6 ms·

Which is why she is pro nuclear. The physicist in her reversed that position when it was a choice of being elected or being kicked out of office. Physicists li

Which is why she is pro nuclear. The physicist in her reversed that position when it was a choice of being elected or being kicked out of office. Physicists like power as much if not more than politicians.

WithinReason 5y ago
> Physicists like power as much if not more than politicians. An ambiguous statement in this context :)
rndgermandude 5y ago
Yes, she changed her stance after Fukushima when public opinion - which wasn't very pro nuclear to begin with - shifted rapidly in Germany. I would agree is was a populist move and not a move based on science. However, she was hardly in a position where she would have lost office. The next federal election was 2 years away, and nuclear, while at the time an important topic that dominated the media of course, was hardly the only topic. Her party might have suffered a somewhat in the short term - in state elections for example - but it's rather unlikely her party would have "lost" the next federal election and she her office. She also never expressed a strong pro-nuclear stance while Chancellor (and as far as I know not before that either), and certainly did not justify such a stance with her scientific background. While in office as Chancellor, she called nuclear a "bridge technology" that should be kept around a while longer until Germany can switch over to renewables at its own pace. The decision to partly reverse the nuclear exit - and the exit was decided years before and was generally seen favorably by Germans - by delaying when nuclear power plants had to go offline - she never planned to build new plants, for example - was less of a declaration for nuclear and had more too do with appeasing the nuclear lobby, and the industry lobby which feared higher energy costs. And it wasn't a decision she was really making all by herself, there was a lot of pressure from within the elites of her own party (most of which do not hold any degrees in physics, just saying), aside from all the lobby pressure. She might have thought and/or still may think of nuclear as favorable, be it because she has a PhD in what was called theoretical chemistry - tho it is more physics than chemistry what she did and concerned nuclear decay reactions/processes - or be it because years before she became chancellor she was Federal Minister for the Environment which includes "nuclear security and oversight", or be it just because any everybody kinda has an opinion. But regardless, she didn't express a very pro nuclear opinion, as you suggest. Unless she declares herself now that she is not running for office anymore, we will not really know what she truly thinks about nuclear and why. Not that her opinion on the matter is particularly more important than the opinion of others...
- shapefrog 5y ago
  > she didn't express a very pro nuclear opinion, as you suggest New nuclear power plants were banned altogether. The agreement became law in 2002 (Atomgesetz). Angela Merkel, objected to the agreement, calling it a “destruction of national property” that would be revoked if the CDU came to power. To be fair I only looked for 30 seconds and it is hardly a smoking gun to call not building nuclear power a destruction of national property as being 'pro nuclear'.
  - rndgermandude 5y ago
    I do not recall she saying that in 2002 - when she was essentially the leader of the opposition. Do you have a public source for it? I am genuinely interested in reading/listening to her full statement.
    - shapefrog 5y ago
      https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/history-behind-germanys-nuclear-phase-out https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/history-behind-ge... https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/konsens-bei-atomgespraechen-der-ausstieg-kommt-aber-keiner-weiss-wann-a-80879.html https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/konsens-bei-atomg...
      - rndgermandude 5y ago
        Thanks for the links. Merkel, according to your Spiegel reference said: >Die Begrenzung der Restlaufzeit der deutschen Atomkraftwerke käme einer Vernichtung von volkswirtschaftlichem Vermögen gleich. Which translates to >Limiting the remaining service life of German nuclear power plants would be equal to destroying national economic assets. So her concern was about shutting down existing nuclear power plants earlier than initially planned. She kept true to her word, and reversed that, only to re-reverse herself after Fukushima. That's however not necessarily a very pro-nuclear stance, more a pro-"let them continue printing money with their existing plants because they have been good friends to the CDU in the past" stance. What she didn't say however is that she favored investing in more nuclear power generation and nuclear technology in general.
pfdietz 5y ago
Ah, that explains why physicist Amory Lovins is so pro-nuclear, right?
- shapefrog 5y ago
  > served on the National Petroleum Council A physicist that likes power.

