This is typical CDU conservative talk from Merz. He is on a war path with anything Angela Merkel did because she saw him as politically inexperienced and shunned him. So he had to work for Blackrock. The CSU (the Bavarian equivalent and permanent coalition partner of the CDU) is also demanding to reactivate nuclear power plants but at the same time is not willing to store any spent nuclear fuel. The CSU is also notor…
Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake
111–120 of 192 posts
Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake
#112Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake
#113No 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…
Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake
#115The 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…
Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake
#116All of these should have been shut down (by now). The mistake was not building new ones to replace them.
Why?
> The mistake was not building new ones to replace them.
Why not keep the old ones, as long as they are still save and profitable, _and_ build new ones?
Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake
#117Earlier 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.
Why? To appease those with extreme environmentalist views.
Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake
#118Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
#119Earlier 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.
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.
You can check what needs to be fixed with them now (if anything) and do the renovations to keep them working. As long as the basic design is still considered save today, and as long as maintenance and running costs are well below the revenue you make.
The biggest expense in nuclear power is building them. And a really big part of that exploding cost is in all the dark rituals you have to engage in to placate public opinion. (Like excessively long safety reviews and whatnot.)
If you take an existing nuclear reactor, the status quo works in your favour. Even in the unlikely scenario where your renovation essentially replaces the whole thing (so from an engineering point of view, you might as well build it from scratch), renovation might still be the wise choice exactly because of status quo bias in the population.
Re: Germany's Merz admits nuclear exit was strategic mistake
#120I remember in a train 1971 passing some Nuclear Towers and whole train expressed displeasement at the scenery. Kinda scary actually, because they started staring at me for not joining the crowd.