4 ms·

I also get a warm fuzzy feeling from solar panels and wind farms. But we are losing our planet to climate change, and warm fuzzy feelings do not help. Lowering

by jwr 7y ago

I also get a warm fuzzy feeling from solar panels and wind farms. But we are losing our planet to climate change, and warm fuzzy feelings do not help. Lowering CO2 emissions does. Germany could have had zero CO2 emissions by now, if money were invested into nuclear instead of the current efforts. The declaration to move away from nuclear power was misguided and will be regarded as a huge error in the future.

semi-extrinsic 7y ago
I like to say that the environmental NGOs, politicians etc. have been given the choice between pneumonia (nuclear power) and cancer (CO2 emissions), and they answer "oh no, my grandma died of pneumonia when she was young, so I'll have the cancer".
est31 7y ago
Feelings and impressions are more important than you think. Stock markets for example are not perfect but instead also reflect human perception: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/reflexivity.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/reflexivity.asp This deal requires investment at the start but will pay off in the end by lower costs caused by climate change. So what is holding people back? Their perception. They feel like they will die before the impacts will happen. They feel like nobody is doing anything about it so why should they be the first? Humans are built in a way that joining an existing movement is easy but starting one is hard. Germany helped getting the start of the s-curve going.
imtringued 7y ago
The renewable subsidies don't cover the cost of a modern nuclear power plant. The 25 billion € per year spent on renewables is just barely enough to construct a single nuclear plant. Other than warm fuzzy feelings that nuclear is superior it wouldn't actually solve the problems Germany is currently facing. Merkel doesn't want to threaten the jobs of coal workers and their communities. Therefore coal plants don't get turned off.

by jwr 7y ago

semi-extrinsic 7y ago

I like to say that the environmental NGOs, politicians etc. have been given the choice between pneumonia (nuclear power) and cancer (CO2 emissions), and they answer "oh no, my grandma died of pneumonia when she was young, so I'll have the cancer".

est31 7y ago

Feelings and impressions are more important than you think. Stock markets for example are not perfect but instead also reflect human perception: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/reflexivity.asp https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/reflexivity.asp This deal requires investment at the start but will pay off in the end by lower costs caused by climate change. So what is holding people back? Their perception. They feel like they will die before the impacts will happen. They feel like nobody is doing anything about it so why should they be the first? Humans are built in a way that joining an existing movement is easy but starting one is hard. Germany helped getting the start of the s-curve going.

imtringued 7y ago

The renewable subsidies don't cover the cost of a modern nuclear power plant. The 25 billion € per year spent on renewables is just barely enough to construct a single nuclear plant. Other than warm fuzzy feelings that nuclear is superior it wouldn't actually solve the problems Germany is currently facing. Merkel doesn't want to threaten the jobs of coal workers and their communities. Therefore coal plants don't get turned off.