5 ms·

Germany is heavily investing in solar and wind. Why do you bring up coal? Also - even if the nuclear power plant is 100% safe, it still produces nuclear waste

Germany is heavily investing in solar and wind. Why do you bring up coal? Also - even if the nuclear power plant is 100% safe, it still produces nuclear waste that nobody wants to keep anywhere near their city and will be dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years, that's longer than humanity has been around - it's just the same trap as burning fossil fuels. Why would we want to make the same mistake again?

hajile 7y ago
We can discover efficient ways to re-refine those materials and provide even more energy for the future (actually, such techniques exist for a lot of waste, but mining is still cheaper, so we don't do it). By the time this process is done, the waste simply won't exist anymore.
- brutt 7y ago
  Maybe it wiser to spend some profits of nuclear industry on problem of nuclear waste first. We already has tons of waste. Chornobyl and other sites are still waiting for a solution.
renaudg 7y ago
> Germany is heavily investing in solar and wind. Why do you bring up coal? Because coal is what Germany really relies on in practice, making it one the worst industrialised nations when it comes to CO2 emissions per kWh. Check for yourself, right this minute : http://electricitymap.org/ http://electricitymap.org/ > it's just the same trap as burning fossil fuels. Why would we want to make the same mistake again? Because it's not the same mistake at all. Nuclear waste is stored in highly stable geological layers, and the volumes are orders of magnitude lower. As I wrote here (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21996751 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21996751), a year's worth of nuclear energy for running France's whole fleet of trains produces just 200kg of nuclear waste. Since the beginning of the nuclear programme, the cumulated volume is 3650m3, or an olympic swimming pool's worth of it. Don't get me wrong, renewables are a worthy long term goal, but we might never get there in the first place if we don't tackle the climate change and emissions emergency first.
- xxgreg 7y ago
  Phasing out coal in Germany is a political battle against a large entrenched century old industry. The phase-out looks to be gaining traction in recent years. Deals are being made to retrain coal miners and fund economic redevelopment of heavily coal dependent regions. All players including the power companies, network operators, miners unions, green NGOs, central and regional governments have been in discussion about how to manage the phase-out. A schedule for when plants will be turned off is being written into law. https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/spelling-out-coal-phase-out-germanys-exit-law-draft https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/spelling-out-coal... Coal powered electricity generation is dropping and renewable generation is increasing. See chart: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/gallery_image/public/paragraphs/images/fig2a-gross-power-production-germany-1990-2019.png?itok=Cqqf1JON https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/g... From: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-consumption-and-power-mix-charts https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-c... Where Germany has a bad record on emissions reductions is in other sectors such as transport and heat. Germany has had a centre-right political party running the show for 15 years, progress has been slow. The next election will likely be a CDU-Green coalition which will likely increase ambitions on emissions reductions.
  - renaudg 7y ago
    The incontrovertible problem remains : wind/solar are intermittent, peak load sources (Germany doesn't have the geography for hydro) No matter how you spin this, you NEED to pick one of either nuclear, gas or coal in your mix to complement renewables. Of these 3, only one of them is low carbon. Of the other two, one makes your energy grid depend on Putin's whims, while the other causes tremendous fine particles pollution causing thousands of premature deaths today, in addition to carbon emissions. > Coal powered electricity generation is dropping and renewable generation is increasing. But won't ever replace a base load source of electricity. Even after a 300 billion investment and spectacular share increase of renewables from 6 to 46%, Germany's emissions per kWh are 5-10 times worst than the best. > The next election will likely be a CDU-Green coalition which will likely increase ambitions on emissions reductions. Increased ambition is great but the facts above are unescapable. Are Die Grüne willing to drop ideology and face them ? That seems highly improbable.
manfredo 7y ago
Because solar and wind leads to continued dependency on coal and gas. The reality is, nuclear is the only geographically independent method of providing carbon free energy around the clock. The closure of nuclear plants leads to increased usage of coal and gas: https://www.economist.com/europe/2017/11/09/germany-is-missing-its-emissions-targets https://www.economist.com/europe/2017/11/09/germany-is-missi...

hajile 7y ago

We can discover efficient ways to re-refine those materials and provide even more energy for the future (actually, such techniques exist for a lot of waste, but mining is still cheaper, so we don't do it). By the time this process is done, the waste simply won't exist anymore.

brutt 7y ago
Maybe it wiser to spend some profits of nuclear industry on problem of nuclear waste first. We already has tons of waste. Chornobyl and other sites are still waiting for a solution.

renaudg 7y ago

> Germany is heavily investing in solar and wind. Why do you bring up coal? Because coal is what Germany really relies on in practice, making it one the worst industrialised nations when it comes to CO2 emissions per kWh. Check for yourself, right this minute : http://electricitymap.org/ http://electricitymap.org/ > it's just the same trap as burning fossil fuels. Why would we want to make the same mistake again? Because it's not the same mistake at all. Nuclear waste is stored in highly stable geological layers, and the volumes are orders of magnitude lower. As I wrote here (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21996751 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21996751), a year's worth of nuclear energy for running France's whole fleet of trains produces just 200kg of nuclear waste. Since the beginning of the nuclear programme, the cumulated volume is 3650m3, or an olympic swimming pool's worth of it. Don't get me wrong, renewables are a worthy long term goal, but we might never get there in the first place if we don't tackle the climate change and emissions emergency first.

xxgreg 7y ago
Phasing out coal in Germany is a political battle against a large entrenched century old industry. The phase-out looks to be gaining traction in recent years. Deals are being made to retrain coal miners and fund economic redevelopment of heavily coal dependent regions. All players including the power companies, network operators, miners unions, green NGOs, central and regional governments have been in discussion about how to manage the phase-out. A schedule for when plants will be turned off is being written into law. https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/spelling-out-coal-phase-out-germanys-exit-law-draft https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/spelling-out-coal... Coal powered electricity generation is dropping and renewable generation is increasing. See chart: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/gallery_image/public/paragraphs/images/fig2a-gross-power-production-germany-1990-2019.png?itok=Cqqf1JON https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/g... From: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-consumption-and-power-mix-charts https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-c... Where Germany has a bad record on emissions reductions is in other sectors such as transport and heat. Germany has had a centre-right political party running the show for 15 years, progress has been slow. The next election will likely be a CDU-Green coalition which will likely increase ambitions on emissions reductions.
- renaudg 7y ago
  The incontrovertible problem remains : wind/solar are intermittent, peak load sources (Germany doesn't have the geography for hydro) No matter how you spin this, you NEED to pick one of either nuclear, gas or coal in your mix to complement renewables. Of these 3, only one of them is low carbon. Of the other two, one makes your energy grid depend on Putin's whims, while the other causes tremendous fine particles pollution causing thousands of premature deaths today, in addition to carbon emissions. > Coal powered electricity generation is dropping and renewable generation is increasing. But won't ever replace a base load source of electricity. Even after a 300 billion investment and spectacular share increase of renewables from 6 to 46%, Germany's emissions per kWh are 5-10 times worst than the best. > The next election will likely be a CDU-Green coalition which will likely increase ambitions on emissions reductions. Increased ambition is great but the facts above are unescapable. Are Die Grüne willing to drop ideology and face them ? That seems highly improbable.

manfredo 7y ago

Because solar and wind leads to continued dependency on coal and gas. The reality is, nuclear is the only geographically independent method of providing carbon free energy around the clock. The closure of nuclear plants leads to increased usage of coal and gas: https://www.economist.com/europe/2017/11/09/germany-is-missing-its-emissions-targets https://www.economist.com/europe/2017/11/09/germany-is-missi...