Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake • Hacker News Board

Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake

#101

Post by chmod775 » Sat, Jan 17, 2026, 4:56 AM UTC

energy123 wrote: post #97

chmod775 wrote: post #88

All of these should have been shut down (by now). The mistake was not building new ones to replace them.

Nuclear is high capex and low opex. From a LCOE perspective, it's ~always bad to shut down nuclear plants early (due to capex being a sunk cost), but it's also usually bad to make new ones (due to high capex) relative to contemporary alternatives.

Huh? It would have not have been early. All of those shut down early in 2011 would have reached their planned shutdown dates by now (which doesn't rule out overhauls/recertification at that time though).

Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake

#102

Post by UltraSane » Sat, Jan 17, 2026, 4:56 AM UTC

chmod775 wrote: post #94

UltraSane wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? How old were they? Reactors can easily last 60 years.

I believe the very last ones of those shut down early would have been scheduled for shut down by 2020, so in that case about 9 years earlier than their planned lifetime. Some were shut down mere months before the planned date. Their average age in 2020 would have been around 45 years. They were shut down at ~35 instead. Younger reactors Germany left running until they also reached around 35 years.

Shutting down reactors that age is very stupid if their is nothing wrong with them. Reactors are commonly being certified for 60 to even 80 years.

Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake

#103

Post by gregbot » Sat, Jan 17, 2026, 4:57 AM UTC

chmod775 wrote: post #94

UltraSane wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? How old were they? Reactors can easily last 60 years.

I believe the very last ones of those shut down early would have been scheduled for shut down by 2020, so in that case about 9 years earlier than their planned lifetime. Some were shut down mere months before the planned date. Their average age in 2020 would have been around 45 years. They were shut down at ~35 instead. Younger reactors Germany left running until they also reached around 35 years.

I highly doubt german reactors were designed to only last 35 years. Most gen II light water reactors in the US are expected to operate for 60-80 years.

Edit: ah i reread and see what you meant but my point still stands that 45 years is abnormally short for the type of reactors they had

Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake

#104

Post by energy123 » Sat, Jan 17, 2026, 4:57 AM UTC

seba_dos1 wrote: post #98

Who would have thought?

Politicians who appease these irrational psychogenic illnesses that sweep a population instead of saying "you're all idiots" are awful people. An abrogation of their leadership.

Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake

#105

Post by hippo22 » Sat, Jan 17, 2026, 4:58 AM UTC

The story of their shutdown is really quite crazy.

The shutdown was initiated by chancellor Gerhard Schröder. After killing Germany’s nuclear sector, he signed off on Nord Stream 1 as he was on his way out of office. Just after leaving office, Gazprom nominated him for the post of the head of the shareholders' committee of Nord Stream AG. Russia later nominated him to be on their largest oil producers board.

This guy basically sold out Germany’s energy independence for Russia.

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerhard_Schr%C3%B6der

Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake

#106

Post by mtoner23 » Sat, Jan 17, 2026, 4:59 AM UTC

chmod775 wrote: post #88

All of these should have been shut down (by now). The mistake was not building new ones to replace them.

These same reactors lasted a lot longer in the us with some small infrastructure investment in them. Past their original date

Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake

#107

Post by Eji1700 » Sat, Jan 17, 2026, 4:59 AM UTC

amarant wrote: post #93

SilverElfin wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why shut them down? Older generation reactors? A lot of other countries are extending the lives of older reactors successfully and with far less cost and delay than a brand new plant. Except China, who is good at building them.

To get political points from the anti nuclear crowd, which is huge in Europe. I think proximity to Chernobyl is probably the reason why that movement has grown so badly out of proportion

It’s a shockingly strong movement even still in the US. A lot of education growing up was about how nuclear sludge would ruin everything and basically every “green” movement would still fight nuclear tooth and nail through all sorts of scare tactics.

It’s only in the post climate change world that some are coming around to the reality that France exists and isn’t a smoking radioactive crater.

Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake

#108

Post by chmod775 » Sat, Jan 17, 2026, 4:59 AM UTC

gregbot wrote: post #103

chmod775 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the very last ones of those shut down early would have been scheduled for shut down by 2020, so in that case about 9 years earlier than their planned lifetime. Some were shut down mere months before the planned date. Their average age in 2020 would have been around 45 years. They were shut down at ~35 instead. Younger reactors Germany left running until they also reached around 35 years.

I highly doubt german reactors were designed to only last 35 years. Most gen II light water reactors in the US are expected to operate for 60-80 years. Edit: ah i reread and see what you meant but my point still stands that 45 years is abnormally short for the type of reactors they had

That's also not what I said. Germany was aiming for 45 years initially (likely planning for overhauls + recertification then, rather than shutdown). Instead they shut down at 35.

However if left as is, all of those shut down in 2011 would have been shut down by ~2020 anyways.

Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake

#109

Post by gregbot » Sat, Jan 17, 2026, 4:59 AM UTC

Eji1700 wrote: post #96

No Shit. Economically, diplomatically, strategically, and environmentally probably the dumbest decision they could have made and something they will continue to feel repercussions from for at least another decade. It’s not as loud as Brexit or Trump but likely equally as damaging to so many causes across the board. The only silver lining from this monumental fuck up is that since sadly we only learn when consequences…

Well, the only real downside to this is that energy is a bit more expensive and emissions won’t go down significantly for an extra 15 years or so. Depending on your preferred social cost of carbon that could not matter to you.

Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake

#110

Post by eru » Sat, Jan 17, 2026, 5:01 AM UTC

energy123 wrote: post #104

seba_dos1 wrote: post #98

Who would have thought?

Politicians who appease these irrational psychogenic illnesses that sweep a population instead of saying "you're all idiots" are awful people. An abrogation of their leadership.

You know how voting works?