8 ms·

Nuclear in Germany was in its death bed already by the nineties. It was killed by the massive costs, also fueled by failed experiments in "next generation" rea

Nuclear in Germany was in its death bed already by the nineties. It was killed by the massive costs, also fueled by failed experiments in "next generation" reactors that are still further away from feasibility than fusion power. And, to a lesser degree, nimbyism.

gmueckl 5y ago
In my view, the death of nuclear power in Germany started with the protests against the reprocessing plant in Wackersdorf. This is the start of a strong anti nuclear power movement that gradually won over public opinion. Unfortunately, I personally believe that a lot of the campaigning against nuclear power was perpetuating wrong or misleading information. There are valid argument against that technology, but the arguments that proved successful at swaying public opinion were borderline fearmomgering. And they have taken root to such an extent that a levelheaded factual discussion has become hard.
masklinn 5y ago
> It was killed by the massive costs It was killed as an easy boon for idiotic environmentalist groups (the german green party is one of the few which at times reached relevant levels of representation), which have done more against the environment than for it. It which was also supported by local trade groups as Germany has huge deposits of lignite (whuch is basically the worst coal available). In no small part following greenpeace’s nonsensical switch from military to civilian nukes in a bid for relevance most environmentalist groups and green parties hate nukes with a passion. Decommissioning plants you could keep in running order is financially idiotic since you’ve already performed the vast majority of the investment.
- namdnay 5y ago
  The same greenpeace that sells green energy contracts in Germany, which use... gas . It's crazy to think that a purported environmental organisation will be the main culprits for tens of thousands of avoidable cancers in Germany :(
  - HPsquared 5y ago
    Environmental concerns causing cancer in Europe has a bit of precedence - see the push for diesel engines in passenger cars. These reduce carbon dioxide emissions (which act at the global level) at the expense of higher particulate and nitrogen oxide emissions (which affect the health of people nearby).
    - nivenkos 5y ago
      I thought the main push for diesel cars was just fuel prices? The prices in Europe are like 5x US prices.
      - namdnay 5y ago
        at least in france, the tax rules based on horsepower and co2 were strongly favourable to diesel cars (as they emit less co2 and have better performance at similar hp), which led to insane stuff like putting a diesel engine in a smart car...
      - HPsquared 5y ago
        Fuel is only expensive in Europe because it's subject to special taxes [0]. Emissions standards are also (until recently with the scandals) relatively lax for diesel vehicles [1]. EDIT: also if you look at the fuel prices link, notice the production cost of gasoline is generally lower than that of diesel in most countries, but after taxes diesel is cheaper. [0] https://www.fuelseurope.eu/knowledge/refining-in-europe/economics-of-refining/fuel-price-breakdown/ https://www.fuelseurope.eu/knowledge/refining-in-europe/econ... [1] https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Vehicles_emissions_standards_in_EU,_USA_and_Japan-fr.svg https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Vehicles_emissions...
- patall 5y ago
