8 ms·
Germany Quits Nuclear Power, Ending a Decades-Long Struggle
- nixass 4y agoGermany be like - let's do exactly opposite of what makes sense in today's world Green party is really ruining and I'm amazed people still give them votes
- leipert 4y agoTo be fair: Merkel (so conservatives and liberals) made the decision in 2011 after Fukushima in a move to align with popular sentiment.
- DrBazza 4y agoUnfortunately popular sentiment doesn't equate to scientific fact. Nuclear power is cleaner, safer and less environmentally damaging than fossil fuels in every way. Still, since when have politicians ever let facts get in the way of campaigning for power?
- tuukkah 4y agoWe are not choosing between nuclear and fossils - we have chosen renewables. Clarification: I'm not German. I'm talking globally and long term. What's happening right now in Germany is just a blip. The big picture: > Clean power growth is likely to exceed electricity demand growth in 2023; this would be the first year for this to happen outside of a recession. With average growth in electricity demand and clean power, we forecast that 2023 will see a small fall in fossil generation (-47 TWh, -0.3%), with bigger falls in subsequent years as wind and solar grow further. That would mean 2022 hit “peak” emissions. A new era of falling power sector emissions is close. https://ember-climate.org/insights/research/global-electricity-review-2023/ https://ember-climate.org/insights/research/global-electrici...
- pantalaimon 4y agoStill coal fired plants are supposed to run until 2038
- HyperSane 4y agoYou chose to shut down perfectly working nuclear reactors and keep burning coal. You COULD and SHOULD have replaced coal with nuclear. https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertbryce/2022/10/28/the-iron-law-of-electricity-strikes-again-germany-re-opens-five-lignite-fired-power-plants/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertbryce/2022/10/28/the-iron...
- pclmulqdq 4y agoYou thought you chose renewables. You actually chose coal, LNG, and buying power from France.
- fabian2k 4y agoGermany exports more power than it imports. And France is only a part of the imports, with 2022 being much lower due to their issues with the nuclear power plants. https://www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2023/03/PD23_090_43312.html https://www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2023/03...
- pclmulqdq 4y agoLarge power exports come necessarily from using non-dispatchable forms of power generation like solar and wind. Other people who can turn off their power plants will buy yours rather than burning their own resources. In other words, the amount of power a nation exports means very little about how you keep the lights on.
- TheLoafOfBread 4y agoSo you can import it at winter for much more $$$ than you sold it at summer.
- polotics 4y ago
- benfortuna 4y ago"Nuclear power is cleaner [..] than fossil fuels in every way." Actually not every way though.. nuclear waste has to go somewhere.
- pantalaimon 4y agoNuclear waste doesn’t cause climate change and it doesn’t go anywhere - this is not an urgent problem.
- Nicksil 4y ago>Actually not every way though.. nuclear waste has to go somewhere. I don't understand your argument; of course waste must go somewhere. Nuclear power, with its waste, is still cleaner than fossil fuels in every way.
- DrBazza 4y ago> nuclear waste has to go somewhere. My stock comment for that is: bury it deep and with signs; if we've lost the ability to read the signs, we've lost the ability to dig deep and endanger ourselves.
- Nicksil 4y agoIndeed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_nuclear_waste_warning_messages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_nuclear_waste_warnin...
- benfortuna 4y agoI'm not saying nuclear is worse than fossil fuels, just that we don't know the future impact of waste with such a long half-life. So I don't think it's demonstrably cleaner "in every way".
- Nicksil 4y ago>I'm not saying nuclear is worse than fossil fuels, just that we don't know the future impact of waste with such a long half-life. No, we've got a pretty good idea. >So I don't think it's demonstrably cleaner "in every way". It is, objectively.
- HyperSane 4y agoToo bad the populous are idiots.
- mannykannot 4y ago...made the decision in 2011... That does not mean the plan has to be followed through without amendment today - in fact, it cannot be, unless restarting lignite-burning generators was part of the original plan. Responsibility for this development lies squarely on all those who chose this path today (and regardless of party affiliation.)
- ekianjo 4y ago> after Fukushima in a move to align with popular sentiment. So they were populists?
