3 ms·
Germans do not have to decide between Nuclear Energy or Climate Catastrophe. They have to decide between the potential risks of radioactive pollution or the imp
by AlphaGeekZulu 7y ago
Germans do not have to decide between Nuclear Energy or Climate Catastrophe. They have to decide between the potential risks of radioactive pollution or the impairment of landscape by wind turbines and power lines. There is not much tragedy in this decision.
- toohotatopic 7y agoIn France and Belgium, which are West of Germany, there are plenty of nuclear reactors. This is in a region with prevailing west winds. If Germany would want to minimize the risk of radioactive pollution, it would have to build plenty nuclear reactors at its eastern border and sell that energy to France below market value. Then, as long as France doesn't cut Germany off, the French nuclear reactors would be shut down and the risk of nuclear pollution for Germany would be reduced.
- looping__lui 7y agoAnd adding to that: the public DOES understand this. People in Western Germany (especially in NRW where they have to suffer from coal and are close to French and Belgium reactors) just shake heads in disbelief while having to swallow the highest electricity prices in Europe...
- C14L 7y agoOh, we have decided. Germany has by far the dirtiest energy produciton in Western Europe. On average, every German citizen produces almost twice as much CO2 than the average French or Brit: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co-emissions-per-capita And talking about risks: Brown coal ist BY FAR the most dangerous form of energy: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-production-per-twh https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/death-rates-from-energy-p...
- anoncake 7y ago> And talking about risks: Brown coal ist BY FAR the most dangerous form of energy: A predictable number of deaths is not a danger but damage.