3 ms·
This doesn’t accurately reflect what’s happening. 1) the national referendum was held in 1980, not exactly a recent decision. Most people who voted in that re
by Gud 4y ago
This doesn’t accurately reflect what’s happening.
1) the national referendum was held in 1980, not exactly a recent decision. Most people who voted in that referendum are probably dead.
2) The referendum consisted of four different choices, basically all voting options were a No to nuclear, the only difference between them is how slowly the existing plants should be decommissioned(slowest option won).
3) The majority owners of Vattenfall are the Swedish state and their leadership will say and do what the politicians tell them to say. I’ll bet you a beer that within 6 months they’ll be extremely pro nuclear, just how their new masters want them to be.
- Gud 4y ago3a) Looks like I was right, but it happened in less than a week not months. The CEO of Vattenfall wants to extend the lifetime for the operational Forsmark and Ringhals nuclear reactors up to a total lifetime of 80 years(!). Personally I would prefer new reactors instead of keeping these relics alive, but Sweden has a limitation of maximum 10 reactors, complicating the construction of new reactors. https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/vattenfall-vill-forlanga-reaktorernas-livstid https://sverigesradio.se/artikel/vattenfall-vill-forlanga-re...