3 ms·

> According to the text, they might even need a constitutional amendment. I am no expert in German law, but this strikes me as an unlikely requirement that woul

by V__ 5y ago

> According to the text, they might even need a constitutional amendment. I am no expert in German law, but this strikes me as an unlikely requirement that would nevertheless be doable. A 2/3 majority is needed in both the Bundesrat (senate) and Bundestag (house). Not happening. > This is what they say: The existing nuclear reactors should have passed a lengthy security inspection in 2019, which they didn’t pass since they would close at the end of 2022. They would need to pass such an inspection, and it takes a long time. > ... > Yes, of course Germany can afford to take some more time to pass these inspections! The author makes it sound like those are cars which can be easily refitted, upgraded and certified. This would take enormous amounts of time and money for the three plants which are still online, and who knows how much for the ones which are offline. Let's say it would just take a year (very optimistic), it wouldn't have any effect on the conflict. It's simply not worth it, when the money could be spent on other technologies. It would probably be easier and much cheaper to build new nuclear power plants (like ThorCon which was on HN a few days ago).

renewiltord 5y ago
Is security there the same as what we'd call security or is it like `securité` in French which is safety? I'm pretty sure the former is not that hard, and you can bypass it if there is a real national need. The real thing is that Germany has NS and NS2 and so they're happy to just guzzle gas.
- formerly_proven 5y ago
  Safety.
- V__ 5y ago
  They mean safety. > The real thing is that Germany has NS and NS2 and so they're happy to just guzzle gas. NS2 is dead. They stopped certification, dismissed all employes and it's sanctioned by Germany/EU and the U.S. I think what a lot of people don't realize is that Germany just had a major political shift after the election last year. The new government now has to work around the failures of the last 16 years, in which nothing really got done. It really is a rock and a hard place. Stop all Russian imports and kill the economy, or try to find other sources (LNG from Qatar) and switch as fast as possible. Both options are bad, and the minister is also not happy but has to make it work somehow.
- _ph_ 5y ago
  If you haven't noticed it, those gas pipelines are practically dead. NS2 is, and NS1 is being ramped down. Make no mistake, Germany is getting out of Russian gas as long as Putin is in power. It is all about ramping it down without impacting the population and the industry too much.
moooo99 5y ago
> A 2/3 majority is needed in both the Bundesrat (senate) and Bundestag (house). Not happening. Absolutely not ever going to happen. > The author makes it sound like those are cars which can be easily refitted, upgraded and certified. This would take enormous amounts of time and money for the three plants which are still online, and who knows how much for the ones which are offline. Even Lindner says that extending the lifetime of nuclear power plants isn't really a realistic option. With what the FDP said in the past and what they are saying now this makes me really believe that there is something more to the whole debate than the fundamental opposition of the green party towards nuclear power. > It's simply not worth it, when the money could be spent on other technologies. It likely is. Nuclear isn't really a feasible option for short term actions. Given the political barriers and the progress of the nuclear exit it would be an extremely long play with little to no effects on the current conflict. My gut feeling is that investing this into increasing renewables and investing into improving the energy efficiency of buildings (where the majority of gas import goes) has a significantly bigger impact on energy requirements. Generally this is a debate that nobody seems to want to have. Everybody is talking about how we can substitute energy imports. Everybody talks about LNG terminals, storage facilities and nuclear power but nobody talks about the low hanging fruits. We do have basically free measures to take to at least slighly reduce the fossil fuel consumption. Mandatory home office availability for suitable jobs, car free/reduced days, speed limits, encouraging less heating, etc.
- V__ 5y ago
  > We do have basically free measures to take to at least slighly reduce the fossil fuel consumption. Mandatory home office availability for suitable jobs, car free/reduced days, speed limits, encouraging less heating, etc. Lindner: Not on my watch we don't
- xyzzyz 5y ago
  Also rationed gas, electricity only a few hours a day for retail customers, and others. Lots of basically free measures indeed, we don’t need no nuclear.
- dathinab 5y ago
  > With what the FDP said in the past and what they are saying now this makes me really believe that there is something more to the whole debate than the fundamental opposition of the green party towards nuclear power. My guess is that there is somewhere a non public classified report titled something like: "Reassessment of the safety of Nuclear Power plants using modern standards and in context of environmental catastrophes." With a conclusion of: "PANIC!!!". Just as an example one of the nuclear power plants is build on a geographic fault line...
SllX 5y ago
We don’t know how long this—let’s not water it down with words like “conflict”—war will last. We also don’t want members of NATO to be dependent on a hostile foreign power for heating fuel. If it takes longer than a year, fine, it’s something that should have been started years ago but there’s no other time available to us than the present and future, so let’s try the present. Solar+Wind+Batteries are a necessary but not sufficient part of a future energy plan for a large industrialized nation, so see if infrastructure that already exists today is usable and can be brought back online in a useful capacity for a bill of materials competitive with the alternatives.
- V__ 5y ago
  > We need to expand renewables, rigorously cut consumption at all levels, diversify, and rapidly ramp up hydrogen. [1] Russian coal imports are projected to go down to 25% (from 50%) in the next month or so, and by autumn should be more or less zero. Independence from gas should be achieved by 2024. LNG terminals will be build and floating LNG terminals have been secured. [1] https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Pressemitteilungen/2022/03/20220325-minister-habeck-germany-is-quickly-cutting-its-dependence-on-russian-energy-but-we-still-need-to-act-prudently.html https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Pressemitteilungen/2022/03/... That's about the same timeframe which could be reasonably expected for the recertification/upgrading/etc. of the nuclear plants. The goal is to get independent of Russia.
  - SllX 5y ago
    Sounds good. What is the argument against getting those plants back online if that’s how little time it will take? I assume Germany seeks to grow and prosper as a nation, not stagnate at prior energy usage levels, or make themselves overly dependent on imports from another but different nation?
    - V__ 5y ago
      There are multiple reasons, first that 2 years would still be a very optimistic time frame. The energy companies got a huge reimbursement for the shutdowns and are therefore not interested in prolonging, because it would actually cost them more money than investing in other technologies. But the biggest reason is sadly the German publics prolific anti-nuclear views. There is basically zero public support behind the idea.