  Well, the green party never advocated for using coal instead. Of course, you cannot abandon nuclear power, then destroy your rising solar industry, then destroy your wind industry (first onshore, than offshore) and finally also abandon coal and gas. While playing games with biogas & hydropower and reducing support for alternative heating systems like wood pellets. All of that seems to be the current plan of the conservative party. The green party had a plan and it was on track until about 2010, 5 years after they lost power. Since then, its all gone down. But blaming that on a party in opposition is at minimum unfair, if not stupid. All at the cost of more than a hundred thousand industry jobs.
  - MagnumOpus 5y ago
    > the green party never advocated for using coal instead ... blaming that on a party in opposition They had the choice of achieving an exit from nuclear power or from coal power. They chose the former when they pushed through the Atomkonsens in 2002 when they were, in fact, a governing party. Now Germany has lost pretty much exactly as much power generation from early shutdown of nuclear plants as they are running in terms of coal power generation.
    - patall 5y ago
      They were a governing party with 1/6 of the votes in a coalition with a party that to this day delays the exit from coal because 'jobs'. In an economic crisis when the word greenhouse gases (and not yet climate change) was not prevalent at all. In retrospect, you are probably right. But at the time that simply was impossible. > Now Germany has lost pretty much exactly as much power generation from early shutdown of nuclear plants as they are running in terms of coal power generation. And exactly that is not because of the green party. The green parties program from 2005 outlined the end of coal subventions for 2012. The status quo is 2038.
      - nec4b 5y ago
        It doesn't matter how many votes they had (1 would be enough). They were necessary for forming the coalition, therefore they could extort other larger coalition parties to give in to their demands.
johnchristopher 5y ago
Nimbyism which apparently extends to Belgium. https://euobserver.com/energy/133154 https://euobserver.com/energy/133154
pyrale 5y ago
> It was killed by the massive costs Yet, somehow, power is cheaper in France than in Germany, and the energiewende investments cost about twice France's investment for its whole nuclear fleet. Sure, new designs are more expensive, but I can't help but think that the main issue with nuclear is the impossibility to have a discussion free from disinformation.
- masklinn 5y ago
  A big part of the cost increase is also linked to political and social fears: after Chernobyl contracts dropped through the floor so there’s been a huge loss of knowledge in both building and designing new plants. Plus designers tried to design even safer plants, meaning costs increase, meaning you want to increase power density, leading to further complexity and thus cost increases. The would would be in a much better position if we’d kept building (and improving) Gen IIs as we tried to resolve Gen III’s teething issues.
- cedilla 5y ago
  Somehow? France tries desperately to wind down its nuclear reactors because they are so heavily subsidised. What the end user pays for electricity is just one part of the total costs. That's true for all forms of generation of course.
throw0101a 5y ago
> It was killed by the massive costs […] Meanwhile, recent headlines: > German Emissions From Electricity Rose 25% In First Half Of 2021 Due To The Lack Of Wind Power, Not Willpower * https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2021/07/28/german-emissions-from-electricity-rose-25-in-first-half-of-2021-due-to-the-lack-of-wind-power-not-willpower/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2021/07/28... > Energy Prices in Europe Hit Records After Wind Stops Blowing * https://www.wsj.com/articles/energy-prices-in-europe-hit-records-after-wind-stops-blowing-11631528258 https://www.wsj.com/articles/energy-prices-in-europe-hit-rec...