- tuukkah 4y agoThis was not decided by the greens only. From the article: > Yet the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan in 2011 caused German sentiments to shift strongly against atomic energy once more, and Ms. Merkel abruptly reversed course. Her government passed a law to phase out Germany’s 17 nuclear reactors by the end of 2022. Similarly in the neighbouring Austria, nuclear power is prohibited in the constitution, not by a political party.
- pantalaimon 4y agoYou can still visit the nuclear power plants that were built but never switched on https://youtu.be/WUVZbBBHrI4 https://youtu.be/WUVZbBBHrI4
- Traubenfuchs 4y ago> in the neighbouring Austria, nuclear power is prohibited Which is funny, because we actually built a pretty much complete nuclear power plant, Zwentendorf. It‘s now a unique museum. A vote of just 50.47 % ruined our radiant future... Also we do have one research reactor left right in the city. I was blessed enough to visit it once.
- ekianjo 4y ago> A vote of just 50.47 % ruined our radiant future... There really should be a rule that important decisions can't pass with a tiny majority
- dragonwriter 4y ago> There really should be a rule that important decisions can’t pass with a tiny majority There are at least two major problems with such a rule: (1) On an important question, “yes” and “no” are both important decisions. (2) Who decides what is “important”? You can make a rule that is closer to “you can’t make specific kinds of deviations from the status quo without a supermajority vote”, but that’s…very different from “important decisions”.
- TheLoafOfBread 4y ago
- HyperSane 4y agoSurprised you are getting downvoted, you are correct. This is an incredibly stupid thing to do.
- Timon3 4y agoThey are probably being downvoted because they are pinning the decisions lead by CDU on the Green party. If they didn't misrepresent the situation they most likely would not get downvoted. Funny how that works, no?
- HyperSane 4y agoThe CDU may have made the decision but the Greens were in favor of it, were they not?
- mrweasel 4y agoDanish TV just had a documentary, regarding nuclear power. It's basically the "reporter" who is reconsidering his life long hostility towards nuclear power. In the documentary there's an interesting point: The opponents never wanted coal either, they firmly believe that a no to nuclear was a yes to solar and wind. That part of the message just got lost, and it was not particularly realistic either. It's incredibly naive, but it's the same mentality in present day nuclear opponents. They still fail to see that a no to nuclear is often a yes to coal, oil and gas.
- jillesvangurp 4y agoActually CDU, the christian democrats, were in charge when this was decided and for most of the period while they were planning and executing that decision. Angela Merkel was in charge for 16 years until handing over to the new coalition months before the Ukrainian invasion. The CDU is a conservative party. And seriously, trying to pass off Angela Merkel as a tree hugging hippy would be quite a feat. The thing is, this was a widely supported decision that has by and large gone through without a lot of opposition in a country that reliably votes for conservatives and moderates to lead them. Also, none of the bad stuff that people predicted would happen has actually happened. No blackouts. No massive increase in coal/gas usage. None of that seems to be happening.
- mvdwoord 4y agoSwitching back to coal, great move.
- leipert 4y agoYeah, what’s even more hilarious: Conservatives made the decision to shut down the nuclear plants and also destroyed the German renewable sector at the same time. But voters have a short term memory and will blame it all on the current administration.
- awaythrow98765 4y ago2 of the 3 currently governing parties made up the coalition that first decided to end nuclear back in 2001. The later conservative Merkel government just first extended reactor life-times just to go back on its word and shorten them again when Fukushima happened. But all the big parties and their politicians had a hand in the current desaster, people are quit right to blame all the last 25 years' governments.
- kken 4y agoThe entire concept of the "Energiewende" was implemented without putting the right constraints in place. The conservatives later fumbled it instead of adding the right changes. What happened is that the subsidies for renewable energy in Germany mostly led to a buildup of a huge photovoltaic industry in China after an initial goldrush in Europe. When they changed the incentive scheme, the German photovoltaic industry crumbled and the chinese one was kept afloat with local subsidies. For a while, the equipment suppliers in Europe still profited from the boom in China, but where eventually replaced by Chinese ones. In effect, now both the photovoltaic industry and the equipment industry in Europe largely disappeared. And to add insult to injury, China is considering to limit photovoltaic exports (potentially as a means to counter the semiconductor sacntions): https://www.scmp.com/business/article/3208206/chinas-proposed-export-curbs-key-solar-technologies-could-backfire-hurt-domestic-giants-analysts-say https://www.scmp.com/business/article/3208206/chinas-propose...
