4 ms·
Of course they could. But Germany would rather rely on Russia than have nuke energy. Russian oil and gas is greener and has a lower carbon foot print according
by _3u10 5y ago
Of course they could. But Germany would rather rely on Russia than have nuke energy.
Russian oil and gas is greener and has a lower carbon foot print according to them.
- lawn 5y agoI'm glad you added "according to them", because nuclear has a much lower carbon footprint than gas.
- _3u10 5y agoYeah I was quite frankly surprised to see a clean energy leader promoting fossil fuels as sustainable and nuclear as not.
- jaltekruse 5y agoYo! I encourage you to read down to the "what NOT to do" section. This type of bickering is exactly what I'm trying to convince people to avoid. I think we should take this moment to acknowledge what lots of people agree on, energy independence is good for security. I'm trying to make the website neutral, but its hard in the current political climate. I think liberals need to accept that energy independence is good even if it doesn't come 100% renewable. And also trying to rally conservatives to accept that renewables are a longer term play, but are kind of the only option for nations that have no domestic oil reserves. But that is kind of all irrelevant right now, Russia could cut off gas from Europe today! I'm trying to prevent us from being caught with our pants down and having to cave an otherwise pretty united international response.
- _3u10 5y agoIt’s Germany’s choice. I’m not rationing anything because they chose a course of action with predictable consequences. They made their clean energy bed, and lectured everyone else on it, they can lie in it. If they like the results they can keep going, if they don’t in the long run there’s still time to change the road your on.