3 ms·
The trade-off Germany chose is not between using nuclear vs. producing more CO2. It is between using nuclear vs. reducing economic activity (and the latter is I
by captainmuon 3y ago
The trade-off Germany chose is not between using nuclear vs. producing more CO2. It is between using nuclear vs. reducing economic activity (and the latter is IMHO very dubious - despite many warnings, Germany is able to procure enough energy just fine).
It's not like we need a fixed amount of energy X, and have to choose how to get it. Rather, we say we want to discontinue fossil at a certain fixed pace, and say, OK what is the effect of turning off nuclear on the power price? And what is the effect on the economy?
And given that nuclear energy in Germany is not actually that cheap, and hugely unpopular, it was an easy decision.
- alexey-salmin 3y agoThat is simply false, both short-term and long-term. Short-term they explicitly chose produce more co2 emissions in 2022, not to decrease economic activity. They "procure enough energy just fine" by burning coal. Long-term Germany's co2 emissions are more than 2-2.5x of France, both annual and cumulative. That is THE result of their anti-nuclear strategy.