5 ms·

Germany rejects EU’s climate-friendly plan, calling nuclear power ‘dangerous’

23 points by nixass 5y ago

fsflover 5y ago
This is just ridiculous and outrageous. A few related links: EU experts to say nuclear power qualifies for green investment label: document (reuters.com) 482 points by accountinhn 9 months ago | 552 comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26603464 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26603464 Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standard, White House says (arstechnica.com) 425 points by nixass 9 months ago | 356 comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26673987 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26673987 See also: https://thebreakthrough.org/blog/the-true-face-of-the-anti-nuclear-movement https://thebreakthrough.org/blog/the-true-face-of-the-anti-n...
- kmlx 5y ago
  > This is just ridiculous and outrageous. it might be, but it's also very much expected. the german green party recently won their biggest share of votes. they're now part of a coalition government. one of their core pledges was to kill off nuclear, something that was set in motion by the previous government after the tsunami induced fukushima nuclear accident.
- nixass 5y ago
  The rejection of nuclear power is so rooted into German society that there's no meaningful time frame to re-educate "concerned population". Energiewende is failing every day more and more, burning hundreds of billions of Euros, while kissing Putin's chocolate starfish in the process
  - KarlKemp 5y ago
    Hundreds of billions of Euros? Germany's tax revenue is around 200 billion Euros p. a., so I doubt it. 0: https://www.google.com/search?q=germany+tax+collected&client=safari&rls=en&ei=haHUYeqnH9KVsAfU-6MQ&ved=0ahUKEwiq_v3s65j1AhXSCuwKHdT9CAIQ4dUDCA0&uact=5&oq=germany+tax+collected&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAMyBggAEA0QHjIICAAQCBANEB46BwgAEEcQsAM6BwgAELADEEM6CgguEMgDELADEEM6EAguEMcBENEDEMgDELADEEM6BQgAEIAEOgQIABBDOgYIABAWEB46BwghEAoQoAE6BAgAEA06CQgAEMkDEA0QHjoECAAQEzoICAAQDRAeEBM6CAgAEBYQHhATOgoIABAIEA0QHhATSgQIQRgASgQIRhgAUPMEWNg7YMs8aARwAngAgAGhAYgBjQqSAQQwLjEwmAEAoAEByAELwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz https://www.google.com/search?q=germany+tax+collected&client...
    - nixass 5y ago
      https://energsustainsoc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13705-017-0141-0 https://energsustainsoc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s... >There is also no doubt that the German Energiewende, at first sight, does not serve as an encouraging example in this respect: The cost bill - in the sense of the direct, perceptible financial effects - has already run up to almost € 500 billion, and the German private households as well as many businesses pay significantly more for electricity than in most other OECD-countries.
dane-pgp 5y ago
To keep this discussion grounded with some numeric facts, it's worth looking at the trend in Germany's electricity generation capacity over the past 20 years[0]. For example, fossil and nuclear capacity are both down from their peak in 2010, and their nuclear capacity is currently less than even that of biomass. Other charts are available on the same page[1]. [0] https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/gallery_image/public/paragraphs/images/fig1-installed-net-power-generation-capacity-germany-2002-2021.png?itok=k2BK48jz https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/g... [1] https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-consumption-and-power-mix-charts https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-c...
- IAmEveryone 5y ago
  Also: the last time nuclear was anywhere near competitive costs was 2010: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_energy#/media/File:20201019_Levelized_Cost_of_Energy_(LCOE,_Lazard)_-_renewable_energy.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_energy#/medi.... Today, it's easily 5x as expensive as wind or solar. (note: "levelized" costs are total costs divided by total real-world production, so it's already adjusted for "the time the sun doesn't shine" etc: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_energy
  - dane-pgp 5y ago
    That's a great point. Also, the more renewable capacity is installed, the less often fossil and nuclear plants need to run at full capacity, which means they generate less energy (and less RoI) over their design life, which pushes up their "levelized" costs further. As you say, the inflection point for that economic effect was probably years ago in a lot of places, although if the world had made an economically rational coordinated response to climate change 40 years ago, it could well have made sense to mass-produce nuclear power stations and use the excess energy for atmospheric carbon capture.
    - macilacilove 5y ago
      "which pushes up their "levelized" costs further." To me that means that the "levelized cost" metric punishes controllable energy sources unfairly for the "issues" that are caused by volatile energy sources right?
KarlKemp 5y ago
Last I checked, nuclear power is, indeed, dangerous. It may be a danger we have gotten good at controlling. Or we may think that. But a can of gasoline is a dangerous good even if you have a fire extinguisher pointing at it at all times. Also: the reaction is motivated more by the simultaneous labeling of natural gas as a "green technology", because the ridiculousness of a fossil fuel being subsidized to achieve climate goals is rather obvious.
- valesco 5y ago
  Uranium is not a fossil fuel, it’s a metal.

