11 ms·
Volkswagen boss criticizes Germany’s decision to privilege coal over nuclear
- PunksATawnyFill 7y agoThe Japanese really screwed nuclear power from a PR standpoint, just when we should be going all-in on it.
- ajna91 7y agoWhile the handful of Fukushima related injuries are tragic, they pale in comparison to the thousands of injuries/deaths directly caused by pollution by traditional plants, not to mention climate change.
- Grue3 7y agoOn the other hand it might be an opportunity to prove that a nuclear disaster (even in an outdated reactor and the worst case scenario of the largest tsunami ever) isn't all that bad. Instead of leaving it alone, there's an active effort to clean up the damage completely, and it might just work. JR East has just announced that limited express train from Tokyo to Sendai that goes right through the exclusion zone (within 1.5 km of Fukushima Dai-Ichi) will be relaunched by the end of the year (currently it stops at Iwaki). The methods used to remove radiation around the railway are quite interesting (replacing the soil, walls of trees to prevent contamination by wind-blown particles etc.)
- jarym 7y agoI think nuclear power is great. Unfortunately we don’t have the means to fix a catastrophe should one occur (and it will, as safe as nuclear is, it it not possible to eliminate the possibility of a serious accident). ‘Safety’ has to be considered in the context of mitigation options as well as options to correct problems. It’s the latter that lets down nuclear - Chernobyl and Fukushima have shown we just can’t contain and correct the effects when things go wrong. Until we as a race figure out how to do that, nuclear will remain dangerous in my view.
- seszett 7y agoWe haven't really found any way to fix the problems that fossil fuels are creating, either. Which might not be catastrophic yet if you're optimistic, but are certainly heading that way.
- wsc981 7y agoNot sure which is safer, I believe some research suggests more people die from coal mining then from nuclear energy. See for example this: https://ourworldindata.org/what-is-the-safest-form-of-energy https://ourworldindata.org/what-is-the-safest-form-of-energy
- kristopolous 7y agoCoal mining also needs to go.
- TremendousJudge 7y agoGreat. Coal mining could have gone in the forty years ago if nuclear had replaced coal. But I guess it was too dangerous, so now we get to live the hottest years on record. Yay for safety, everybody truly did a great job.
- kristopolous 7y agoFalse equivalency. US is a net coal exporter. If we were 100% nuclear the mining would be the same and it'd be exported. Not a solution. Instead, Swanson's curve should have been accelerated pushing the cost economics of solar to have made it competitive at an earlier date. Then you wouldn't need global legislative compliance, it'd have been cheaper earlier
- TremendousJudge 7y agoI never mentioned the US.
- samcday 7y agoI only have a shallow understanding of the economic forces at play in the energy market. But it seems to be that we're just not going to be able to disrupt the fossil fuel industries before it's too late. Is there someone who's knowledgeable on this subject that can cheer me up with some good data suggesting maybe we can turn this ship around in time? Or should I just start hoping that we miraculously nail fusion in the next 5 years and suddenly find we have absolutely no need for oil / coal / gas?
- StreamBright 7y agoWe can turn this ship out by educating our peers. I have convinced countless people about reconsider their view on energy. Keep doing it and we will succeed.
- pmiller2 7y agoThat’s why government intervention is needed. We can disrupt these industries with the stroke of a pen. No matter how much it hurts, it’ll hurt more to let them continue to spew greenhouse gasses and other pollutants into the air.
- yifanl 7y agoThis reduces into the most insane game of chicken ever played. Everyone loses (in every dimension) if no one switches off, but the first country to switch off will absolutely lose (economically).
- pmiller2 7y agoI’d rather just lose economically than destroy our entire society, wouldn’t you?
- jodrellblank 7y agoPerfect! After you..
- _Codemonkeyism 7y agoI don't think anyone who didn't live through Tschernobyl, WAA, Castor and the NATO Double-Track Decision with the SS-20 scare can understand why Germany doesn't want nuclear power.
- sabertoothed 7y ago...and the Asse mismanagement [1][2] with costs of 4-6 billion EUR. [1] English: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asse_II_mine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asse_II_mine [2] German: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schachtanlage_Asse https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schachtanlage_Asse
- pojzon 7y agoIts depressing that people voting for "green" parties are actually supporting more pollution. Nuclear power is the only way to be honest.
- Zenst 7y agoWas post Japan Fukushima incident that Germany did this as a knee-jerk reaction. Of course, not factoring in the enviromental aspect. Then the big factor that most of Germanies coal electric generating plants sit on the border of other countries, makeing their enviroment/air quality at the mercy of the wind. An often overlooked aspect in air quality in some places - change of wind and they get somebody else's dirty air and tips the balance triggering the EU to fine the place with the dirty air and overlook the source that may of been within limits (just) but combined with another source that is within limits, tips the balance and you get air quality that's classed as unfit and bad. So for many neibours, thank you Germany for your pollution so you can carry on burning your toxic coal at any excuse.
