plutonium. No thanks.
- AmericanChopper 8y ago
  You’re really just spreading fud. Not that it matters, even the most extreme exaggerations of the dangers of nuclear are a drop in the bucket compared to carbon emissions. Getting cancer from carbon pollution isn’t any better than getting it from nuclear radiation, only it is far more common. If you’re against carbon emissions, and emission free clean energy at the same time, I don’t know how you’d expect to be taken seriously.
- mavhc 8y ago
  How many people died from that vs co2+particulates+radiation from burning coal?
  - cmarschner 8y ago
    The lobby for nuclear power on HN always surprises me. In Germany these points are pretty undisputed - the question is not an OR, of course one needs to leave coal as well [1]. Which is why there is all the investment in renewables [2]. Nuclear power, however, has the potential for devastation of a whole region for many thousands of years (ask people in Pripyat), and these costs for future generations need to be internalized as well. We have no room to spare in Europe. If you internalize the costs of disasters of nuclear power they don‘t make sense anyway. [1] Current status: exit has been underway for at least a decade, although not as quickly as some would have hoped. https://medium.com/thebeammagazine/germanys-lignite-exit-strategy-16359d047392 https://medium.com/thebeammagazine/germanys-lignite-exit-str... [2] wind and solar have been growing consistently for the past 15 years and have surpassed coal two years back. See https://twitter.com/dave0dave0/status/1081101220159414273?s=21 https://twitter.com/dave0dave0/status/1081101220159414273?s=...
    - mavhc 8y ago
      Can renewables power everything though? Seems unlikely, we'd need 50% renewables + all the batteries we can make forever, and 50% nuclear to replace coal, gas, and oil. Average EU human uses 4kW of energy 24/7, including everything they eat, buy, heat, move etc. Assuming we move all use of engines to electricity and generate renewable power so don't waste 50% heating water in power stations, and get it down to 2kW, to store that power for just a day would be an electric car sized battery for every human.