41–50 of 281 posts
The Wikipedia article gives more answers than this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-nuclear_movement_in_Germa...
>An mp from the Social Democratic Party (spd), which leads the governing coalition, compared nuclear supporters (ludicrously) to anti-vaxxers. Edit: Oops, misread it.
You read it wrong. It's the nuclear SUPPORTERS that are compared to anti-vaxxers, not opponents.
This is something many people in the EU simply don't get -- I don't get it. Germans have a basically a positive stereotype of being a scientific nation and all around clever lads -- this has enormous soft power and gives leverage to things like "Made in Germany" as a brand. This anti-nuclear stance in Germany is absolutely caustic to that projected image. It's absolutely insane they want to shut down Nuclear and repl…
could you tell me, how long Uranium reserves last? Climate change aside (which will kill us all), Uranium-based fission power plants are just not solving the problem at hand: We are using far too much energy and increasingly have depleted the cache earth history hid for us.
> Climate change aside (which will kill us all)
That is a religious viewpoint, not based in fact. Either show the proof or retract it, statements like that add nothing to the discourse. It also makes it hard to take the rest of your question seriously.
We haven't managed to decide on a place to store the nuclear waste, and all the plans decades in making have been thrown overboard entirely a few years ago. This is more of a political failure, but if we can't manage to fix this part in decades maybe we shouldn't produce even more nuclear waste we have no place to put.
How economical is it, if you include the costs of removing the irradiated plant in the end. It's kinda impossible to get unbiased numbers here as everyone has an agenda, but you can't just ignore that part of the costs and put it on the public.
The safety is a combination of the technology and the people and processes running the entire thing. I personally the technology is probably something we could figure out well enough, but I don't have that much trust in the softer parts here for a technology where you have a very small risk for a very large amount of damage.
This is something many people in the EU simply don't get -- I don't get it. Germans have a basically a positive stereotype of being a scientific nation and all around clever lads -- this has enormous soft power and gives leverage to things like "Made in Germany" as a brand. This anti-nuclear stance in Germany is absolutely caustic to that projected image. It's absolutely insane they want to shut down Nuclear and repl…
> It's absolutely insane they want to shut down Nuclear and replace it with fossil fueled plants. That's not what's happening... Nuclear has been mostly replaced with renewables, while fossil fuel generation has been in slow decline as well. You may disagree with that policy, but please get your facts right.
German Greens want you to believe we (Germans) are heading into a "right" direction and go 100% ecological, but they conveniently forget about that.
[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_geplanter_und_im_Bau_bef...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my mind, a nuclear power plant staffed with German engineers is the least likely to have a nuclear accident.
The same was thought about japanese nuclear power plants
This is something many people in the EU simply don't get -- I don't get it. Germans have a basically a positive stereotype of being a scientific nation and all around clever lads -- this has enormous soft power and gives leverage to things like "Made in Germany" as a brand. This anti-nuclear stance in Germany is absolutely caustic to that projected image. It's absolutely insane they want to shut down Nuclear and repl…
In my mind, a nuclear power plant staffed with German engineers is the least likely to have a nuclear accident.
>An mp from the Social Democratic Party (spd), which leads the governing coalition, compared nuclear supporters (ludicrously) to anti-vaxxers. Edit: Oops, misread it.
> Both refuse to accept the views of scientists.
Are a lot of mainstream scientists against nuclear?
I'm used to seeing a lot of misinformation related to Germany and nuclear power, so here are some facts in advance: 1) coal use went way down since they decided to switch off the nuclear plants. people assume it was replaced by coal, but this is false 2) emissions are down 3) phase out of coal was started last year and is on schedule to last until 2038 4) renewable use is way way up 5) they are one of the largest exp…
any source for that claim?