- dang 7y agoHey, please don't take HN threads into nationalistic flamewars, or any flamewars. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- Luc 7y ago"According to you, does nuclear energy contribute to the production of greenhouse gasses (CO2) and to climate change?" In France a whopping 86% of 18-34 year olds answer YES. Source: p17 of https://www.orano.group/docs/default-source/orano-doc/presse/dossiers-presse/les-fran%C3%A7ais-et-le-nucl%C3%A9aire/20190625_bva-pour-orano_distribution-conf%C3%A9rence-de-presse-et-site-intern.pdf?sfvrsn=227a1c20_4 https://www.orano.group/docs/default-source/orano-doc/presse...
- joss82 7y agoWhich is true indeed! Nuclear power, in a world where transport emits co2, emits co2 (especially during the enrichment phase). Just waaaaay less than other forms of electricity production (including solar and wind)
- Luc 7y agoIt is exactly this which Greenpeace has latched onto for their propagande. The fact that it is true in only the most trivial way is not understood by those on the receiving end. The end result is a voting population primed to vote against their own interests.
- mariushn 7y agoIn related news... Book "Inconvenient Facts: The science that Al Gore doesn't want you to know" has almost 300 reviews, 92% 4/5 stars: https://www.amazon.com/Inconvenient-Facts-science-that-doesnt/dp/1545614105 https://www.amazon.com/Inconvenient-Facts-science-that-doesn... Quotes from the Facts: * You will learn that the planet is improving, not in spite of increasing CO2 and rising temperature, but because of it. * Polar bears are doing just fine * Ocean acidity = climate pHraud * Forest fires = fanning the flames of needless panic ... Museums also educate, with funds from oil companies: https://thinkprogress.org/smithsonian-stands-by-wildly-misleading-climate-change-exhibit-paid-for-by-kochs-bd3105ef354b/ https://thinkprogress.org/smithsonian-stands-by-wildly-misle... https://io9.gizmodo.com/science-museums-are-skittish-about-climate-change-1591364396 https://io9.gizmodo.com/science-museums-are-skittish-about-c... How to combat these?
- machz 7y ago
- gmueckl 7y agoA lot of the strong anti-fission sentiments in Germany is buit on emotion and not facts. The debate has been thoroughly poisoned by fear-mongering of the opponents of nuclear power. Interestingly, this was the strategy of environmentalist and left-wing parties jumped onto the same bandwagon. This has been going on for more than 3 decades and the public is mostly trained to ignore any rational arguments (no matter whether for or against). So unless a new generation grows up that is not indoctrinated (for lack of a better term), the decision to exit nuclear power has no chance of being overturned.
- tuco86 7y agoNuclear Power is great until it's not. 'Germany is Wrong..' is a bit simplistic. No one would say japan is wrong for shutting nuclear down. Yet Chernobyl was only 30 years ago and fallout was blown over Germany. Some food could not be harvested for years (Mostly mushrooms like my beloved chanterelle •`_´•). There grew a whole movement out of it and from that a political party called "Bündnis 90/Die Grünen" (the greens) which stand for protecting the environment and getting rid of nuclear power. They nearly overtook the conservative christian party at the last eu elections. Also it's been at least a 20 year struggle to find a place to put all the nuclear waste, also highly politicised and vastly expensive. You see, it's a little complicated. Personally I would be fine with nuclear power as long as externalities are paid by the power companies and we learn how to better handle disasters.
- Luc 7y ago> No one would say japan is wrong for shutting nuclear down. Many people say that, including those best placed to know. > Also it's been at least a 20 year struggle to find a place to put all the nuclear waste, also highly politicised and vastly expensive. All you need is a warehouse. Sure, a reinforced one, a nice one. But there is no need to put the waste kilometers under the ground. It's only so vastly expensive because some people will feel better when it's 'out of the environment'.
- tuco86 7y agoI overreached a little with 'no one', I admit. I's just, telling someone he is just wrong while there are reasons, idk. Have not really thought about a 100000 year warehouse that maybe susceptible to disaster or attack, sounds great. I'm on board if the costs are paid by power company.
- tastroder 7y agoIs there anything new here that adds to the discussion on HN or can we expect the same pseudo-scientific back and forth between "nuclear isn't too bad, we have new reactors" and "it's still not safe enough"? The democratic society in Germany settled on the latter decades ago, I'm not sure why this needs to be regurgitated every month just because some countries settled on the former.
- southern_cross 7y agoMerkel’s decision to prematurely shut down Germany's generally safe and successful nuclear power program was quite frankly just stupid.