5 ms·

As Germany is vilified so much in this discussion: I live in Germany and there is no deadly smog in Germany. I'm too lazy to look up if our air pollution is gen

As Germany is vilified so much in this discussion: I live in Germany and there is no deadly smog in Germany. I'm too lazy to look up if our air pollution is generally better or worse than in France, but in general, air pollution here is driven by traffic, not coal plants. Nuclear power, in its current form is not sustainable, both because of recurring accidents leading to political issues and because of the unsolved waste storage problem. The bottom line: We want to go to mostly renewable energy sources, and the shortest path leads, unfortunately, through more fossil fuels. We need to increase energy production. We would also need to replace our old nuclear power plants with something. If we replace those with new nuclear power, we will eventually have to decommission and replace those (and deal with all the waste). Coal plants are easier and faster to ramp up and ramp down. I don't like it. But there it is.

pyrale 5y ago
> As Germany is vilified so much in this discussion I wouldn't care about Germany's problem if German politicians weren't trying to export it to their neighbours, whether by lobbying for energy transition credits not to be usable for nuclear, or by fucking up the spot power exchange. > I'm too lazy to look up Too lazy to look up actual figures, but not lazy enough not to post about it :(
nix23 5y ago
>Nuclear power, in its current form is not sustainable But Coal is? https://www.euractiv.com/section/air-pollution/news/german-coal-plant-exposed-as-europes-single-worst-air-polluter/ https://www.euractiv.com/section/air-pollution/news/german-c... >German coal plant exposed as Europe’s single worst air polluter There is a nice map of NO2 pollution, and just Paris is worse..the rest of france looks pretty clean. >I'm too lazy to look up Yeah maybe next time don't be that lazy before wrinting something? And maybe of some interest: https://www.electricitymap.org/map https://www.electricitymap.org/map
- bayesian_horse 5y ago
  Coal is not sustainable, but easier to replace. Point is: Air quality in Germany isn't really that much of an issue, certainly there is no significant difference to France, while Germany has more industry and a higher GDP.
  - nix23 5y ago
    https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/air-pollution-deaths-coal-plants-b1826079.html#:~:text=5%20pollution%20from%20coal%20plants,in%20Romania%2C%20Bulgaria%20and%20Greece https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/air-pollut.... 34000 death/year in europe, not even Chernobyl had like 4000 over all? But hey Air quality i not a issue in Germany. https://energytransition.org/2013/05/coal-power-causes-3000-deaths-in-germany/ https://energytransition.org/2013/05/coal-power-causes-3000-... 3000 death/year alone in germany https://www.euractiv.com/section/health-consumers/news/report-germany-suffers-more-coal-linked-deaths-than-rest-of-eu/ https://www.euractiv.com/section/health-consumers/news/repor... >>Only 50 premature deaths in France in 2013 could be traced to domestic coal-fired plants. The remaining 1,330 were cross-border, the majority from German plants. But hey too lazy to look it up, right?
    - bayesian_horse 5y ago
      Europe has a population of 746.4 million. So no, 34000 deaths/year that are attributable to air pollution, or 3000 of about 80 Million, is not a big deal, considering that both air pollution and coal power are currently a necessary evil to keep the economy running. The economy is what keeps all those people alive, by the way. Cut that economy by even a few percent and it will cost many more lives. And those lazy comparisons somehow imply you could replace all that pollution with nuclear power, over night, or even at all. You can't. Some industries depend on burning coal, so are even harder to switch. Transportation is nearly all fossil fueled, so that would take a decade or two to electrify. All that takes extra energy investment (burning CO2 etc) to realize. And then you need to ramp up nuclear power. With all the problems that come with it. Probably have to relax some safety regulations to encourage the industry to grow quickly enough. Germany is a free, democratically run country. Nobody wants to have a nuclear facility in their vicinity, much less a long term storage. People aren't stupid, they know accidents are extremely rare, but if they do happen, they pay the full price. And even long before, their property prices plummet. And after several "this will never happen accidents" actually happened, "there will be no accidents" doesn't hold all that much weight with the people. All that alone makes it virtually impossible to start new projects.
hyperman1 5y ago
I always heard the Ruhr industrial zone was one of the biggest air polluters of Western Europe. What's the status today?

pyrale 5y ago

> As Germany is vilified so much in this discussion I wouldn't care about Germany's problem if German politicians weren't trying to export it to their neighbours, whether by lobbying for energy transition credits not to be usable for nuclear, or by fucking up the spot power exchange. > I'm too lazy to look up Too lazy to look up actual figures, but not lazy enough not to post about it :(

nix23 5y ago

>Nuclear power, in its current form is not sustainable But Coal is? https://www.euractiv.com/section/air-pollution/news/german-coal-plant-exposed-as-europes-single-worst-air-polluter/ https://www.euractiv.com/section/air-pollution/news/german-c... >German coal plant exposed as Europe’s single worst air polluter There is a nice map of NO2 pollution, and just Paris is worse..the rest of france looks pretty clean. >I'm too lazy to look up Yeah maybe next time don't be that lazy before wrinting something? And maybe of some interest: https://www.electricitymap.org/map https://www.electricitymap.org/map

bayesian_horse 5y ago
Coal is not sustainable, but easier to replace. Point is: Air quality in Germany isn't really that much of an issue, certainly there is no significant difference to France, while Germany has more industry and a higher GDP.
- nix23 5y ago
  https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/air-pollution-deaths-coal-plants-b1826079.html#:~:text=5%20pollution%20from%20coal%20plants,in%20Romania%2C%20Bulgaria%20and%20Greece https://www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/news/air-pollut.... 34000 death/year in europe, not even Chernobyl had like 4000 over all? But hey Air quality i not a issue in Germany. https://energytransition.org/2013/05/coal-power-causes-3000-deaths-in-germany/ https://energytransition.org/2013/05/coal-power-causes-3000-... 3000 death/year alone in germany https://www.euractiv.com/section/health-consumers/news/report-germany-suffers-more-coal-linked-deaths-than-rest-of-eu/ https://www.euractiv.com/section/health-consumers/news/repor... >>Only 50 premature deaths in France in 2013 could be traced to domestic coal-fired plants. The remaining 1,330 were cross-border, the majority from German plants. But hey too lazy to look it up, right?
  - bayesian_horse 5y ago
    Europe has a population of 746.4 million. So no, 34000 deaths/year that are attributable to air pollution, or 3000 of about 80 Million, is not a big deal, considering that both air pollution and coal power are currently a necessary evil to keep the economy running. The economy is what keeps all those people alive, by the way. Cut that economy by even a few percent and it will cost many more lives. And those lazy comparisons somehow imply you could replace all that pollution with nuclear power, over night, or even at all. You can't. Some industries depend on burning coal, so are even harder to switch. Transportation is nearly all fossil fueled, so that would take a decade or two to electrify. All that takes extra energy investment (burning CO2 etc) to realize. And then you need to ramp up nuclear power. With all the problems that come with it. Probably have to relax some safety regulations to encourage the industry to grow quickly enough. Germany is a free, democratically run country. Nobody wants to have a nuclear facility in their vicinity, much less a long term storage. People aren't stupid, they know accidents are extremely rare, but if they do happen, they pay the full price. And even long before, their property prices plummet. And after several "this will never happen accidents" actually happened, "there will be no accidents" doesn't hold all that much weight with the people. All that alone makes it virtually impossible to start new projects.

hyperman1 5y ago

I always heard the Ruhr industrial zone was one of the biggest air polluters of Western Europe. What's the status today?