gmueckl 5y ago

In my view, the death of nuclear power in Germany started with the protests against the reprocessing plant in Wackersdorf. This is the start of a strong anti nuclear power movement that gradually won over public opinion. Unfortunately, I personally believe that a lot of the campaigning against nuclear power was perpetuating wrong or misleading information. There are valid argument against that technology, but the arguments that proved successful at swaying public opinion were borderline fearmomgering. And they have taken root to such an extent that a levelheaded factual discussion has become hard.

masklinn 5y ago

> It was killed by the massive costs It was killed as an easy boon for idiotic environmentalist groups (the german green party is one of the few which at times reached relevant levels of representation), which have done more against the environment than for it. It which was also supported by local trade groups as Germany has huge deposits of lignite (whuch is basically the worst coal available). In no small part following greenpeace’s nonsensical switch from military to civilian nukes in a bid for relevance most environmentalist groups and green parties hate nukes with a passion. Decommissioning plants you could keep in running order is financially idiotic since you’ve already performed the vast majority of the investment.

namdnay 5y ago
The same greenpeace that sells green energy contracts in Germany, which use... gas . It's crazy to think that a purported environmental organisation will be the main culprits for tens of thousands of avoidable cancers in Germany :(
- HPsquared 5y ago
  Environmental concerns causing cancer in Europe has a bit of precedence - see the push for diesel engines in passenger cars. These reduce carbon dioxide emissions (which act at the global level) at the expense of higher particulate and nitrogen oxide emissions (which affect the health of people nearby).
  - nivenkos 5y ago
    I thought the main push for diesel cars was just fuel prices? The prices in Europe are like 5x US prices.
    - namdnay 5y ago
      at least in france, the tax rules based on horsepower and co2 were strongly favourable to diesel cars (as they emit less co2 and have better performance at similar hp), which led to insane stuff like putting a diesel engine in a smart car...
    - HPsquared 5y ago
      Fuel is only expensive in Europe because it's subject to special taxes [0]. Emissions standards are also (until recently with the scandals) relatively lax for diesel vehicles [1]. EDIT: also if you look at the fuel prices link, notice the production cost of gasoline is generally lower than that of diesel in most countries, but after taxes diesel is cheaper. [0] https://www.fuelseurope.eu/knowledge/refining-in-europe/economics-of-refining/fuel-price-breakdown/ https://www.fuelseurope.eu/knowledge/refining-in-europe/econ... [1] https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Vehicles_emissions_standards_in_EU,_USA_and_Japan-fr.svg https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Vehicles_emissions...
patall 5y ago
Well, the green party never advocated for using coal instead. Of course, you cannot abandon nuclear power, then destroy your rising solar industry, then destroy your wind industry (first onshore, than offshore) and finally also abandon coal and gas. While playing games with biogas & hydropower and reducing support for alternative heating systems like wood pellets. All of that seems to be the current plan of the conservative party. The green party had a plan and it was on track until about 2010, 5 years after they lost power. Since then, its all gone down. But blaming that on a party in opposition is at minimum unfair, if not stupid. All at the cost of more than a hundred thousand industry jobs.
- MagnumOpus 5y ago
  > the green party never advocated for using coal instead ... blaming that on a party in opposition They had the choice of achieving an exit from nuclear power or from coal power. They chose the former when they pushed through the Atomkonsens in 2002 when they were, in fact, a governing party. Now Germany has lost pretty much exactly as much power generation from early shutdown of nuclear plants as they are running in terms of coal power generation.
  - patall 5y ago
    They were a governing party with 1/6 of the votes in a coalition with a party that to this day delays the exit from coal because 'jobs'. In an economic crisis when the word greenhouse gases (and not yet climate change) was not prevalent at all. In retrospect, you are probably right. But at the time that simply was impossible. > Now Germany has lost pretty much exactly as much power generation from early shutdown of nuclear plants as they are running in terms of coal power generation. And exactly that is not because of the green party. The green parties program from 2005 outlined the end of coal subventions for 2012. The status quo is 2038.
    - nec4b 5y ago
      It doesn't matter how many votes they had (1 would be enough). They were necessary for forming the coalition, therefore they could extort other larger coalition parties to give in to their demands.

johnchristopher 5y ago

Nimbyism which apparently extends to Belgium. https://euobserver.com/energy/133154 https://euobserver.com/energy/133154

pyrale 5y ago

> It was killed by the massive costs Yet, somehow, power is cheaper in France than in Germany, and the energiewende investments cost about twice France's investment for its whole nuclear fleet. Sure, new designs are more expensive, but I can't help but think that the main issue with nuclear is the impossibility to have a discussion free from disinformation.

masklinn 5y ago
A big part of the cost increase is also linked to political and social fears: after Chernobyl contracts dropped through the floor so there’s been a huge loss of knowledge in both building and designing new plants. Plus designers tried to design even safer plants, meaning costs increase, meaning you want to increase power density, leading to further complexity and thus cost increases. The would would be in a much better position if we’d kept building (and improving) Gen IIs as we tried to resolve Gen III’s teething issues.
cedilla 5y ago
Somehow? France tries desperately to wind down its nuclear reactors because they are so heavily subsidised. What the end user pays for electricity is just one part of the total costs. That's true for all forms of generation of course.

throw0101a 5y ago

> It was killed by the massive costs […] Meanwhile, recent headlines: > German Emissions From Electricity Rose 25% In First Half Of 2021 Due To The Lack Of Wind Power, Not Willpower * https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2021/07/28/german-emissions-from-electricity-rose-25-in-first-half-of-2021-due-to-the-lack-of-wind-power-not-willpower/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2021/07/28... > Energy Prices in Europe Hit Records After Wind Stops Blowing * https://www.wsj.com/articles/energy-prices-in-europe-hit-records-after-wind-stops-blowing-11631528258 https://www.wsj.com/articles/energy-prices-in-europe-hit-rec...