by V__ 5y ago

renewiltord 5y ago

Is security there the same as what we'd call security or is it like `securité` in French which is safety? I'm pretty sure the former is not that hard, and you can bypass it if there is a real national need. The real thing is that Germany has NS and NS2 and so they're happy to just guzzle gas.

formerly_proven 5y ago
Safety.
V__ 5y ago
They mean safety. > The real thing is that Germany has NS and NS2 and so they're happy to just guzzle gas. NS2 is dead. They stopped certification, dismissed all employes and it's sanctioned by Germany/EU and the U.S. I think what a lot of people don't realize is that Germany just had a major political shift after the election last year. The new government now has to work around the failures of the last 16 years, in which nothing really got done. It really is a rock and a hard place. Stop all Russian imports and kill the economy, or try to find other sources (LNG from Qatar) and switch as fast as possible. Both options are bad, and the minister is also not happy but has to make it work somehow.
_ph_ 5y ago
If you haven't noticed it, those gas pipelines are practically dead. NS2 is, and NS1 is being ramped down. Make no mistake, Germany is getting out of Russian gas as long as Putin is in power. It is all about ramping it down without impacting the population and the industry too much.

moooo99 5y ago

> A 2/3 majority is needed in both the Bundesrat (senate) and Bundestag (house). Not happening. Absolutely not ever going to happen. > The author makes it sound like those are cars which can be easily refitted, upgraded and certified. This would take enormous amounts of time and money for the three plants which are still online, and who knows how much for the ones which are offline. Even Lindner says that extending the lifetime of nuclear power plants isn't really a realistic option. With what the FDP said in the past and what they are saying now this makes me really believe that there is something more to the whole debate than the fundamental opposition of the green party towards nuclear power. > It's simply not worth it, when the money could be spent on other technologies. It likely is. Nuclear isn't really a feasible option for short term actions. Given the political barriers and the progress of the nuclear exit it would be an extremely long play with little to no effects on the current conflict. My gut feeling is that investing this into increasing renewables and investing into improving the energy efficiency of buildings (where the majority of gas import goes) has a significantly bigger impact on energy requirements. Generally this is a debate that nobody seems to want to have. Everybody is talking about how we can substitute energy imports. Everybody talks about LNG terminals, storage facilities and nuclear power but nobody talks about the low hanging fruits. We do have basically free measures to take to at least slighly reduce the fossil fuel consumption. Mandatory home office availability for suitable jobs, car free/reduced days, speed limits, encouraging less heating, etc.

V__ 5y ago
> We do have basically free measures to take to at least slighly reduce the fossil fuel consumption. Mandatory home office availability for suitable jobs, car free/reduced days, speed limits, encouraging less heating, etc. Lindner: Not on my watch we don't
xyzzyz 5y ago
Also rationed gas, electricity only a few hours a day for retail customers, and others. Lots of basically free measures indeed, we don’t need no nuclear.
dathinab 5y ago
> With what the FDP said in the past and what they are saying now this makes me really believe that there is something more to the whole debate than the fundamental opposition of the green party towards nuclear power. My guess is that there is somewhere a non public classified report titled something like: "Reassessment of the safety of Nuclear Power plants using modern standards and in context of environmental catastrophes." With a conclusion of: "PANIC!!!". Just as an example one of the nuclear power plants is build on a geographic fault line...

SllX 5y ago

We don’t know how long this—let’s not water it down with words like “conflict”—war will last. We also don’t want members of NATO to be dependent on a hostile foreign power for heating fuel. If it takes longer than a year, fine, it’s something that should have been started years ago but there’s no other time available to us than the present and future, so let’s try the present. Solar+Wind+Batteries are a necessary but not sufficient part of a future energy plan for a large industrialized nation, so see if infrastructure that already exists today is usable and can be brought back online in a useful capacity for a bill of materials competitive with the alternatives.

V__ 5y ago
> We need to expand renewables, rigorously cut consumption at all levels, diversify, and rapidly ramp up hydrogen. [1] Russian coal imports are projected to go down to 25% (from 50%) in the next month or so, and by autumn should be more or less zero. Independence from gas should be achieved by 2024. LNG terminals will be build and floating LNG terminals have been secured. [1] https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Pressemitteilungen/2022/03/20220325-minister-habeck-germany-is-quickly-cutting-its-dependence-on-russian-energy-but-we-still-need-to-act-prudently.html https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Pressemitteilungen/2022/03/... That's about the same timeframe which could be reasonably expected for the recertification/upgrading/etc. of the nuclear plants. The goal is to get independent of Russia.
- SllX 5y ago
  Sounds good. What is the argument against getting those plants back online if that’s how little time it will take? I assume Germany seeks to grow and prosper as a nation, not stagnate at prior energy usage levels, or make themselves overly dependent on imports from another but different nation?
  - V__ 5y ago
    There are multiple reasons, first that 2 years would still be a very optimistic time frame. The energy companies got a huge reimbursement for the shutdowns and are therefore not interested in prolonging, because it would actually cost them more money than investing in other technologies. But the biggest reason is sadly the German publics prolific anti-nuclear views. There is basically zero public support behind the idea.