1. Well electricity is one thing. But Europe consume absurd amount of oil and gas in heating. Even in countries like France.

  2. Surely it doesn't hurt to start by producing more electricity so that electric heating is actually feasible?

  3. Sure, but we know how to make electricity without emitting too much CO2, can we at least do that?

  4. And yet we still stupidly burn oil and gas for electricity, where it can be easily replaced, instead of saving it for those areas where it can't be replaced.

  5. You are right, but the situation in Germany is different: they chose to close their functioning power plant for political reasons, no matter the climate and geopolitical problems.

  6. This gets ignored so much, some people in this thread even argue against considering all primary energy sources, which is insane.

  7. because english is the de facto lingua franca. so if your protest is to reach the maximum number of people it has to be in english.

  8. because not meant for Germans... probably the person taking the pic was waiting for then to start the projection and then they went on their way

  9. If there's one thing this sub loves more than shitting on Germany, it's white knighting for them because they're being shat on "unfairly".

  10. Then please explain how we can heat our homes with nuclear energy, or electricity, only the rich folks can afford electric heating systems.

  11. I can just imagine how the British tabloids would cover this: "Germany at it again: environmentalists threaten Putin with NUCLEAR option!"

  12. That would be the more serious tabloids, the "less noble" ones would probably title "Krauts want to enrich Uranium - next step to dominate European continent"

  13. At least we didn't have some bizarre knee jerk allergic reaction to Nuclear power because of a tsunami that happened half the world away lol

  14. To be fair the english government is planning on expanding its nuclear fleet in the next year to become less dependant on fossil fuels, so props to them :)

  15. Yeah, we really need an "anti-nuclear fanatism phaseout" strategy, before we can undo the "nuclear phaseout" non-strategy...

  16. This is just proof you shouldn't pay attention to environmentalists. They hindered us on the nuclear front for decades, stopped new construction that lead to overuse of the old ones like fukushima, and now they throw it all under the bus for "current event".

  17. As long as it becomes state-owned, it's a bearable intermediate solution. Private fission reactors on that scale, however, are (and were) unacceptable; as small as the worst-case chances are, the mind-boggling costs for a full fission meltdown would have to be shouldered by the taxpayers, anyway. Any sane company (including insurance providers) would rather disolve than pay for centuries.

  18. These are not "environmentalists", they call themselves „Anti-Putin-Pro-Atomkraft-Aktion“ and that's pretty much all the information that exists about them.

  19. Especially if you know that the problem of germany isnt electricity generation, but Gas for heating and industry. Reopening nuclear facilities wouldnt lower the imported fossil fuels from russia by a single €.

  20. Cause the nuclear fanboyism went through the roof since Ukraine and apparently it's the holy grail solving every single issue of humanity /s

  21. But… you can’t just switch on nuclear power… that’s- that’s not remotely how any of this works! Plus, good luck finding a company to do it. Not a single company is willing to operate a plant after they raked in all that sweet sweet government money.

  22. These plants are so old that even the energy companies that own them don't want to run them anymore. Imagine that, corporations putting safety over profits. That's how terrible they are. And yet, nuclear shills on the internet want them turned back on. If this isn't peak stupidity, I don't know what is.

  23. It just doesn't work like that though? To those interested, just watch Vox's recent video on Germany's reliance. While it is very superficial, it still outlines the most basic issue - that does not work. The last decade has been spent working against nuclear, if you were to ramp everything up now, it would take even longer. The infrastructure that's used for Gas is not simply replacable through nuclear. You'd have to rebuild everything, which takes even longer.

  24. Because what Germany is doing with renewables is not enough and won't be enough. Renewables have their own production and supply unreliability problems.

  25. We keep running into the logic here that we don't have another pure power supply that is as stable and as powerful for the price. Wind farms and solar panels also have to be constantly replaced and are not recycled.

  26. And furthermore, not of Russian uranium. Rosatom has a big share in global Uranium fuel production. They are so important, that they are not on the sanction list.

  27. Because it is a PR stunt by American nuclear supporters, not German environmentalist. Nuclear has about zero support in Germany. Even in the UK, a lot of people are worried about the ballooning cost of the Hinkley Point construction - and the growing dependency on China.

  28. You are kind of right. The nuclear fuel for the existing German power plants comes from Russia too. But, renewables are not a substitute for nuclear. They serve different needs. Nuclear power supplies base load while renewables are still only suitable for peak load supply. Sufficient and reliable storage solutions for renewable sources are possibly even further away than building of new nuclear power stations.

  29. Put the money into modern nuclear ffs. Wind and solar are only nice locally, but overall terrible for the environment. The resources they require stil come from -- and add to the financing of -- countries with shitty environmental regulations, like Russia and China. Until that changes, you continue to push the problem off on other people.

  30. Not very original considering how Greenpeace did the exact same thing, with the exact opposite message, on the exact same nuclear plant, just

  31. Its about time to stop using fossil fuel, stop financing dictators (Russia, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Libia, and so on)

  32. Switch on renewable energies. We dont have time to build reactors. In the time 1 reactor is finished(20 years) You can build 1000times as much renewable energies.

  33. It probably would be financially more viable to literally burn euro bank notes to produce electricity than to invest any amount into nuclear power production.

  34. Oh sweet! Let the factual incorrect nuclear circlejerk begin! May you all get rich from the nuclear lobby! ... you guys dont do it for free, right? Right?

