Why Germany won’t keep its nuclear plants open • Hacker News Board

Re: Why Germany won’t keep its nuclear plants open

#251

Post by ewin » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 6:15 AM UTC

partiallypro wrote: post #164

galooomot wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, in terms of money, germany is among the biggest supporters of ukraine since the war started in 2014, donating several billion euros. https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/en/aussenpolitik/laenderinfo...

This is very much a puff piece from the German government to cover their gross negligence in helping to fund the very regime that is trying to wipe Ukraine from the earth. Also leaves out how reluctant Germany was to provide arms, despite providing arms to much more questionable countries.

These questionable countries are not active war zones, though. This is based on parliament resolutions that are decades old and some eu stuff. I think you are oversimplifying things.

Re: Why Germany won’t keep its nuclear plants open

#252

Post by kleene_op » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 6:15 AM UTC

freemint wrote: post #184

daniel-cussen wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nuclear is less safe than grid solar, it slightly beats rooftop solar because standing on roofs is dangerous and most solar installs are new. Yeah and making the solar panel, how green is that? I would like to add that they should bring in bouncy castles around homes when installing solar panels, the kids can play on them and primarily will definitely save the installer from falling. You could also package them tog…

> Yeah and making the solar panel, how green is that? Depending from where you buy them, quiet green. Produced with 100% renewables, made in Germany with polysilicon made in Europe. Why do you seem some emotional as if your identity is at stake here?

> made in Germany

Not trying to defend the parent comment going off about bouncy castle, but I have a hard time believing that statement is true. This is the share of photovoltaic pannel production per region.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/668749/regional-distribu...

Re: Why Germany won’t keep its nuclear plants open

#253

Post by bayesian_horse » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 6:16 AM UTC

someguydave wrote: post #79

hedora wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're repeating some of the excuses the article addresses. - The author says they studied nuclear in grad school, and are probably therefore an expert. - They quantify the additional risk of meltdown due to delaying new safety regulations. It's negligible compared to operating plants according to the new regulations. - Their proposal would increase Germany's stockpile of nuclear waste by 3%, which is surely within e…

Everything in life is a tradeoff. To me, the risks of keeping the nuclear plants in Germany are much lower than the risks of continuing to fund Russia.

To me the likelihood of even the remaining nuclear reactors having serious accidents is higher than Russia trying something successfully against Germany. You can say to Putin: "You and what army?" It looks like virtually any NATO member state would be able to defend itself alone against the conventional army of Russia, much less with allied help.

Nuclear weapons is another topic, but those won't be affected by short term sanctions in the slightest...

Re: Why Germany won’t keep its nuclear plants open

#254

Post by bayesian_horse » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 6:18 AM UTC

ozfive wrote: post #168

hedora wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the beginning of a multi decade conflict. The end game is Russia becoming a North Korean style vassal state of China. Every world leader that is speaking about the conflict seems fine with this outcome. Also, it will take a while for Russia to build enough natural gas pipelines to China. In practice, those pipelines will be Putin's leash. (He will need China, but they have no need for him.) I hope Ukraine mai…

> I hope Ukraine maintains its independence, but it's just the first battle in a war Putin accidentally created, and will surely lose. Putin did NOT accidentally create this war. It's clear that this was intentional and that there are real people suffering because of that intention. He tried opening more doors to see what benefits he could gain. That isn't an accident.

Maybe OP meant it in the way that Putin wanted to just rush over Ukraine, replace the government and be done with it. That would have been a very short war at best. But that is not the war he got, so yes, he "accidentally" created the current one.

Re: Why Germany won’t keep its nuclear plants open

#255

Post by bayesian_horse » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 6:20 AM UTC

ajmurmann wrote: post #229

Archelaos wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One should also not forget that Germany's nuclear industry is identical with its fossil-energy industry: RWE, Vattenfall, E.ON/PreussenElectra, EnBW. (STEAG is the only major fossil-energy company that was not involved in nuclear energy.) The situation Germany finds itself in today is the direct result of these companies lobbying the various Merkel governments between 2005 and 2021. Instead of relying heavily on rene…

That nuclear power plants are operated by fossil-energy companies explains why I keep hearing from Germany that the companies running the nuclear plants have no interest in expanding their life at this point.

It has more to do with profits. Companies tend to take profitable opportunities. Nuclear power isn't that profitable if governments insists on those pesky regulations.