- HyperSane 4y ago
- wheelerof4te 4y agoWhat are they gonna use for power?
- pantalaimon 4y agoCoal, Gas and Wind
- HyperSane 4y agoLots of dirty lignite coal. https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertbryce/2022/10/28/the-iron-law-of-electricity-strikes-again-germany-re-opens-five-lignite-fired-power-plants/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertbryce/2022/10/28/the-iron...
- awaythrow98765 4y agoCurrently mostly coal (mostly lignite) with a little imported LNG for base load and peaks. Wind and solar if available. Rest is imported nuclear, coal and other power from neighboring countries. Longer term, a switch to 100% renewables is planned, which is supposed to take 20 years. However, plans are coming along too slowly, especially regarding storage and transmission lines. But also necessary ramp-up of wind and solar installations is extremely lacking. Meanwhile power prices are at an all-time high and no betterment in sight. Meanwhile a switch to mostly-electric transportation, green steel smelting, green concrete production, and mostly electric heating should happen, which will roughly triple electricity consumption overall. So I guess we'll wait and see, most probably more of the imported whatever-we-can-get at stellar prices.
- wheelerof4te 4y agoYeah, 100% renewable energy for such a large and developed country. How are they gonna do it, by exterminating 50% of the population?
- awaythrow98765 4y agoAs it seems by getting rid of all the industry.
- pantalaimon 4y agoThis will result in 15 MT more CO2 emissions per year https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/15-millionen-tonnen-mehr-co2-durch-abschaltung-der-akws-100.html https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/15-millionen-tonnen-mehr-co2-...
- Overtonwindow 4y agoI wonder if Greta will show up to protest this..
- raverbashing 4y agoLike this? https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/17/us/greta-thunberg-detained-germany-climate/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2023/01/17/us/greta-thunberg-detaine...
- TheLoafOfBread 4y agoProtesting against mining which is expanded because NPPs are closed.
- HyperSane 4y agoThis is one of the stupidest things any country has voluntarily done.
- is_true 4y agothat you know about
- flybrand 4y ago[flagged]
- aflag 4y ago[flagged]
- qtzfz 4y ago[flagged]
- jpeter 4y ago[flagged]
- ekianjo 4y ago[flagged]
- yuppie_scum 4y ago[flagged]
- dang 4y agoMaybe so, but please don't post unsubstantive comments to Hacker News. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- HyperSane 4y agohttps://www.forbes.com/sites/robertbryce/2022/10/28/the-iron-law-of-electricity-strikes-again-germany-re-opens-five-lignite-fired-power-plants/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertbryce/2022/10/28/the-iron... German Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced that Germany was reopening five power plants that burn lignite, a low-rank coal. Germany’s return to lignite demonstrates, yet again, the Iron Law of Electricity, which says that people, businesses, and governments will do whatever they have to do to get the electricity they need. Indeed, Germany’s move back to lignite is chock-full of contradictions, including one that belongs in the “you can’t make this up” column. The Iron Law of Electricity is so powerful that the utility RWE is dismantling the Keyenberg wind project in the western part of the country to, wait for it... make more room for the expansion of the Garzweiler mine. Lignite from Garzweiler fuels the Neurath C power plant, which is one of the power plants being brought back online. A spokesperson for RWE told the Guardian newspaper that “We realize this comes across as paradoxical.” Yes, there are paradoxes aplenty. Germany’s need to keep the lights on explains why the government is willing to ignore the fact that burning lignite to produce electricity emits more carbon dioxide than any other form of power generation. Furthermore, burning lignite contradicts Germany’s climate goals. Under the country’s much-vaunted Energiewende (German for “energy turnaround”) Germany has pledged to slash its total greenhouse gas emissions by 95% by 2050. The cost of that pledge could total more than $500 billion by 2025 — and that figure only accounts for the investment needed to decarbonize the electricity sector. The result of all that spending is that residents of Germany are now paying some of the highest electricity prices in Europe.
- kken 4y agoDon't forget that this is complety against current public sentiment in germany: https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/germany-sees-tidal-shift-in-sentiment-toward-atomic-energy-a-05f47c3c-d20e-44dc-bd6d-1e1dbfb7f0cd https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/germany-sees-ti...
