Archived link

Laying out key priorities for the EU’s upcoming Clean Industrial Deal, German Economy State Secretary Sven Giegold said on Monday (30 September) he wants the Commission to prioritise renewable energy, taking a tough line on nuclear power and France’s renewable targets.

Alongside a quicker roll-out of renewable energy facilitated by “further exemptions from [environmental impact] assessments,” Giegold outlined several other German priorities for the EU’s upcoming strategy.

Based on the 2030 renewable energy targets, the EU should also set up a 2040 framework, complemented by new, more ambitious targets for energy efficiency, he said.

“It should include new heating standards, a heat pump action plan and a renovation initiative,” he explained, noting a heat pump action plan was last shelved in 2023.

Hydrogen, made from renewables, should be governed by a “a pragmatic framework,” the German politician stressed, reiterating calls from his boss, Economy Minister Robert Habeck (Greens), to delay strict production rules into the late 2030s.

    • macniel
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      3 months ago

      Nuclear ain’t clean when you don’t have a solution for spent Uranium Rods.

      • Thorry84@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        We don’t have a solution for all the CO2 in the atmosphere, yet we happily continue burning fossil fuels at record levels.

        And I wonder what exactly you think the danger is of radioactive waste. We have excellent methods of getting it into caskets safely. Maybe don’t dig it out of its casket and eat it? Then you’ll be fine.

        Not to mention the dozens of ultra deadly forever chemicals we use by the tons in industrial processes. We store them perfectly fine and they pose a much greater risk to people of they were to come into contact with it.

        It’s like we have this thing that guaranteed kills millions every year and causes so much suffering, but we keep on using it because the alternative might have some downsides. It’s so weird.

        • macniel
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          3 months ago

          And where do you store that casket? That still leaks radiation.

          But yeah both have downsides (nuclear and coal/gas/oil) so we need to force more Renewables.

          • Thorry84@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            3 months ago

            The caskets don’t leak radiation, you can hug them and be perfectly fine.

            Even renewables have their downsides, nothing is without downsides, but we need to way them fairly and equally. But nuclear for most people is like the boogeyman and gets an unfair treatment, even though it’s used with great succes all over the world.

            With solar for example we are currently producing huge amounts of solar panels, but often (in China for example) the waste generated with this isn’t handled properly. Also they have a life span of 15-20 years and we haven’t figured out the recycling all that well. Do these issues stop us from going all in on solar? Hell no, we need to go in fully on solar. But with nuclear (in some parts of the world at least) it’s like it needs to be perfect, with no outstanding issues in order for it to even be considered an option.

            And just wait till you find out they pump deadly industrial waste straight into the ground using injection wells, where it just sits for thousands of years. Nobody ever makes a fuss about that. But putting some concrete caskets into an old mine is somehow a crime against humanity. It makes zero sense.

            • CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              The caskets don’t leak radiation, you can hug them and be perfectly fine.

              Asse, Germany, radioactive waste deposit. Known since 2008 to be leaking, research shows noticeable higher numbers of cases for thyroid cancer and leukemia.

              Hug that shit all you want.

              • Successful_Try543
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                For information:

                A significant inflow of water and a subtle loss of mechanical stability may jeopardise the underground mine integrity – the site is in danger of collapsing and becoming flooded.

                Between 1988 and 2008 32 new entry points were recorded. In 1996, the BFS notified the Bundesumweltministerium that there was a risk of severe radioactive contamination if the mine ran full of water and that further investigation was urgently required.

                After the controversies about the facility became public and the operator was changed to the Federal Office for Radiation Protection, a new plan was developed in 2010. It became obvious that the recovery of the waste is necessary for long-term safety. The waste is planned to be collected by remotely controlled robots, sealed in safe containers, and stored temporarily above ground. Preparations include creating a new shaft that will be big enough and building the above ground storage facility. The estimated costs for the closure of the mine are estimated to be at least 3.7 billion Euro. The recovery of the waste and closure of the mine will be paid with tax money, not by the operators of the German nuclear plants, even though most of the waste was created by them. The beginning of the recovery is planned to start in 2033 and is estimated to last for decades.

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asse_II_mine

                Edit: Wow. I’m getting downvotes for providing additional information. Teriffic!

                • Thorry84@feddit.nl
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Yeah the anti-nuclear crowd just goes and downvote all the things, they don’t even read anything. It’s kinda sad.

              • Thorry84@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                3 months ago

                So they fucked up one time 50 years ago and thus the entire process is deemed to be flawed? Mistakes were made, mistakes are going to be made and as long as we learn from them and fix our mistakes, that’s just a normal part of life.

                Look at any tech, machine or industry we have today and you can see how many people died and suffered for those things to exist today. Hydro power has killed over a hundred thousand people and has destroyed entire eco systems, we still consider that clean and safe power. Cars kill people every day and planes still fall out of the sky sometimes. I still feel perfectly safe stepping into my car and driving on the road. So you saying “hug that shit” is like I’m supposed to fear my car, because of the horrible accidents that happen every day.

