3 ms·

By "Europe asks" the article means someone wrote a white paper [1]. Europe's energy strategy–together with Russian and American military adventurism and Chines

By "Europe asks" the article means someone wrote a white paper [1]. Europe's energy strategy–together with Russian and American military adventurism and Chinese economic nationalism–probably puts it into a recession this year. I have a lot of respect for the aims of the European project. But as currently structured, I see no mechanism by which hard decisions can be made. [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52026DC0117&qid=1773310096275 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A...

SilverElfin 8mo ago
By mechanism and structure are you basically saying they’re too slow and bureaucratic to act in time to avoid a recession? Or that there is literally no way for them to revive nuclear for some reason?
- amarant 8mo ago
  There is very little hope. Restarting plants that have been offline for years is not simple, and building new ones is a decades long venture. Either approach would take too long.
- JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
  > they’re too slow and bureaucratic to act in time to avoid a recession? "The energy imports dependency rate in the EU was 57%, which means that nearly 60% of the EU’s energy needs were met by net imports" [1]. To put that in perspective, Sri Lanka–an island nation–has an import dependency ratio of 60% [2]. A European recession is coming because Europe made wrong decisions in the past. I don't know if there is anything it can do in the short term to fix this. Just, potentially, alleviate the pain. > there is literally no way for them to revive nuclear for some reason? Nuclear's problem in the West is we overregulate it. I'm not seeing a clear way for the EU to fix this problem, barring France striking a deal in exchange for extending its nuclear-weapons umbrella. For nuclear, the EU's veto rules mean between Germany's greens and Hungary's Russophilia, nothing transformative can get done. [1] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/wdn-20260318-1 https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/w... [2] https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.IMP.CONS.ZS?most_recent_value_desc=true https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.IMP.CONS.ZS?most_rec...
surgical_fire 8mo ago
Because those decisions are made at the country level. People keep speaking of the EU as if it had the authority of a country. It does not. While it was empowered by the members states to regulate certain things, a lot of things come down to each individual country. Pointing at the EU is a way to launder the failures of each country. For instance, while there are regulations on emission reduction and percentage of renewables, how those are achieved is on each country. It was not the EU that made Germany retarded with nuclear. If anything, the EU regulation on emissions reduction and renewables make the countries here slightly less dependant on oil and gas. For the EU to make the "hard decisions" that would allow it to be relevant in the global stage, it would need to federalize. Become a de-facto country.

SilverElfin 8mo ago

By mechanism and structure are you basically saying they’re too slow and bureaucratic to act in time to avoid a recession? Or that there is literally no way for them to revive nuclear for some reason?

amarant 8mo ago
There is very little hope. Restarting plants that have been offline for years is not simple, and building new ones is a decades long venture. Either approach would take too long.
JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
> they’re too slow and bureaucratic to act in time to avoid a recession? "The energy imports dependency rate in the EU was 57%, which means that nearly 60% of the EU’s energy needs were met by net imports" [1]. To put that in perspective, Sri Lanka–an island nation–has an import dependency ratio of 60% [2]. A European recession is coming because Europe made wrong decisions in the past. I don't know if there is anything it can do in the short term to fix this. Just, potentially, alleviate the pain. > there is literally no way for them to revive nuclear for some reason? Nuclear's problem in the West is we overregulate it. I'm not seeing a clear way for the EU to fix this problem, barring France striking a deal in exchange for extending its nuclear-weapons umbrella. For nuclear, the EU's veto rules mean between Germany's greens and Hungary's Russophilia, nothing transformative can get done. [1] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/wdn-20260318-1 https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/web/products-eurostat-news/w/w... [2] https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.IMP.CONS.ZS?most_recent_value_desc=true https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.IMP.CONS.ZS?most_rec...

surgical_fire 8mo ago

Because those decisions are made at the country level. People keep speaking of the EU as if it had the authority of a country. It does not. While it was empowered by the members states to regulate certain things, a lot of things come down to each individual country. Pointing at the EU is a way to launder the failures of each country. For instance, while there are regulations on emission reduction and percentage of renewables, how those are achieved is on each country. It was not the EU that made Germany retarded with nuclear. If anything, the EU regulation on emissions reduction and renewables make the countries here slightly less dependant on oil and gas. For the EU to make the "hard decisions" that would allow it to be relevant in the global stage, it would need to federalize. Become a de-facto country.