21–30 of 143 posts
Given the Germany stupid move to get rid of nuclear (in favor of coal[1], as it turned out), not sure if it will support this decision. And nowadays they are dependent from one country's gas... [1] https://www.wired.com/story/germany-rejected-nuclear-power-a...
I still see "Atomkraft? Nein, danke!" stickers here and there and am sad at the ignorance displayed by the people who sport them.
ie. Gerhard Shroder, former Chancellor of Germany who oversaw the beginning of their nuke shutdown, and now works for Rosneft! (A giant Russian fossil fuel company controlled by the Russian Government)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still see "Atomkraft? Nein, danke!" stickers here and there and am sad at the ignorance displayed by the people who sport them.
Let’s see if they still sport these stickers after the coming winter…
But, in a more practical world, there’s not much of a choice if we want an energy source that’s not killing us by air pollution. In the other hand, we seem to be yet again passing the problem onto future generations. Perhaps they’ll have the science to resolve nuclear waste but there’s no guarantee.
At the end of the day, we’re currently consuming too much for the technology we have versus the population of the planet wrt to our biosphere.
There are a few obvious fixes but none are palatable.
As long as those countries are happy to cover the cost of waste disposal or cleanup...
Given the Germany stupid move to get rid of nuclear (in favor of coal[1], as it turned out), not sure if it will support this decision. And nowadays they are dependent from one country's gas... [1] https://www.wired.com/story/germany-rejected-nuclear-power-a...
I still see "Atomkraft? Nein, danke!" stickers here and there and am sad at the ignorance displayed by the people who sport them.
Good. Due do skewed and unreasonable public opinion it is currently almost impossible to start new nuclear power projects. As a result instead of modern, safe (passive cooling, etc) nuclear plants we're running 30-40 year old, unsafe old timers! Thorium pellet reactors, et al, are promising technologies for safe and local power generation. I believe the right answer is a mix of (safe) nuclear, renewables, together wi…
Worth adding that in EU this is largely German public opinion. And somehow the tail wags the dog.
You can read up some background here: https://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-pr... I'd imagine having the green label will make export sales better as companies can bulk up their `green` quota of energy supplies much easier and that stigma hasn't helped.
[EDIT ADD] If you look at the commissioning dates of the bulk of Frances reactors and the life-cycle of those reactors. You will notice that within the next ten years - many reactors will need decommissioning. So a push to get them labelled as green is very much in Frances interest to justify replacing end of life reactors. Otherwise they may well fall foul of energy production quota targets down the line by the EU.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still see "Atomkraft? Nein, danke!" stickers here and there and am sad at the ignorance displayed by the people who sport them.
Ironically its the Greens. One would think theyre false flag paid by coal and petrol corporations.
Given the Germany stupid move to get rid of nuclear (in favor of coal[1], as it turned out), not sure if it will support this decision. And nowadays they are dependent from one country's gas... [1] https://www.wired.com/story/germany-rejected-nuclear-power-a...