                I can’t find the source for you claiming higher cases of thyroid cancer and leukemia due to the leak of hazardous materials from the Asse-II mine. I can find plenty of FUD articles from anti-nuclear websites, but no actual peer reviewed research.

                • CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  So they fucked up one time 50 years ago and thus the entire process is deemed to be flawed?

                  Nope, it’s only an example. Castor caskets have always been critized for safety issues, especially because testing wasn’t done thoroughly enough. That’s not a mistake, it’s a systematic issue.

                  Your second paragraph is just not a good argument. We should opt for the safest feasible option and that is not nuclear. It has safety issues (especially with waste), takes too long to build and is too expensive.
                  By the way, for the reasons you mentioned (and more) you will not see me arguing for hydro power, and also I strongly argue for reducing the use if cars. The issue is, we have a straight up fetish for cars, to the point that we swipe away legislations that would improve the safety of drivers and non-involved (like a general speed limit on the Autobahn). Cars in Germany are similar to guns in the US regarding their respective standings in society. It is simply irrational.

                  I can’t find the source for you claiming higher cases of thyroid cancer and leukemia due to the leak of hazardous materials from the Asse-II mine.

                  Auswertung des EKN zur Krebshäufigkeit in den Gemeinden Cremlingen, Stadt Wolfenbüttel, SG Baddeckenstedt, SG Oderwald, SG Schladen, SG Schöppenstedt und SG Sickte is the source.

                  By the way, there is still no disposal site deemed safe enough for final storage of nuclear waste in germany.

            • YourPrivatHater@ani.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              3 months ago

              These so called caskets have to be rebuild regularly because the contents will remain harmful for what may as well be called eternity in human years

              They will get water leaks, they will erode and they will constantly cost money and be a burden on the environment. CO2 is comparingly manageable, its a mid therm problem for humanity, nuclear waste is burden forever… Unless we shoot it into the sun or something like that. (will never be a good option)

              • Thorry84@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                3 months ago

                Do you have a source for that? Because that is not true. A properly built casket can go for at least a thousand years. The issues reported with caskets is where they’ve been exposed to salt water / brine. That’s a facility issue, not a casket issue. There are so many caskets stored around the world and only a very small amount have had actual issues associated with them.

                Even with the issues, the impact has always been very locally. Not like with coal where radioactive matter is blasted straight into the atmosphere and spread in dust form. Radioactive dust getting into your lungs is a big issue. Water contaminated with waste you can simply stay a feet away from and be perfectly fine. And remember a lot of water gets contaminated all the time with a lot of different dangerous stuff, that’s why we monitor and treat the water we use. The leaks have been a problem, but mostly in the form of costs, not in the form of it being dangerous. It has always been detected right away and not gotten into water we use.

                • YourPrivatHater@ani.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  There is no material known to man (or woman) (wich we can effectively build with) that lasts 100 thousand to 1 Million years (wich is necessary for such things)

                  We cannot build such a building from pure gold or titanium (wich both wouldn’t last long enough either, but significantly longer than concrete) a structure like that has to be rebuild at least once in 100 years, if not every 50 years, wich is more reasonable. It will cost humanity for all eternity to keep the environment safe from this waste.

                  https://www.forbes.com/sites/christinero/2019/11/26/the-staggering-timescales-of-nuclear-waste-disposal/

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete_degradation

                  Forgot to add, NO, nuclear, or rather toxic contamination of ground and surface water has the ability to be a super serious environmental issue for very very large areas. We humans produced stuff that might outlast our species, its not just nuclear waste, there is also regular toxic waste with similar storage issues wich we cannot dispose off and that has to be stored in a similar manner, just the need for radiation shielding is not there, but water and air are the biggest enemies of human architecture and long lasting storage solutions.

                  There is no such thing as forever lasting human buildings or burrows. They will always be a huge burden.

                  • Thorry84@feddit.nl
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    Well those timelines aren’t correct. The EPA says 10.000 years and that’s for the entire storage solution. It doesn’t matter that the caskets decay after a 2000 years, once the entire thing is encased in rock.

                    The concrete degradation doesn’t really apply, because caskets are specifically made with longevity in mind and aren’t just made out of concrete. Causes for concrete degradation is also exposure to water and mechanical stress. That doesn’t apply in a long term storage facility.

                    And we still have examples of Roman concrete around these days, made 2000 years ago. There are also natural nuclear reactors which are contained, so we know in principle containment is possible.

                    It may take 100.000 years for something to become completely inert, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t safe much earlier. And something with that long of a timeline doesn’t produce hardly any radiation to begin with. The dangerous stuff is much hotter and becomes safe within hundreds to thousands of years.

          • Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            In the significant amount of space no longer used to store coal? People vastly overestimate the volume (physical dimensions) of nuclear waste produced, and ignore that the “waste” is largely still usable for other purposes.