5 ms·

There are two reasons that are particular to Germany here. In the wake of the Fukushima disaster, there were heavy protests in Germany that made the country shu

There are two reasons that are particular to Germany here. In the wake of the Fukushima disaster, there were heavy protests in Germany that made the country shut down all its nuclear power plants permanently, which was more than a dozen plants. This means that a "bridge" technology needed to be found until the entire economy could be made to use renewables at some point in the future, and coal was readily available. Secondly, coal has a relatively good image among Germany's working class. Coal mines used to offer employment to lots of otherwise underprivileged Germans, especially in the Ruhr region of Western Germany, and coal mining continues to this day. Of course, things are changing in Germany. In the last year, there were week-long left-wing protests against clearing an old-growth forest for coal mining, which brought attention to the issue and might trigger some change. However, Greenpeace Germany's suggestion to shut off coal and switch to burning natural gas instead is met with some resistance across the political spectrum, given that Germany cannot procure gas from anywhere but Russia, and EU-Russian relationships are somewhat cool recently. We'll see where we end up, I guess. In any case, Germany is still a much greener country than e.g. the United States, who recently stopped promoting climate protection policies altogether. Until we have convinced the United States that they need to protect the environment, there is scarce leverage (and scarce reason) to persuade the developing countries.

netsharc 8y ago
Were there really heavy protests in Germany after Fukushima? It happened a few days before state elections in Baden Wuerttemberg, so Merkel cynically said her party is now against nuclear power, to try to save its chances in that election (and it didn't work, the Greens won a lot).
- indigo945 8y ago
  The state elections absolutely played a part in it, but there were indeed heavy protests too. See for example (article in German): https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article12970772/Hunderttausende-demonstrieren-gegen-Atomkraft.html https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article12970772/Hund...
- majewsky 8y ago
  > Merkel cynically said her party is now against nuclear power There is nothing cynical about it (except your judgment of it). She admits to following opinion polls on important issues like this. In the days after Fukushima, the opinion polls regarding nuclear power moved from 50:50 to a majority in favor of ending nuclear power. Same thing with gay marriage: As soon as she saw support for it growing far enough that it could threaten her party's position in the federal elections, she changed her stance from "never" to "let the representatives decide", leading to a nonpartisan bill passing the parliament with overwhelming majority. Same thing with "Wir schaffen das": Her actions regarding the 2015 refugee influx were (at least partially) motivated by stronger-than-expected support for refugee-friendly policies in the population. Say what you want about Merkel, but there is an argument to be made that by closely monitoring opinion polls, her government is more democratic than otherwise. (There are obvious flaws in this argument, which is why I don't endorse it.)
  - netsharc 8y ago
    I'm not an expert in politics and governing, but that seems like a horrible way to run a democracy: with zero conviction of what is just (e.g. for the gays) but only with your ear to "what is popular"? There's even a term for it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority I've always thought her motivation in 2015 was because she didn't want to be seen in history as a monster, I didn't know about the poll numbers. But what if the majority said "Refugees stay out!"? If I were a political leader, I would still let them in and try to appeal to my population about being humane, if I just looked at the poll numbers and they say "close the borders" and I just followed that, I would not be able to sleep at night. I've read an article that asked what she has accomplished for the nation, and the author concluded her only mission is political survival.
    - majewsky 8y ago
      > If I were a political leader, I would still let them in and try to appeal to my population about being humane My cynical side says that's why you're not a political leader.
avar 8y ago
Germany has been exceptionally anti-nuclear for decades. The Fukushima disaster had a big impact, but there was already an anti-nuclear movement before that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-nuclear_movement_in_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-nuclear_movement_in_Germa...
a_bonobo 8y ago
> and coal mining continues to this day. Actually they just closed the very last mine - http://time.com/longform/germany-coal-mine/ http://time.com/longform/germany-coal-mine/ >Coal was once the lifeblood of Germany’s economy, providing energy, jobs and a way of life for hundreds of thousands of people. But on Dec. 21, that era — which began during the industrial revolution and peaked in the 1950s — officially comes to an end, as the country’s last black coal mine is sealed up for good.
- xxgreg 8y ago
  Closed the very last __hard coal__ mine. Unfortunately lignite (brown coal) mining continues.
- the8472 8y ago
  That's just black coal. There is still open pit mining of lignite, which is even worse.
xxgreg 8y ago
> Germany cannot procure gas from anywhere but Russia "In 2015, 35 percent of gas imports came from Russia, 34 percent from Norway and 29 percent from the Netherlands." https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-dependence-imported-fossil-fuels https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-dependen... The Netherlands imports are in rapid decline. So shares from Norway and Russia will be increasing. > In the wake of the Fukushima disaster, there were heavy protests in Germany that made the country shut down all its nuclear power plants permanently In 2000 Germany agreed to phase out nuclear power over ~20 years. A few months before the tsunami at Fukushima, Merkel's government extended these deadlines by ~10 years, but did not cancel phase-out. The public opinion due to the events at Fukushima caused the government to move things back to a similar timeline to the original phase out. However a number of plants were shut immediately. There's a good timeline here if you're curious to learn more: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/very-brief-timeline-germanys-energiewende https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/very-brief-timeli... Edit: The bit in the timeline where is says Merkel cancelled the phase out is misleading. Here's a better article if you want to understand what happened in 2010: "Merkel stated numbers for the planned extension of the lifespan of nuclear plants in Germany. "Technically, 10 to 15 years are reasonable," she said in an interview with public television station ARD. Instead of phasing out all nuclear plants by 2022 as established in current law, the plants would remain online at least until 2032 and possibly until 2037." http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/slowing-the-phase-out-merkel-wants-to-extend-nuclear-power-plant-lifespans-a-714580.html http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/slowing-the-phas...