Re: Why Germany won’t keep its nuclear plants open

#256

Post by bayesian_horse » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 6:24 AM UTC

harha wrote: post #203

riedel wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It typically is sufficient if German voters trust their government's decision. Sure you can argue for another smart dictator, but the German majority IMHO is backing the anti nuclear course of their government. The question currently is not gas vs nuclear at the moment. Building new reactors does not make any sense, given the current risk/cost/value IMHO: https://www.worldnuclearreport.org/ Running the remaining reac…

Smart dictator isn't typically a sustainable strategy, there are democracies that do much better, the most typical example being Switzerland. My impression is that this is a typical German reply to criticism, yes there are worse cases, but it's not helpful to find a worse comparison if you want to grow. From my outsider view and having lived in a bunch of places, I don't have the impression that the German government…

Switzerland has some advantages... being smack in the middle of the alps means nice trade routes, small population, hard to invade. They can afford "neutrality", they can afford taking advantage of their neighbors (by not joining EU but having some similar deals) because they are so small their neighbors can ignore that. Poland tried to stay neutral in WWII, by the way.

What Switzerland does is not scaleable. Small countries tend to deviate from the average. Some win, some lose.

Re: Why Germany won’t keep its nuclear plants open

#257

Post by bayesian_horse » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 6:28 AM UTC

choeger wrote: post #3

Being anti-nuclear is deeply engrained in the DNA of Germany's green party. Even more so than climate change. In fact, when the anti-nuclear movement started, climate change wasn't even a topic. In other words, the only thing that needs to happen is the German green party to admit a mistake in fighting nuclear power harder than fossile fuels...

Opposition to nuclear power isn't a political ideology. You aren't for or against nuclear power because you don't generally like the people who are against nuclear power.

I don't see the major arguments against nuclear power being negated by either climate change or the war in Ukraine. So no, there is no mistake. Nuclear power isn't the right way forward for Germany.

Re: Why Germany won’t keep its nuclear plants open

#258

Post by bayesian_horse » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 6:30 AM UTC

daniel-cussen wrote: post #57

Retric wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not completely accurate. Nuclear is less safe than grid solar, it slightly beats rooftop solar because standing on roofs is dangerous and most solar installs are new. Hydroelectric vs nuclear is tricky because large dams save lives and by reducing flooding etc, and installing hydroelectric when building a dam is much safer than building the dam in the first place. Which makes calculating the deaths from hydroe…

> Nuclear is less safe than grid solar, it slightly beats rooftop solar because standing on roofs is dangerous and most solar installs are new. Yeah and making the solar panel, how green is that? I would like to add that they should bring in bouncy castles around homes when installing solar panels, the kids can play on them and primarily will definitely save the installer from falling. You could also package them tog…

Oh right, nobody ever thought to include the cost and effects of producing the solar panels!!

I'm joking of course.

Re: Why Germany won’t keep its nuclear plants open

#259

Post by bayesian_horse » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 6:34 AM UTC

partiallypro wrote: post #162

KarlKemp wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At this point, nobody wants to change the policy. Not the greens, not the conservative party, nor the companies that own these power plants. It is simply not possible to run a dozen nuclear reactors on a two-weeks'-notice timescale, at least not in a democracy that respects property rights and safety practices. It's also economically unsound and technologically misguided, since nuclear power cannot replace the role g…

Nuclear can't replace the role of gas in Europe, but getting rid of nuclear makes the problem much worse. Germany has been warned about this constantly and they seem to think they know better. We'll see, right now they look like stubborn fools that are now unable to do much of anything to help stop Russia.

I have seen a lot of stubborn fools who keep claiming nuclear power is safe and the impossible accidents either don't happen or aren't really that bad.

"Much of anything" is a malevolent exaggeration. Germany is basically changing its entire stance on military spending, sending tons of weapons and other supplies to Ukraine, taking in hundreds of thousands of refugees and risking its economy by enacting strong sanctions and getting off imports from Russia eventually. For some people that is "not much of anything", but I suspect there is an agenda...

Re: Why Germany won’t keep its nuclear plants open

#260

Post by bayesian_horse » Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 6:39 AM UTC

jandrewrogers wrote: post #247

bayesian_horse wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, completely unscientific... Like the Russian soldiers who dug trenches in the "red forest" near Tschernobyl, got radiation poisoning and scattered the stuff all over the place where people still have to work to contain the impossible accident that happend decades ago. Yes, things like that and "Oh, from now on nothing will happen, science says so!"scares the shit out of people. Anti-scientific? There is just n…

You realize that this is not a coherent and rational response, yes? You don't address anything, you just throw out oddly random straw men. Maybe I am incorrect but nothing you wrote would contribute to that discussion.

In my opinion the opposition to nuclear power is not anti-scientific. It is bullshit to just label all the proponents scientists and the opposition non-scientists. There are two factions arguing on scientific grounds.

That there is another level to the discussion, the fear of nuclear disasters is another topic. It is impossible to say where the "rational" level of fear is. Scientists have been wrong about the risks too often. With the huge downsides, people will gladly err on the side of caution.

My arguments are examples why the "anti-scientific" argument is just BS. The fear is not always rational, but always legitimate. It is all about risk tolerance.