7 ms·

German Government Lied About Nuclear

62 points by AinderS 4y ago

LargoLasskhyfv 4y ago
German government itself is a lie.
cm2187 4y ago
> We have a heating problem or an industry problem, but not an electricity problem — at least not generally throughout the country. I don't even get that logic. The easy substitution for gas heating is electric heating (all you need is to plug a cheap portable electric heater in a power socket). [edit] also it seems 12% of the german electricity is generated with gas. So more nuclear should directly translate in more gas available to some other use, shouldn't it?
- spfzero 4y ago
  I also read that with incredulity "but not an electricity problem". Germany generates lots of electricity from coal and gas, emitting lots of carbon dioxide. That's a problem.
  - dirkt 4y ago
    Germany can get coal from somewhere else. Germany cannot get gas from somewhere else, at least not in sufficient quantities. In 2021, gas was used for 17% of the generated electricity [1]. This percentage is artificially high, since CO2 offsets for gas compared to other energy resources made it very attractive. Adjusting that down, the remaining 10% or so can easily be replaced by other sources, or imported. OTOH, about 50% of German households are heated with gas. You cannot replace all 200 million of those installations with electric heating (even if we wanted to, electric heating wastes the most energy). The industry is also highly dependent on natural gas, e.g. to produce glass (including solar panels), or as a raw material, e.g. to produce fertilizer, or other chemicals. That cannot be replaced by electricity. Should those industries not be able to continue working because of a gas shortage, this will have a ripple effect for the whole German economy. Yet the internet echo chamber mob continues to claim that Germany has an electricity problem, and could just instantly turn off the Russian gas if they'd just switch to nuclear... and you have to tell every single one of the to do some research. The internet has truly become an ugly place. [1] https://www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2022/03/PD22_116_43312.html https://www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2022/03...
    - fragmede 4y ago
      > You cannot replace all 200 million of those installations with electric heating Why not? That seems entirely tractable to me, given 4 months and a large enough budget. It’s undesirable for other reasons, sure, but if it’s between literally freezing to death and surviving, I know which one I’d choose.
- mvgcf 4y ago
  Gas is used as a preliminary product in chemical processes. Thus the industry needs gas, not electrical heating.
  - CRConrad 4y ago
    Way not to understand the comment you replied to: Yes, the industry needs gas, not electrical heating. And at the moment, most gas in Germany is used for industrial purposes; some, to heat homes; and some, to generate electricity. Therefore any gas freed up, by not being used to generate electricity or heat homes, can be used for those industrial purposes in stead. So using nuclear power in stead of gas to generate electricity, and electricity in stead of gas to heat homes, frees up some gas for industrial use. Sheesh.
whinvik 4y ago
It is indeed weird that a party calling itself "Green" is so much against the actual meaning of the word.
- ant6n 4y ago
  They are against the color?
GekkePrutser 4y ago
I don't agree with him. Continuing with Nuclear just for geopolitical reasons is only a stopgap. No country except finland has a permanent storage option for waste, and I think it's very admirable that Germany is going nuclear-free. It's just as unsustainable as fossil fuels, it's just on a much longer timeframe so we can push it forward. The current climate crisis shows what that leads to. And it could be that those fuel rod offers were refused for a technical reason or something. It feels a bit like we're only getting one side of the story here.
- TheLoafOfBread 4y ago
  Why would you store it? You can recycle it https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/frances-efficiency-in-the-nuclear-fuel-cycle-what-can-oui-learn https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/frances-efficiency-in-t...
  - nl 4y ago
    This is only one type of waste. > Through recycling, up to 96% of the reusable material in spent fuel can be recovered. That 4% is still substantial and very long lived (10,000 year+)
- AinderS 4y ago
  > It's just as unsustainable as fossil fuels, it's just on a much longer timeframe What good is solving nuclear waste storage that might become a problem in a thousand years, if we are done in by global warming (which nuclear can help offset) in a hundred?
  - GekkePrutser 4y ago