23 points by nixass 5y ago

This is just ridiculous and outrageous. A few related links: EU experts to say nuclear power qualifies for green investment label: document (reuters.com) 482 points by accountinhn 9 months ago | 552 comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26603464 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26603464 Nuclear should be considered part of clean energy standard, White House says (arstechnica.com) 425 points by nixass 9 months ago | 356 comments https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26673987 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26673987 See also: https://thebreakthrough.org/blog/the-true-face-of-the-anti-nuclear-movement https://thebreakthrough.org/blog/the-true-face-of-the-anti-n...

kmlx 5y ago
> This is just ridiculous and outrageous. it might be, but it's also very much expected. the german green party recently won their biggest share of votes. they're now part of a coalition government. one of their core pledges was to kill off nuclear, something that was set in motion by the previous government after the tsunami induced fukushima nuclear accident.
nixass 5y ago
The rejection of nuclear power is so rooted into German society that there's no meaningful time frame to re-educate "concerned population". Energiewende is failing every day more and more, burning hundreds of billions of Euros, while kissing Putin's chocolate starfish in the process
- KarlKemp 5y ago
  Hundreds of billions of Euros? Germany's tax revenue is around 200 billion Euros p. a., so I doubt it. 0: https://www.google.com/search?q=germany+tax+collected&client=safari&rls=en&ei=haHUYeqnH9KVsAfU-6MQ&ved=0ahUKEwiq_v3s65j1AhXSCuwKHdT9CAIQ4dUDCA0&uact=5&oq=germany+tax+collected&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAMyBggAEA0QHjIICAAQCBANEB46BwgAEEcQsAM6BwgAELADEEM6CgguEMgDELADEEM6EAguEMcBENEDEMgDELADEEM6BQgAEIAEOgQIABBDOgYIABAWEB46BwghEAoQoAE6BAgAEA06CQgAEMkDEA0QHjoECAAQEzoICAAQDRAeEBM6CAgAEBYQHhATOgoIABAIEA0QHhATSgQIQRgASgQIRhgAUPMEWNg7YMs8aARwAngAgAGhAYgBjQqSAQQwLjEwmAEAoAEByAELwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz https://www.google.com/search?q=germany+tax+collected&client...
  - nixass 5y ago
    https://energsustainsoc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13705-017-0141-0 https://energsustainsoc.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s... >There is also no doubt that the German Energiewende, at first sight, does not serve as an encouraging example in this respect: The cost bill - in the sense of the direct, perceptible financial effects - has already run up to almost € 500 billion, and the German private households as well as many businesses pay significantly more for electricity than in most other OECD-countries.

dane-pgp 5y ago

To keep this discussion grounded with some numeric facts, it's worth looking at the trend in Germany's electricity generation capacity over the past 20 years[0]. For example, fossil and nuclear capacity are both down from their peak in 2010, and their nuclear capacity is currently less than even that of biomass. Other charts are available on the same page[1]. [0] https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/gallery_image/public/paragraphs/images/fig1-installed-net-power-generation-capacity-germany-2002-2021.png?itok=k2BK48jz https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/g... [1] https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-consumption-and-power-mix-charts https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/germanys-energy-c...

IAmEveryone 5y ago
Also: the last time nuclear was anywhere near competitive costs was 2010: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_energy#/media/File:20201019_Levelized_Cost_of_Energy_(LCOE,_Lazard)_-_renewable_energy.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_energy#/medi.... Today, it's easily 5x as expensive as wind or solar. (note: "levelized" costs are total costs divided by total real-world production, so it's already adjusted for "the time the sun doesn't shine" etc: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_energy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_energy
- dane-pgp 5y ago
  That's a great point. Also, the more renewable capacity is installed, the less often fossil and nuclear plants need to run at full capacity, which means they generate less energy (and less RoI) over their design life, which pushes up their "levelized" costs further. As you say, the inflection point for that economic effect was probably years ago in a lot of places, although if the world had made an economically rational coordinated response to climate change 40 years ago, it could well have made sense to mass-produce nuclear power stations and use the excess energy for atmospheric carbon capture.
  - macilacilove 5y ago
    "which pushes up their "levelized" costs further." To me that means that the "levelized cost" metric punishes controllable energy sources unfairly for the "issues" that are caused by volatile energy sources right?

KarlKemp 5y ago

Last I checked, nuclear power is, indeed, dangerous. It may be a danger we have gotten good at controlling. Or we may think that. But a can of gasoline is a dangerous good even if you have a fire extinguisher pointing at it at all times. Also: the reaction is motivated more by the simultaneous labeling of natural gas as a "green technology", because the ridiculousness of a fossil fuel being subsidized to achieve climate goals is rather obvious.

valesco 5y ago
Uranium is not a fossil fuel, it’s a metal.