  35. Nuclear power has not been able and will not be able to replace fossil fuels. First for economic reasons, related to the second reason which is urgency. It was neither Greenpeace nor cheap Russian gas which prevented the global success of nuclear power. It's the price for the complexity which can't compete with abundant cheaply harvestable free renewable energy.

  36. It would be able, but building new more efficent ones wouldnt be practical with the overall move to renewables

  37. Let's hear how renewable energy deals with the baseline coverage problem. No, building enough dams to store water is not feasible since no one wants to displace millions of people like the Three Gorges.

  38. But its too late now, they waited too long to build new ones and went out of their way to make it impossible to restore the reactors. Soon all the reactors will have to shut down for safety reasons and the ruble will stay strong from record export earnings.

  39. I don't get how any environmentalists could be against nuclear power since it is one of the greenest sources of energy. Economically, it sucks since the whole thing expensive, but environmentally, it is way less detrimental than fossil fuels. Nuclear power ≠ nuclear weapons. Maybe they're just confused.

  40. Interestingly the Green party of Finland took a lukewarm stance towards nuclear power at their party conference last weekend. Their political goals for the near future are:

  41. Nuclear energy is cleaner and safer for the environment, it's literally proven. Even the so-called "green options" like hydroelectric destroy the fauna and flora of rivers, solar takes up too much arable land and wind just isn't sufficient... People are against nuclear because they immediately think of "Chernobyl" which only happened because of human incompetence and political corruption.

  42. Why are so many people so nukebrained. Its to late in Germany. Accept it. And even in France they don't know how to store their waste. Last thing I heard is that they buried in underground within clay rock that ruptures under extreme heat!!!. And they want to seal this in the future. If a fire starts in one of these facilities, have fun as everything perishes under you. We can't advocate for something if we don't even know how to store it for thousands of years.

  43. No, but when they run the they run reliably and produce an insane amount of power relative to the low emissions.

  44. Nuclear energy isnt ideal but it is far better than polluting our enviroment and supplying Putins war with funds

  45. Shhhh. Don't say that. Some magic future fantasy reactor will use all that old nuclear waste as fuel and we won't depend on Rosatom's technology anymore. That's also the reason, why we won't need any storage. Win-Win. Or so... /s

  46. You guys know that much of the fission material used for nuclear power plants also comes from russia and china, right?

  47. German environmentalists (that was against nuclear) are pretty retarded, had one co-worker while working in Germany and she was a fan of communism too.

  48. Interesting but honestly the German anti-nuclear faction is probably the strongest one in Europe or perhaps the world so I doubt this will be seen as something positive by them. They're fanatically against it to the point of actively spreading large amounts of disinformation.

  49. Meanwhile fucking Italy had the fucking Italians vote to ban nuclear completely. General public here knows shit about nuclear energy and has less than 0 competence to vote on something like this but that's not even the best part: they fucking voted like a month after Chernobyl.

  50. Which organisation did it? As far as I know, germanies Enviromentalists are wildly opposed to nuclear, and I never heard them demanding it now.

  51. Not to mention that France has had a basically carbon free grid for almost half a century now. It's going to take hundreds of years for places like Germany to catch up to those historic emissions. All these pseudo environmentalists need a reality check.

  52. Mates you are the reason Germany has stopped using nuclear and now you want to act like it’s your idea to get into nuclear to wean off Russian energy?

  53. Germanys nuclear fuel comes from Russia. So switching on nuclear wouldn't do anything to Putin. In addition you can't just restart a nuclear power plant, end of life is prepared well ahead and turning it on again would take a while.

  54. This is gold coming from the country with the perfect example against nuclear energy. Though I agree that shutting down nuclear energy prematurely was a bad idea

  55. are those the same enviromentalist that went apeshit when fukushima happened and nearly everyone demanded to go away from nuclear?

  56. Going without greenhouse gas with only solar & wind is utopic, only nuclear can produce enough at this point of time. Until we get to nuclear fusion (20/30ish year according to specialist) we won’t get anything clean ... the only other way is to cut down energy consumption which will never happen.

  57. Honestly it boggles me why hasn't everyone switched completely to nuclear and renewable. I know nuclear waste is a long term issue but like... dump it in a desert or something? Surely we have PLENTY of spots where we can just let it sit. Hell, fire it off into the sun on cheap rockets or something idk

  58. Ah yes, cheap rockets to transport nuclear waste what a great idea. That’s also exactly the thing where you’d want to be as cheap as possible, so that in the best case the rocket explodes in the atmosphere to spread radiation as far as possible.

  59. Last I checked there weren't any deserts in Germany though. And other countries are usually pretty reluctant to import nuclear waste. I'm not even sure if I should take the rocket idea seriously. The is a terrible idea for a whole bunch of reasons.

  60. How can you grasp such an intelligent concept (no nuclear, no party) and at the same time go full "let's send nuclear waste on the sun"?

  61. These people believe that within a year it is possible to convert our entire power grid to completely different sources. I don't know how to explain it to them, but today's technology doesn't work so that you put solar panels everywhere and magically have stable energy forever.

  62. And dear Germans came to India to instigate protests when ever a nuclear plant for electricity is initiated and tried hard to make it difficult to get the fuel.Not sure why

  63. It is not just germany. Many countries have reduced nuclear energy in favor of importing energy or attempting to replace some of the energy need with other sources with varying success. Sweden shut down nuclear power plants and import from germany, russia and other. Some of the sources are coal and gas. This is not just meant against germany. Its directed to us idiots who shut down nuclear energy and replaced with russian or importing coal energy for example :p

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News Reporter