netsharc 8y ago

Were there really heavy protests in Germany after Fukushima? It happened a few days before state elections in Baden Wuerttemberg, so Merkel cynically said her party is now against nuclear power, to try to save its chances in that election (and it didn't work, the Greens won a lot).

indigo945 8y ago
The state elections absolutely played a part in it, but there were indeed heavy protests too. See for example (article in German): https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article12970772/Hunderttausende-demonstrieren-gegen-Atomkraft.html https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article12970772/Hund...
majewsky 8y ago
> Merkel cynically said her party is now against nuclear power There is nothing cynical about it (except your judgment of it). She admits to following opinion polls on important issues like this. In the days after Fukushima, the opinion polls regarding nuclear power moved from 50:50 to a majority in favor of ending nuclear power. Same thing with gay marriage: As soon as she saw support for it growing far enough that it could threaten her party's position in the federal elections, she changed her stance from "never" to "let the representatives decide", leading to a nonpartisan bill passing the parliament with overwhelming majority. Same thing with "Wir schaffen das": Her actions regarding the 2015 refugee influx were (at least partially) motivated by stronger-than-expected support for refugee-friendly policies in the population. Say what you want about Merkel, but there is an argument to be made that by closely monitoring opinion polls, her government is more democratic than otherwise. (There are obvious flaws in this argument, which is why I don't endorse it.)
- netsharc 8y ago
  I'm not an expert in politics and governing, but that seems like a horrible way to run a democracy: with zero conviction of what is just (e.g. for the gays) but only with your ear to "what is popular"? There's even a term for it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority I've always thought her motivation in 2015 was because she didn't want to be seen in history as a monster, I didn't know about the poll numbers. But what if the majority said "Refugees stay out!"? If I were a political leader, I would still let them in and try to appeal to my population about being humane, if I just looked at the poll numbers and they say "close the borders" and I just followed that, I would not be able to sleep at night. I've read an article that asked what she has accomplished for the nation, and the author concluded her only mission is political survival.
  - majewsky 8y ago
    > If I were a political leader, I would still let them in and try to appeal to my population about being humane My cynical side says that's why you're not a political leader.

avar 8y ago

Germany has been exceptionally anti-nuclear for decades. The Fukushima disaster had a big impact, but there was already an anti-nuclear movement before that: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-nuclear_movement_in_Germany https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-nuclear_movement_in_Germa...

a_bonobo 8y ago

> and coal mining continues to this day. Actually they just closed the very last mine - http://time.com/longform/germany-coal-mine/ http://time.com/longform/germany-coal-mine/ >Coal was once the lifeblood of Germany’s economy, providing energy, jobs and a way of life for hundreds of thousands of people. But on Dec. 21, that era — which began during the industrial revolution and peaked in the 1950s — officially comes to an end, as the country’s last black coal mine is sealed up for good.

xxgreg 8y ago
Closed the very last __hard coal__ mine. Unfortunately lignite (brown coal) mining continues.
the8472 8y ago
That's just black coal. There is still open pit mining of lignite, which is even worse.

xxgreg 8y ago

> Germany cannot procure gas from anywhere but Russia "In 2015, 35 percent of gas imports came from Russia, 34 percent from Norway and 29 percent from the Netherlands." https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-dependence-imported-fossil-fuels https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-dependen... The Netherlands imports are in rapid decline. So shares from Norway and Russia will be increasing. > In the wake of the Fukushima disaster, there were heavy protests in Germany that made the country shut down all its nuclear power plants permanently In 2000 Germany agreed to phase out nuclear power over ~20 years. A few months before the tsunami at Fukushima, Merkel's government extended these deadlines by ~10 years, but did not cancel phase-out. The public opinion due to the events at Fukushima caused the government to move things back to a similar timeline to the original phase out. However a number of plants were shut immediately. There's a good timeline here if you're curious to learn more: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/very-brief-timeline-germanys-energiewende https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/very-brief-timeli... Edit: The bit in the timeline where is says Merkel cancelled the phase out is misleading. Here's a better article if you want to understand what happened in 2010: "Merkel stated numbers for the planned extension of the lifespan of nuclear plants in Germany. "Technically, 10 to 15 years are reasonable," she said in an interview with public television station ARD. Instead of phasing out all nuclear plants by 2022 as established in current law, the plants would remain online at least until 2032 and possibly until 2037." http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/slowing-the-phase-out-merkel-wants-to-extend-nuclear-power-plant-lifespans-a-714580.html http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/slowing-the-phas...