- awaythrow98765 4y agoExiting nuclear was once according to then-current public sentiment. Problem is, all governments in the last 30 years have been populist power-hungry careerists without any regard for longer-term science-based policy. They just did what seemed the easiest way to get over the next election.
- raverbashing 4y agoThen maybe they shouldn't complain about the nuclear plants
- awaythrow98765 4y agoAnti-nuclear-people have mostly been a vocal minority. However, due to mostly anti-science reporting and irresponsible media-spread panic after Czernobyl and Fukushima, there have been temporary majorities for a shutdown, which populist politicians used to get (re)elected.
- ekianjo 4y ago> Anti-nuclear-people have mostly been a vocal minority. Not in Germany
- HyperSane 4y agoAs of 2021 Germany emitted 6 times more CO2 per kWh than France https://www.statista.com/statistics/1291750/carbon-intensity-power-sector-eu-country/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1291750/carbon-intensity...
- akmarinov 4y agoGermany is now currently advocating to sanction and ban Russian nuclear imports and maintenance on most European reactors, but is happily importing russian gas in the meantime…
- kken 4y ago>is happily importing russian gas in the meantime… No, its not.
- akmarinov 4y agoIt’s down a lot, but oil + gas imports are still to the tune of 6 billion euros a month https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/04/13/germany-russia-trade-economy-sanctions-gas-energy/d0e53710-d9f2-11ed-aebd-3fd2ac4c460a_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2023/04/13/germany-r...
- locallost 4y agoWhen this was announced over 10 years ago, the overwhelming majority of people concluded it's a shame they will be replaced with coal. Fast forward ten years and the use of coal is at a record low, the use of gas has not really changed in a meaningful way and overall the situation has improved significantly on its own, but especially compared to some other developed countries. E.g. the US is still at 60% fossil fuels and not going down faster than Germany. This should be a bigger problem, but it's not really talked about, and neither is the per capita consumption a.k.a. efficiency which is in the US abysmal. People should focus more on outcomes of policies and not their favorite tech. If they'd do that it would be easy to see that nuclear has existed for 70 years and it has failed to replace fossil fuels worldwide in a meaningful way. To me it's obvious the costs are prohibitive and this is unlikely to change. It hasn't thus far. If someone can get it done, by all means, but it hasn't happened. Instead we hear about small modular which was already tried in the 80s because of the high upfront investments of large plants, but those turned out not to work because of even higher per MWh costs. So it was back to huge plants which again turned out to be difficult to build. I am seeing a pattern here. Renewables are accomplishing a lot more and a lot faster and there's no need to waste resources on something else. If they can't get us to 100% they can get us as fast as possible to whatever is possible. And thus far all the predictions on what is realistic for renewables as a percentage of the grid have failed dramatically.
- naasking 4y ago> Fast forward ten years and the use of coal is at a record low, the use of gas has not really changed in a meaningful way and overall the situation has improved significantly on its own Now imagine how much lower it would be had they kept the nuclear plants.
- LargoLasskhyfv 4y ago[flagged]
- ZeroGravitas 4y agoWas it a struggle? Seemed like fairly boring long term planning. Next up for phase out, Coal. I would until recently have bet that Germany would phase out Coal before the USA, but the recent IRA changes might have made it a competitive race again.
- blastonico 4y agoGermany used to be the world's reference in engineering to me. Now, I see them as a country of non-sense alarmists.
- budhajeewa 4y agoExecutive summary by ChatGPT: Germany will shut down its three remaining nuclear reactors by April 16, ending nuclear power generation in Europe's largest economy. Germany's move, which marks the end of a decades-long fight by environmentalists, makes it an outlier in much of the industrialised world, including Britain, France, Finland, and Poland, which are expanding their nuclear energy programs as part of their plans to reach ambitious climate targets. The decision comes at a time when Europe is grappling with the question of how to secure enough energy to drive its economies and keep homes warm while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Some scientists and Nobel Prize laureates from across the globe have urged Germany to reconsider its decision to phase out nuclear power, citing it as a valuable alternative to power plants spewing greenhouse gases. However, Robert Habeck, the economy minister, insists that Germany can manage the nuclear exit, stating that the country's energy system will be structured differently, relying on 80% renewable energies by 2030.