    I just don't think it's a good idea exchanging a long-term problem with an longer-term problem. It's like paying off a loan with other loans. And we're not going to be extinct from global warming. It's a huge unprecedented problem but nobody said it's going to wipe us out.
- Schroedingersat 4y ago
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
desindol 4y ago
The title is highly misleading, it's fuel rods for MAYBE one of the three reactors until the year end. The spokesperson is also a spokesperson of a company that took all the nuclear reactors from major energy companies into their portfolio to decommission them. The interviews he took as proof for the lying were also given before the TÜV assured them that ONE of the THREE reactors could run until 06.23 without recertification. The author also did a 180 on climate change and is now a full conspiracy nutjob. Here is the real statement of the ministry WITH the nuclear experts from all energy companies. Yes, they could run them longer... two for 80 days in a lower efficiency "Steckbetrieb" and one for ONE year but they all have no certification to run. Expected more from a bestselling author... https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Nukleare_Sicherheit/laufzeitverlaengerung_akw_bf.pdf https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Nuklear...
- ncmncm 4y ago
  Yes. The most reliable product of the nuclear industry and its advocates, since earliest days, is falsehood.
- tomcam 4y ago
  > The author also did a 180 on climate change and is now a full conspiracy nutjob. How is he a “conspiracy nutjob“?
  - ZeroGravitas 4y ago
    He's not a conspiracy nutjob. He's a paid PR rep. It's his job to create conspiracy nutjobs, so he does sound like one sometimes, like when he writes articles saying that environmentalists don't like nuclear power because they are intentionally trying to destroy modern society. But he doesn't actually believe any of it, which makes it worse.
    - tomcam 4y ago
      Paid by whom? And how do you know what anyone actually believes?
mvgcf 4y ago
Although he directly cites Habeck explaining the situation, the author does not understand his point: There is no electricity shortage in germany, there is a large dependency of the industry on natural gas in production processes. Sometimes used for heating, which might get substituted by elctrical heating. More often gas is used in chemical processes, where there is no direct substitute.
- snehk 4y ago
  But the reality is that gas is used to generate electricity in Germany. That gas is supposed to be used elsewhere in places where it cannot easily be substituted. Instead of relying on nuclear for that energy production Habek is all about coal, which is - no matter how you twist it - worse than nuclear.
- Mave83 4y ago
  There is one, a big and huge one. Don't worry, you will find out on your next electricity invoice that gas is used to produce electricity and by letting nuclear power plants run a little bit longer, we could save huge amounts of gas.
  - solarkraft 4y ago
    Where on the invoice can I find the amount of electricity generated using gas?
    - snehk 4y ago
      It's about 13%. We have one grid in Germany so it's the same for everyone.
- robert_foss 4y ago
  Freeing up gas from gas based electricity plants would surely mean that it can be used for something else.
jesterson 4y ago
> As such, anti-nuclear Greens are putting Europe in grave danger. Everyone who is advocating sanctioning is putting europe in a grave danger. Be it "green" agenda or anti-russian agenda. Sadly it's the modern way to redistribute wealth.
- cersa8 4y ago
  I think it's the reverse. Not sanctioning Russia, letting them march forward will put Europe in grave danger.
  - jesterson 4y ago
    If we read the article, the share of people thinking the same is shrinking. Russia never declared any intentions to "march forward", I think it's been political scaremongering for a while.
    - 3D29021196 4y ago
      If you listened to the rhetoric from Russian state-sanctioned media you would know that's not true. It was was scaremongering that Russia would invade Ukraine, until it wasn't.
    - solarkraft 4y ago
      Russia didn't declare its intention to start a war with Ukraine. They just spent years talking about how terrible they are and someone should do something about them. You might want to check out what they're saying about the rest of Europe.
      - jesterson 4y ago
        And? If I’m saying someone is an idiot that doesn’t mean I’m going to do something about it. The conversation is becoming pointless, if you’d like to believe Russia would conquer the whole Europe it’s your choice. My only advice would be to switch off the tv and think.
- 4y ago

62 points by AinderS 4y ago

German government itself is a lie.

