Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants

dw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 392 posts

Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants

#111

Post by naasking »

dependsontheq wrote: post #87

While I agree that it would have been sensible to phase out coal and then nuclear, the german position is more complex. The fallout from Tschernobyl was measurable in Germany… measurable as in my science teacher measured it in his garden. Up to today boar and mushrooms have an elevated level of radiation in the forests around my home. So this is the emotional background, the risks are not far away. Fukushima gave the…

Burning coal releases more airborne radioactive waste in a short time than a nuclear plant does over its whole lifetime.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-...

Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants

#112

Post by ben_w »

cypress66 wrote: post #94
dependsontheq wrote: post #87

While I agree that it would have been sensible to phase out coal and then nuclear, the german position is more complex. The fallout from Tschernobyl was measurable in Germany… measurable as in my science teacher measured it in his garden. Up to today boar and mushrooms have an elevated level of radiation in the forests around my home. So this is the emotional background, the risks are not far away. Fukushima gave the…

I'm sure your science teacher can also measure air pollution in his garden.

That's not a way to make people comfortable with radiation, it's a way to make people uncomfortable with air pollution.

Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants

#113

Post by fsh »

Lev1a wrote: post #72
squid322 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The decision to turn off nuclear plants in Germany was __not__ made by the greens. It was made years ago by the CDU after Fukushima.

> after Fukushima And can we talk about how stupid and actively malicious it is to use the Fukushima accident as a reason for shutting down nuclear plants in Germany? Fukushima: nuclear plant in a seismically very active region in very close proximity to the ocean where tsunamis are not really a rarity vs. German nuclear plants: not very seismically active (if at all), no tsunamis i've ever heard of, not counting flo…

The Fukushima reactors and a lot of the german ones were built by the same company. They overlooked the flood risk on the japanese coast (which has huge tsunamis every few decades). What did they overlook elsewhere? After Chernobyl, politicians promised that western reactors could not possibly explode. Fukushima proved them wrong.

Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants

#114

Post by felixfbecker »

rossdavidh wrote: post #52
OrangeMonkey wrote: post #4

Good. Germany was facing a cold winter, without energy for heating, and the potential for rolling blackouts. With this change, it does not eliminate the threat but makes it less likely. Who in their right mind would decom any type of energy that could help stave off pain for their citizenship - especially one that has no carbon footprint.

Well, I definitely agree with the decision, but at one point there were some valid things to consider: 1) they had been not doing normal routine maintenance that wasn't going to be needed if they were shutting down, and figuring out what all needs to be done to change gears does take some time (and careful thought) 2) they were at one time buying their fuel for nuclear plants from Russia Now I believe both of these p…

The current plan I believe is to only run them until they run out of their current fuel. No new fuel was a "hard line" drawn by the green party to agree to extending at all.

Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants

#115

Post by drekipus »

ben_w wrote: post #112
cypress66 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure your science teacher can also measure air pollution in his garden.

That's not a way to make people comfortable with radiation, it's a way to make people uncomfortable with air pollution.

Good. People should be uncomfortable with air pollution.

Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants

#116

Post by plextoria »

dependsontheq wrote: post #87

While I agree that it would have been sensible to phase out coal and then nuclear, the german position is more complex. The fallout from Tschernobyl was measurable in Germany… measurable as in my science teacher measured it in his garden. Up to today boar and mushrooms have an elevated level of radiation in the forests around my home. So this is the emotional background, the risks are not far away. Fukushima gave the…

This is the best explanation I’ve heard so far about Germany’s position on nuclear. It is based much more on emotions than on rational arguments.

Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants

#117

Post by pelasaco »

dependsontheq wrote: post #87

While I agree that it would have been sensible to phase out coal and then nuclear, the german position is more complex. The fallout from Tschernobyl was measurable in Germany… measurable as in my science teacher measured it in his garden. Up to today boar and mushrooms have an elevated level of radiation in the forests around my home. So this is the emotional background, the risks are not far away. Fukushima gave the…

unnecessary german angst. Just check the map https://www.wano.info/members/wano-world-map. We are surrounded by atomic power plants. Switzerland, France, Belgium, Denmark, Czech republic..almost all of them are situated in the german borders.

Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants

#118

Post by felixfbecker »

naasking wrote: post #111
dependsontheq wrote: post #87

While I agree that it would have been sensible to phase out coal and then nuclear, the german position is more complex. The fallout from Tschernobyl was measurable in Germany… measurable as in my science teacher measured it in his garden. Up to today boar and mushrooms have an elevated level of radiation in the forests around my home. So this is the emotional background, the risks are not far away. Fukushima gave the…

Burning coal releases more airborne radioactive waste in a short time than a nuclear plant does over its whole lifetime. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coal-ash-is-more-...

A nuclear plant that doesn't explode, that is. Pretty sure Tschernobyl released more radiation than a coal plant over its lifetime. Probably more than all coal plants in Germany in their lifetime combined.

Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants

#119

Post by V__ »

timmg wrote: post #93
V__ wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right now, gas prices are falling (since the gas storages are full) and federal assistance is currently in the works. So, while possible, I don't know how likely of a problem this will be.

Above you pointed out the high cost of replacing fuel rods. How does that compare to the “federal assistance” required to pay bloated gas bills?

Also maintenance, but still in comparison, it probably isn't a lot. The last figure I have is about 17 billion for all those federal programs and investments (but those include cheaper public transport tickets as well as other things).

However, I don't thing those costs are comparable. Those nuclear plants won't have a dramatic impact on the price of gas or energy, so the cost of the federal programs will be there nonetheless.

Re: Germany extends lifetime of all 3 remaining nuclear plants

#120

Post by naasking »

V__ wrote: post #70
OrangeMonkey wrote: post #4

Good. Germany was facing a cold winter, without energy for heating, and the potential for rolling blackouts. With this change, it does not eliminate the threat but makes it less likely. Who in their right mind would decom any type of energy that could help stave off pain for their citizenship - especially one that has no carbon footprint.

Whether one is pro nuclear or not, I think it makes sense to look at the specific situation at hand. Was it a mistake to shut down all nuclear reactors while not pushing for more renewables and replacing all gas and coal plants first? I think so. Should the last three remaining nuclear plants be kept online? I don't think so. Germany's main source of heating is gas and yes, gas is used to generate electricity, so nuc…

> However, only about 10% of gas is used for electricity and Germany has enough electricity.

Energy prices in Germany suggest otherwise. Also, Germany is facing a gas pinch given the geopolitics right now, so freeing up 10% is nothing to sneeze at.

Post reply on HN