3 ms·

I'm not familiar enough with german politics to understand, but how far up/down the chain of causality for this are the greens?

legulere 3y ago
The greens are the easy scapegoat for conservatives in Germany for everything they don’t like. In this case the greens are supposedly responsible for a proliferation of coal by being anti-nuclear. The reality is that the greens fight hardest for an earlier exit from coal, not hard enough though as seen from some environmentalists. In this case the greens managed that the mine is getting closed earlier but some villages will still be destroyed for it. The way they want to replace coal is with renewables. The other big parties, SPD (social democrats), CDU/CSU (conservatives) and FDP (mostly financial liberalism) were all more for keeping nuclear but also slowing renewables down because of coal miner unions or closeness to big electricity producers, to Putin or to the industry heavily relying on cheap Russian gas. Coal and nuclear plants were run by the same companies in Germany. You often try to see the debate being steered towards being about coal versus nuclear while the reality is nuclear + fossil fuels versus renewables
- s9w 3y ago
  [dead]
- fileeditview 3y ago
  I don't think this is about being a scapegoat.. the Greens always had on their agenda to shut down nuclear power completely. I think in the 70ies to 80ies and later there was a big movement that protested a lot against nuclear power (Atomkraft? Nein danke!). And recently they pushed forward to close down the last 3 reactors even though we might have troubles with our energy supply in the near future.
- tasuki 3y ago
  Greens might have been fighting coal, but were fighting harder against nuclear, which in the end led to the proliferation of coal. > You often try to see the debate being steered towards being about coal versus nuclear while the reality is nuclear + fossil fuels versus renewables Just the opposite! One often sees the debate steered towards nuclear + fossil fuels vs renewables (just like you did here!), while the reality is coal vs nuclear.

legulere 3y ago

The greens are the easy scapegoat for conservatives in Germany for everything they don’t like. In this case the greens are supposedly responsible for a proliferation of coal by being anti-nuclear. The reality is that the greens fight hardest for an earlier exit from coal, not hard enough though as seen from some environmentalists. In this case the greens managed that the mine is getting closed earlier but some villages will still be destroyed for it. The way they want to replace coal is with renewables. The other big parties, SPD (social democrats), CDU/CSU (conservatives) and FDP (mostly financial liberalism) were all more for keeping nuclear but also slowing renewables down because of coal miner unions or closeness to big electricity producers, to Putin or to the industry heavily relying on cheap Russian gas. Coal and nuclear plants were run by the same companies in Germany. You often try to see the debate being steered towards being about coal versus nuclear while the reality is nuclear + fossil fuels versus renewables

s9w 3y ago
[dead]
fileeditview 3y ago
I don't think this is about being a scapegoat.. the Greens always had on their agenda to shut down nuclear power completely. I think in the 70ies to 80ies and later there was a big movement that protested a lot against nuclear power (Atomkraft? Nein danke!). And recently they pushed forward to close down the last 3 reactors even though we might have troubles with our energy supply in the near future.
tasuki 3y ago
Greens might have been fighting coal, but were fighting harder against nuclear, which in the end led to the proliferation of coal. > You often try to see the debate being steered towards being about coal versus nuclear while the reality is nuclear + fossil fuels versus renewables Just the opposite! One often sees the debate steered towards nuclear + fossil fuels vs renewables (just like you did here!), while the reality is coal vs nuclear.