> We have a heating problem or an industry problem, but not an electricity problem — at least not generally throughout the country. I don't even get that logic. The easy substitution for gas heating is electric heating (all you need is to plug a cheap portable electric heater in a power socket). [edit] also it seems 12% of the german electricity is generated with gas. So more nuclear should directly translate in more gas available to some other use, shouldn't it?

spfzero 4y ago
I also read that with incredulity "but not an electricity problem". Germany generates lots of electricity from coal and gas, emitting lots of carbon dioxide. That's a problem.
- dirkt 4y ago
  Germany can get coal from somewhere else. Germany cannot get gas from somewhere else, at least not in sufficient quantities. In 2021, gas was used for 17% of the generated electricity [1]. This percentage is artificially high, since CO2 offsets for gas compared to other energy resources made it very attractive. Adjusting that down, the remaining 10% or so can easily be replaced by other sources, or imported. OTOH, about 50% of German households are heated with gas. You cannot replace all 200 million of those installations with electric heating (even if we wanted to, electric heating wastes the most energy). The industry is also highly dependent on natural gas, e.g. to produce glass (including solar panels), or as a raw material, e.g. to produce fertilizer, or other chemicals. That cannot be replaced by electricity. Should those industries not be able to continue working because of a gas shortage, this will have a ripple effect for the whole German economy. Yet the internet echo chamber mob continues to claim that Germany has an electricity problem, and could just instantly turn off the Russian gas if they'd just switch to nuclear... and you have to tell every single one of the to do some research. The internet has truly become an ugly place. [1] https://www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2022/03/PD22_116_43312.html https://www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2022/03...
  - fragmede 4y ago
    > You cannot replace all 200 million of those installations with electric heating Why not? That seems entirely tractable to me, given 4 months and a large enough budget. It’s undesirable for other reasons, sure, but if it’s between literally freezing to death and surviving, I know which one I’d choose.
mvgcf 4y ago
Gas is used as a preliminary product in chemical processes. Thus the industry needs gas, not electrical heating.
- CRConrad 4y ago
  Way not to understand the comment you replied to: Yes, the industry needs gas, not electrical heating. And at the moment, most gas in Germany is used for industrial purposes; some, to heat homes; and some, to generate electricity. Therefore any gas freed up, by not being used to generate electricity or heat homes, can be used for those industrial purposes in stead. So using nuclear power in stead of gas to generate electricity, and electricity in stead of gas to heat homes, frees up some gas for industrial use. Sheesh.

whinvik 4y ago

It is indeed weird that a party calling itself "Green" is so much against the actual meaning of the word.

ant6n 4y ago
They are against the color?

GekkePrutser 4y ago

I don't agree with him. Continuing with Nuclear just for geopolitical reasons is only a stopgap. No country except finland has a permanent storage option for waste, and I think it's very admirable that Germany is going nuclear-free. It's just as unsustainable as fossil fuels, it's just on a much longer timeframe so we can push it forward. The current climate crisis shows what that leads to. And it could be that those fuel rod offers were refused for a technical reason or something. It feels a bit like we're only getting one side of the story here.

TheLoafOfBread 4y ago
Why would you store it? You can recycle it https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/frances-efficiency-in-the-nuclear-fuel-cycle-what-can-oui-learn https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/frances-efficiency-in-t...
- nl 4y ago
  This is only one type of waste. > Through recycling, up to 96% of the reusable material in spent fuel can be recovered. That 4% is still substantial and very long lived (10,000 year+)
AinderS 4y ago
> It's just as unsustainable as fossil fuels, it's just on a much longer timeframe What good is solving nuclear waste storage that might become a problem in a thousand years, if we are done in by global warming (which nuclear can help offset) in a hundred?
- GekkePrutser 4y ago
  I just don't think it's a good idea exchanging a long-term problem with an longer-term problem. It's like paying off a loan with other loans. And we're not going to be extinct from global warming. It's a huge unprecedented problem but nobody said it's going to wipe us out.
Schroedingersat 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