WithinReason 5y ago

> Physicists like power as much if not more than politicians. An ambiguous statement in this context :)

rndgermandude 5y ago

Yes, she changed her stance after Fukushima when public opinion - which wasn't very pro nuclear to begin with - shifted rapidly in Germany. I would agree is was a populist move and not a move based on science. However, she was hardly in a position where she would have lost office. The next federal election was 2 years away, and nuclear, while at the time an important topic that dominated the media of course, was hardly the only topic. Her party might have suffered a somewhat in the short term - in state elections for example - but it's rather unlikely her party would have "lost" the next federal election and she her office. She also never expressed a strong pro-nuclear stance while Chancellor (and as far as I know not before that either), and certainly did not justify such a stance with her scientific background. While in office as Chancellor, she called nuclear a "bridge technology" that should be kept around a while longer until Germany can switch over to renewables at its own pace. The decision to partly reverse the nuclear exit - and the exit was decided years before and was generally seen favorably by Germans - by delaying when nuclear power plants had to go offline - she never planned to build new plants, for example - was less of a declaration for nuclear and had more too do with appeasing the nuclear lobby, and the industry lobby which feared higher energy costs. And it wasn't a decision she was really making all by herself, there was a lot of pressure from within the elites of her own party (most of which do not hold any degrees in physics, just saying), aside from all the lobby pressure. She might have thought and/or still may think of nuclear as favorable, be it because she has a PhD in what was called theoretical chemistry - tho it is more physics than chemistry what she did and concerned nuclear decay reactions/processes - or be it because years before she became chancellor she was Federal Minister for the Environment which includes "nuclear security and oversight", or be it just because any everybody kinda has an opinion. But regardless, she didn't express a very pro nuclear opinion, as you suggest. Unless she declares herself now that she is not running for office anymore, we will not really know what she truly thinks about nuclear and why. Not that her opinion on the matter is particularly more important than the opinion of others...

shapefrog 5y ago
> she didn't express a very pro nuclear opinion, as you suggest New nuclear power plants were banned altogether. The agreement became law in 2002 (Atomgesetz). Angela Merkel, objected to the agreement, calling it a “destruction of national property” that would be revoked if the CDU came to power. To be fair I only looked for 30 seconds and it is hardly a smoking gun to call not building nuclear power a destruction of national property as being 'pro nuclear'.
- rndgermandude 5y ago
  I do not recall she saying that in 2002 - when she was essentially the leader of the opposition. Do you have a public source for it? I am genuinely interested in reading/listening to her full statement.
  - shapefrog 5y ago
    https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/history-behind-germanys-nuclear-phase-out https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/history-behind-ge... https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/konsens-bei-atomgespraechen-der-ausstieg-kommt-aber-keiner-weiss-wann-a-80879.html https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/konsens-bei-atomg...
    - rndgermandude 5y ago
      Thanks for the links. Merkel, according to your Spiegel reference said: >Die Begrenzung der Restlaufzeit der deutschen Atomkraftwerke käme einer Vernichtung von volkswirtschaftlichem Vermögen gleich. Which translates to >Limiting the remaining service life of German nuclear power plants would be equal to destroying national economic assets. So her concern was about shutting down existing nuclear power plants earlier than initially planned. She kept true to her word, and reversed that, only to re-reverse herself after Fukushima. That's however not necessarily a very pro-nuclear stance, more a pro-"let them continue printing money with their existing plants because they have been good friends to the CDU in the past" stance. What she didn't say however is that she favored investing in more nuclear power generation and nuclear technology in general.

pfdietz 5y ago

Ah, that explains why physicist Amory Lovins is so pro-nuclear, right?

shapefrog 5y ago
> served on the National Petroleum Council A physicist that likes power.