3 ms·

Germany never had energy independence in nuclear. Yes, Germany has/had plants, but nothing like enrichment etc. The reason is geopolitics: Germany started two w

Germany never had energy independence in nuclear. Yes, Germany has/had plants, but nothing like enrichment etc. The reason is geopolitics: Germany started two world wars, and noone wanted to have a postwar Germany capable of building nukes. That link between nuclear proliferation and nuclear energy production is sadly often missing from the discussion here. No country builds nuclear reactors only for the energy. It's always for the nukes. Nuclear energy has always been expensive and has been massively subsidized since inception.

mpweiher 4y ago
> but nothing like enrichment etc Sure about that? https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urananreicherungsanlage_Gronau https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urananreicherungsanlage_Gronau
- bildung 4y ago
  Yes, Gronau is the notable exception. Though note the involvement of WW2 winners France and UK (the owner is still a UK company) and the capacity that was wildy below demand for Western German plants. It also isn't like Germany didn't want nuclear proliferation. Public demand to be allowed to produce nukes already started with Konrad Adenauer in the 1950's, and parts of the conservatives still bring up the topic from time to time (e.g. Rupert Scholz in 2007).
panick21_ 4y ago
This is completely wrong. Literally almost the opposite is true. There are lots and lots of countries who use nuclear civilian energy and don't have nuclear weapons. While at the same time there are lots of countries who have nuclear weapons but no civilian nuclear power. In fact, it would be more accurate to say that countries who have civilian nuclear power are less likely to have nuclear weapons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferation_of_Nuclear_Weapons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferatio... The NPT allows countries to have civilian nuclear power but not nuclear weapons, and many do. My country, Switzerland being an example. Japan is a large country where this applies as well. The connection between civilian nuclear power and nuclear weapons is almost non existent. Countries that want nuclear weapons, just get them directly, they don't develop civilian nuclear power first. So please stop spreading this harmful misinformation.
- bildung 4y ago
  Please compare the list of countries with plants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country with the list of countries with nukes: https://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-weapons/worldwide https://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-weapons/worldwide. Note that most of the exceptions in Eastern Europe and Asia were formerly part of the Soviet Union or Warshaw Pact. Japan is indeed a notable exception as the country also has enrichment capabilities etc. Though note that they, too, seem to phase out the usage, though. Switzerland is planning it's phase out too, AFAIK.
  - panick21_ 4y ago
    Of course many of the original countries have both. However you are ignoring many exception in both directions, there are a number of countries with nuclear weapons but not nuclear power, and the other way around also. So 9 countries have nuclear weapons. Of those, 2 don't use civilian nuclear power, that's 22%. You have 32 countries with civilian nuclear power, that means 25 with no nuclear weapons. These 25 are literally distributed over all 5 continents. That is 80%. And notably non of the 9 with nuclear weapons have primarily used civilian nuclear power to bootstrap the bomb. So the data you provided is literally proving my point. > Though note that they, too, seem to phase out the usage, though. Switzerland is planning it's phase out too, AFAIK. That really has nothing to do with what we are talking about. But it was one of the worst votes in Swiss history. The campaign was totally based on absolutely absurd argument and driven by pure demagoguery. And we are not actively shutting down, we have just decided not to build anything new.

mpweiher 4y ago

> but nothing like enrichment etc Sure about that? https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urananreicherungsanlage_Gronau https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urananreicherungsanlage_Gronau

bildung 4y ago
Yes, Gronau is the notable exception. Though note the involvement of WW2 winners France and UK (the owner is still a UK company) and the capacity that was wildy below demand for Western German plants. It also isn't like Germany didn't want nuclear proliferation. Public demand to be allowed to produce nukes already started with Konrad Adenauer in the 1950's, and parts of the conservatives still bring up the topic from time to time (e.g. Rupert Scholz in 2007).

panick21_ 4y ago

This is completely wrong. Literally almost the opposite is true. There are lots and lots of countries who use nuclear civilian energy and don't have nuclear weapons. While at the same time there are lots of countries who have nuclear weapons but no civilian nuclear power. In fact, it would be more accurate to say that countries who have civilian nuclear power are less likely to have nuclear weapons. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferation_of_Nuclear_Weapons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-Proliferatio... The NPT allows countries to have civilian nuclear power but not nuclear weapons, and many do. My country, Switzerland being an example. Japan is a large country where this applies as well. The connection between civilian nuclear power and nuclear weapons is almost non existent. Countries that want nuclear weapons, just get them directly, they don't develop civilian nuclear power first. So please stop spreading this harmful misinformation.

bildung 4y ago
Please compare the list of countries with plants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_by_country with the list of countries with nukes: https://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-weapons/worldwide https://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-weapons/worldwide. Note that most of the exceptions in Eastern Europe and Asia were formerly part of the Soviet Union or Warshaw Pact. Japan is indeed a notable exception as the country also has enrichment capabilities etc. Though note that they, too, seem to phase out the usage, though. Switzerland is planning it's phase out too, AFAIK.
- panick21_ 4y ago
  Of course many of the original countries have both. However you are ignoring many exception in both directions, there are a number of countries with nuclear weapons but not nuclear power, and the other way around also. So 9 countries have nuclear weapons. Of those, 2 don't use civilian nuclear power, that's 22%. You have 32 countries with civilian nuclear power, that means 25 with no nuclear weapons. These 25 are literally distributed over all 5 continents. That is 80%. And notably non of the 9 with nuclear weapons have primarily used civilian nuclear power to bootstrap the bomb. So the data you provided is literally proving my point. > Though note that they, too, seem to phase out the usage, though. Switzerland is planning it's phase out too, AFAIK. That really has nothing to do with what we are talking about. But it was one of the worst votes in Swiss history. The campaign was totally based on absolutely absurd argument and driven by pure demagoguery. And we are not actively shutting down, we have just decided not to build anything new.