5 ms·

I grew up very close to a coal power plant. Guess what, that is many times more dangerous than storing nuclear waste. I don‘t think I have ever heard anyone say

by JanSt 3y ago

I grew up very close to a coal power plant. Guess what, that is many times more dangerous than storing nuclear waste. I don‘t think I have ever heard anyone say they would rather live close to a coal plant. Why is it a mistake or dishonest? That is the reality: Germany already powered many coal plants back up to replace gas and nuclear. Now it will take even longer to get rid of coal.

bayesian_horse 3y ago
Then learn to read a chart. You are either lying or getting your facts wrong. Less coal plants have been reopened than have been shut down before. Yes, the plan was to get rid of coal sooner, the Ukraine war made that harder. Actually some more lignite coal got burned last year in order to compensate. But we're going to get rid of those coal plants a lot sooner than if we were to build a couple new nuclear power plants which would commit us to a few more decades of that technology and all the associated problems.
- JanSt 3y ago
  „Um die akute Gaskrise im vergangenen Sommer zu bekämpfen, sind insgesamt 14 Steinkohle-Kraftwerke und ein Mineralöl-Kraftwerk wieder reaktiviert oder entgegen ursprünglicher Pläne nicht stillgelegt worden. Das geht aus einer Übersicht der Bundesnetzagentur hervor. Alle betroffenen Kraftwerke sind nach wie vor am Markt“ https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/steinkohlekraftwerke-gaskrise-101.html https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/steinkohlek... With 6 nuclear power plants that could be a lot less
  - bayesian_horse 3y ago
    Yes, doesn't negate my point. Coal is not the alternative to nuclear power and saying so is a big fat lie, the correlation is just not in the data. People like you dishonestly want to fool people into believing each terawatt hour not generated by nuclear power is compensated by one terawatt hour generated from coal. Because it's lazy and convenient and some people are stupid enough to believe it.
    - JanSt 3y ago
      You are dishonest here. It‘s without a question that we would need far less coal if we still had our remaining 6 nuclear power plants running. We could be pretty much out of coal by now if we would have phased out of coal before nuclear.
      - bayesian_horse 3y ago
        Now you are switching around the argument. Of course you could replace coal with nuclear power. But that wasn't what you are lying about. Your lie is that nuclear is getting replaced 1:1 with coal power. Not the same thing.
        JanSt 3y ago
        That was my argument from the very beginning, you are doing a lot of interpretation and talk about lies and dishonesty, which is frankly typical German Energiewende talk that led us into this disaster.
Mashimo 3y ago
> I don‘t think I have ever heard anyone say they would rather live close to a coal plant. Same. Yet there are always demonstrations against nuclear waste sites. Or windmils .. or geothermic. Current estimate for a decision on where to put a German nuclear waste site is the year.. 2046. Or 2068. Does not include building it. https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/innenpolitik/suche-nach-atommuell-endlager-103.html https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/innenpolitik/suche-nach-ato...
- JanSt 3y ago
  Yeah that‘s because there is a policy not to build one until after exiting nuclear power. Finland did it within a few years. Germany has a very good geology for nuclear waste.
  - Mashimo 3y ago
    > Finland did it within a few years Well 40 years :D But that includes building it. > The site was selected after a long process, which started in 1983 with a screening of the whole Finnish territory. > The facility is expected to be operational in 2023. I bet there where not many demonstrations in Finland. It will take Germany 40 years just to find a site. And then the demonstrations start.
    - ChuckNorris89 3y ago
      Because the Finns are pragmatic while the Germans are just idiotically idealistic and will protest against any change, even if it's for the greater good. Also doesn't help that most recent German chancellors form Schroeder to Merkel were in bed with the Kremlin for whom nuclear was a threat to their gas business so spreading anti nuclear propaganda through the media to the gullible German public was a necessary move.
      - hutzlibu 3y ago
        Do you have any more insightful nationalistic cliches to share?

by JanSt 3y ago

bayesian_horse 3y ago

Then learn to read a chart. You are either lying or getting your facts wrong. Less coal plants have been reopened than have been shut down before. Yes, the plan was to get rid of coal sooner, the Ukraine war made that harder. Actually some more lignite coal got burned last year in order to compensate. But we're going to get rid of those coal plants a lot sooner than if we were to build a couple new nuclear power plants which would commit us to a few more decades of that technology and all the associated problems.

JanSt 3y ago
„Um die akute Gaskrise im vergangenen Sommer zu bekämpfen, sind insgesamt 14 Steinkohle-Kraftwerke und ein Mineralöl-Kraftwerk wieder reaktiviert oder entgegen ursprünglicher Pläne nicht stillgelegt worden. Das geht aus einer Übersicht der Bundesnetzagentur hervor. Alle betroffenen Kraftwerke sind nach wie vor am Markt“ https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/steinkohlekraftwerke-gaskrise-101.html https://www.tagesschau.de/wirtschaft/unternehmen/steinkohlek... With 6 nuclear power plants that could be a lot less
- bayesian_horse 3y ago
  Yes, doesn't negate my point. Coal is not the alternative to nuclear power and saying so is a big fat lie, the correlation is just not in the data. People like you dishonestly want to fool people into believing each terawatt hour not generated by nuclear power is compensated by one terawatt hour generated from coal. Because it's lazy and convenient and some people are stupid enough to believe it.
  - JanSt 3y ago
    You are dishonest here. It‘s without a question that we would need far less coal if we still had our remaining 6 nuclear power plants running. We could be pretty much out of coal by now if we would have phased out of coal before nuclear.
    - bayesian_horse 3y ago
      Now you are switching around the argument. Of course you could replace coal with nuclear power. But that wasn't what you are lying about. Your lie is that nuclear is getting replaced 1:1 with coal power. Not the same thing.
      - JanSt 3y ago
        That was my argument from the very beginning, you are doing a lot of interpretation and talk about lies and dishonesty, which is frankly typical German Energiewende talk that led us into this disaster.

Mashimo 3y ago

> I don‘t think I have ever heard anyone say they would rather live close to a coal plant. Same. Yet there are always demonstrations against nuclear waste sites. Or windmils .. or geothermic. Current estimate for a decision on where to put a German nuclear waste site is the year.. 2046. Or 2068. Does not include building it. https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/innenpolitik/suche-nach-atommuell-endlager-103.html https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/innenpolitik/suche-nach-ato...

JanSt 3y ago
Yeah that‘s because there is a policy not to build one until after exiting nuclear power. Finland did it within a few years. Germany has a very good geology for nuclear waste.
- Mashimo 3y ago
  > Finland did it within a few years Well 40 years :D But that includes building it. > The site was selected after a long process, which started in 1983 with a screening of the whole Finnish territory. > The facility is expected to be operational in 2023. I bet there where not many demonstrations in Finland. It will take Germany 40 years just to find a site. And then the demonstrations start.
  - ChuckNorris89 3y ago
    Because the Finns are pragmatic while the Germans are just idiotically idealistic and will protest against any change, even if it's for the greater good. Also doesn't help that most recent German chancellors form Schroeder to Merkel were in bed with the Kremlin for whom nuclear was a threat to their gas business so spreading anti nuclear propaganda through the media to the gullible German public was a necessary move.
    - hutzlibu 3y ago
      Do you have any more insightful nationalistic cliches to share?