desindol 4y ago

The title is highly misleading, it's fuel rods for MAYBE one of the three reactors until the year end. The spokesperson is also a spokesperson of a company that took all the nuclear reactors from major energy companies into their portfolio to decommission them. The interviews he took as proof for the lying were also given before the TÜV assured them that ONE of the THREE reactors could run until 06.23 without recertification. The author also did a 180 on climate change and is now a full conspiracy nutjob. Here is the real statement of the ministry WITH the nuclear experts from all energy companies. Yes, they could run them longer... two for 80 days in a lower efficiency "Steckbetrieb" and one for ONE year but they all have no certification to run. Expected more from a bestselling author... https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Nukleare_Sicherheit/laufzeitverlaengerung_akw_bf.pdf https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Nuklear...

ncmncm 4y ago
Yes. The most reliable product of the nuclear industry and its advocates, since earliest days, is falsehood.
tomcam 4y ago
> The author also did a 180 on climate change and is now a full conspiracy nutjob. How is he a “conspiracy nutjob“?
- ZeroGravitas 4y ago
  He's not a conspiracy nutjob. He's a paid PR rep. It's his job to create conspiracy nutjobs, so he does sound like one sometimes, like when he writes articles saying that environmentalists don't like nuclear power because they are intentionally trying to destroy modern society. But he doesn't actually believe any of it, which makes it worse.
  - tomcam 4y ago
    Paid by whom? And how do you know what anyone actually believes?

mvgcf 4y ago

Although he directly cites Habeck explaining the situation, the author does not understand his point: There is no electricity shortage in germany, there is a large dependency of the industry on natural gas in production processes. Sometimes used for heating, which might get substituted by elctrical heating. More often gas is used in chemical processes, where there is no direct substitute.

snehk 4y ago
But the reality is that gas is used to generate electricity in Germany. That gas is supposed to be used elsewhere in places where it cannot easily be substituted. Instead of relying on nuclear for that energy production Habek is all about coal, which is - no matter how you twist it - worse than nuclear.
Mave83 4y ago
There is one, a big and huge one. Don't worry, you will find out on your next electricity invoice that gas is used to produce electricity and by letting nuclear power plants run a little bit longer, we could save huge amounts of gas.
- solarkraft 4y ago
  Where on the invoice can I find the amount of electricity generated using gas?
  - snehk 4y ago
    It's about 13%. We have one grid in Germany so it's the same for everyone.
robert_foss 4y ago
Freeing up gas from gas based electricity plants would surely mean that it can be used for something else.

jesterson 4y ago

> As such, anti-nuclear Greens are putting Europe in grave danger. Everyone who is advocating sanctioning is putting europe in a grave danger. Be it "green" agenda or anti-russian agenda. Sadly it's the modern way to redistribute wealth.

cersa8 4y ago
I think it's the reverse. Not sanctioning Russia, letting them march forward will put Europe in grave danger.
- jesterson 4y ago
  If we read the article, the share of people thinking the same is shrinking. Russia never declared any intentions to "march forward", I think it's been political scaremongering for a while.
  - 3D29021196 4y ago
    If you listened to the rhetoric from Russian state-sanctioned media you would know that's not true. It was was scaremongering that Russia would invade Ukraine, until it wasn't.
  - solarkraft 4y ago
    Russia didn't declare its intention to start a war with Ukraine. They just spent years talking about how terrible they are and someone should do something about them. You might want to check out what they're saying about the rest of Europe.
    - jesterson 4y ago
      And? If I’m saying someone is an idiot that doesn’t mean I’m going to do something about it. The conversation is becoming pointless, if you’d like to believe Russia would conquer the whole Europe it’s your choice. My only advice would be to switch off the tv and think.
4y ago