12 ms·

> They generate more electricity from solar than Fukushima did. The problem is that a country requires many Fukushimas (in Germany's case, 17). If renewables c

by seabee 15y ago

> They generate more electricity from solar than Fukushima did. The problem is that a country requires many Fukushimas (in Germany's case, 17). If renewables cannot fill the gap left by shutting down nuclear, you'll have to import your electricity from other countries generating it by the very method you phased out, or by even worse methods like coal. Being the leader in renewables doesn't change this fact. > Seems like they are betting against something... Political decisions are rarely that longsighted. One can hope, though.

latch 15y ago
I'm not saying there isn't a problem with their plan. Just trying to point out that of all the countries who could pull it off, Germany would probably be my first pick. And it isn't just because of solar...they have aggressive energy goals in place already (some before 2022) which makes me think that Germany has an energy plan the likes of which I never saw while in Canada..and certainly not now that I'm in Asia.
- seabee 15y ago
  Germany are definitely on the right track. I just believe this policy has nothing to do with it, unless you can argue that nuclear is worse than coal, or that importing electricity from nuclear-powered countries achieves something that domestic production does not.
lispm 15y ago
Fukushima I was a site with SIX reactors. German nuclear sites are usually smaller. Off these 17 German reactors currently 13 are off the grid. Germany has had an overcapacity and was a net exporter of electricity. It is also no longer that electricity is bound to countries here in Germany. We have a Europe wide market and electricity is imported based on needs and price. If electricity is cheaper somewhere, we may import that. When our wind parks flood the grid, we have to lower the price and export that.
- seabee 15y ago
  > Off these 17 German reactors currently 13 are off the grid. A significant number were pulled off the grid in the wake of Fukushima. So while it's true they had an overcapacity, it's not the case anymore. [1] How quickly can renewables close that gap? And does renewables provide for cheap electricity? If you're importing based on price, it's not coming from wind or solar. So where exactly is the environmental benefit, other than to make it someone else's problem (i.e. getting France to hide away more spent fuel rods)? Being an exporter with renewables is definitely a matter of 'when'. It's foolish to pretend the years between now and then don't exist, they have consequences too. [1] http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Germany-net-energy-importer-apf-1665949417.html?x=0 http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Germany-net-energy-importer-ap...
  - lispm 15y ago
    You are aware that several of the nuclear power plants will be brought online again? You are also aware that the phase out time is TEN years? In the last ten years we have added ten percent renewable energy as a new source and jump started a new industry with several hundred thousand jobs. I'm pretty sure that in ten years we can build new capacity to replace the remaining nuclear reactors. Actually there are several reports from German Universities and research institutions which all agree that this is possible. What you cite from Yahoo is old news. The Nuclear Industry was happily publishing this. But the case is that a) some of the nuclear power plants will be brought back, so there is no power shortage. The phase out will be done in about ten years. b) Germany always imports nuclear power, since there is a free energy market. Germany also exports all kinds of electricity (nuclear, coal, wind, ...). c) the providers of Nuclear power fear their loss of market power. They are large monopolists which try to prevent competition. There are many smaller providers waiting with their investments, keen to replace them where and when possible.

by seabee 15y ago

latch 15y ago

I'm not saying there isn't a problem with their plan. Just trying to point out that of all the countries who could pull it off, Germany would probably be my first pick. And it isn't just because of solar...they have aggressive energy goals in place already (some before 2022) which makes me think that Germany has an energy plan the likes of which I never saw while in Canada..and certainly not now that I'm in Asia.

seabee 15y ago
Germany are definitely on the right track. I just believe this policy has nothing to do with it, unless you can argue that nuclear is worse than coal, or that importing electricity from nuclear-powered countries achieves something that domestic production does not.

lispm 15y ago

Fukushima I was a site with SIX reactors. German nuclear sites are usually smaller. Off these 17 German reactors currently 13 are off the grid. Germany has had an overcapacity and was a net exporter of electricity. It is also no longer that electricity is bound to countries here in Germany. We have a Europe wide market and electricity is imported based on needs and price. If electricity is cheaper somewhere, we may import that. When our wind parks flood the grid, we have to lower the price and export that.

seabee 15y ago
> Off these 17 German reactors currently 13 are off the grid. A significant number were pulled off the grid in the wake of Fukushima. So while it's true they had an overcapacity, it's not the case anymore. [1] How quickly can renewables close that gap? And does renewables provide for cheap electricity? If you're importing based on price, it's not coming from wind or solar. So where exactly is the environmental benefit, other than to make it someone else's problem (i.e. getting France to hide away more spent fuel rods)? Being an exporter with renewables is definitely a matter of 'when'. It's foolish to pretend the years between now and then don't exist, they have consequences too. [1] http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Germany-net-energy-importer-apf-1665949417.html?x=0 http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Germany-net-energy-importer-ap...
- lispm 15y ago
  You are aware that several of the nuclear power plants will be brought online again? You are also aware that the phase out time is TEN years? In the last ten years we have added ten percent renewable energy as a new source and jump started a new industry with several hundred thousand jobs. I'm pretty sure that in ten years we can build new capacity to replace the remaining nuclear reactors. Actually there are several reports from German Universities and research institutions which all agree that this is possible. What you cite from Yahoo is old news. The Nuclear Industry was happily publishing this. But the case is that a) some of the nuclear power plants will be brought back, so there is no power shortage. The phase out will be done in about ten years. b) Germany always imports nuclear power, since there is a free energy market. Germany also exports all kinds of electricity (nuclear, coal, wind, ...). c) the providers of Nuclear power fear their loss of market power. They are large monopolists which try to prevent competition. There are many smaller providers waiting with their investments, keen to replace them where and when possible.