• SigmarStern@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    When I was a kid, Chernobyl happened. We weren’t that far away and although I was very little I still remember the fear and uncertainty in my parent’s faces. The following years were marked by research about what we can no longer eat, where our food comes from, etc

    I also remember the fights about where to store nuclear waste.

    I don’t want to burn coal. I am pretty upset about what happened to our clean energy plans. But I will also never trust nuclear again. And I think, so do many in my generation.

    • 100@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      which is funny because fossil fuels are everywhere poisoning the air and environment in general, not different from the nuclear radiation bogeyman

      • realitista@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Actually coal plants which are in use, spew thousands of times of nuclear material into the air what any nuclear plant ever has.

  • Hypx@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    The author is wrong. It is only a matter of time before Germany goes back to nuclear. Physics won’t change regardless of short-term opinion.

    • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      You sure gobbled up that Putin propaganda pre-war. But now it’s 2023 and Germany still stands. How much time will have to pass until you people realize the extend of Germany‘s energy dependency was vastly overestimated? France with their nuclear grid is now importing more energy from Germany than the other way around. And if you think that‘s only temporarily you should take a closer look.

    • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      What do you mean? Don’t you think transitioning to mostly renewables while coal and gas go down are good things?

      • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        6 months ago

        Nuclear is affordable, efficient and proven. Abandoning it instead of promoting it was a dumb, conservative move that hurt everyone involved. Except Russian billionaires, of course.

          • Geth@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            They already had it and it was working just fine. They tore it down and went full coal and some gas. Now wind and solar are taking over slowly, but it’s been years with more pollution and more radiation than any already working nuclear plant would have emmited.

            • theonyltruemupf@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              That’s true. The original plans for phasing out nuclear energy encompassed huge investments in renewable energy. The government Merkel II then decided to keep using nuclear and not invest in renewables, then decided a year later to leave nuclear again without investing in renewables. That little maneuver not only cost huge amounts of compensation for the big energy companies but also nuked (haha) the German wind and solar industry to the ground.

                • theonyltruemupf@feddit.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  The old reactors could have been used until their end of life, yes. The effects are exaggerated though. Nobody was going to build new ones. Not even France who rely heavily on nuclear energy has new reactors.

          • discount_door_garlic@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            this ignores the key issue that in Germany, there was already an extensive and perfectly functional nuclear industry. In other countries with no nuclear infrastructure, renewables are definitely the better, cheaper, more scalable choice - but countries which invested big many decades ago are in a different position, and Germany’s deliberate destruction of their nuclear capabilities has left them dependant on fossil fuels from an adversarial state - easily a worse situation than small amounts of carefully managed nuclear waste while renewables were scaled up.

            • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              6 months ago

              this ignores the key issue that in Germany, there was already an extensive and perfectly functional nuclear industry.

              Shhh… anti-nuclear don’t want to hear this. They’d rather project, even though people are talking about how stupid closing down the current nuclear infrastructure and not advocating to build new ones!

              I don’t support building new nuclear power plants, but it’s ridiculous to close down already existing ones given the threat of climate change. NPP should act more like stop gap until renewable energy can take over more effectively.

              • theonyltruemupf@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                6 months ago

                I answered a very similar comment a little further down:

                https://feddit.de/comment/9599367

                I’m not claiming it was smart to leave nuclear before coal. It wasn’t. But it is what happened and it was decided two decades ago. Nuclear is done in Germany and there is no point discussing it further. New reactors were not going to happen either way.

    • TwoCubed@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      This safety comes at a cost, literally. It’s fucking insanely expensive to keep it safe. Yet it can and has failed. Also, fissile material needs to come from somewhere. Guess where that is? Also, how much of it is still available? Nah, fuck nuclear power.

    • Turun@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Yeah, it’s safer than coal, on the same level as solar and wind. But it’s fucking expensive to achieve that equality! You can build 5 times the solar or wind capacity for the same price!