I live in Germany and I wonder, what the consequences will be of shutting down both coal and nuclear in very short time. My guess is, we will pay for nuclear energy from France and coal energy from Poland when wind slows down.
The new government tries to accelerate the construction of renewable energy but I think their plans will fail because of worker shortage and supply chain problems.
I think a big part of the problem is that Germany has strong business ties with Russia (if you think I'm exaggerating, you might not realize that former chancellor Gerhard Schröder became the chairman of the board of Nord Stream AG and of Rosneft right after being chancellor — ties do not get any stronger than that).
It is in Russia's best interest to have EU countries dependent on their fossil fuels (natural gas and coal). This goal is being achieved admirably, with Poland burning coal like crazy (buying lots of Russian coal) and Germany burning Russian gas like crazy (through Nord Stream pipelines).
Shutting down the nuclear plants plays straight into that strategy.
Looks like pandering to Greens/anti-nuclear people, but honestly, I don't know. To me, it appears borderline insane, but there's probably something that I am missing.
By "primary" you mean they used 27% over a 6 month period, compared with 21% the 6 months a year earlier. Switching back into first after a good spell for wind had it briefly in the lead.
Why does that mean they can't switch it off?
The UK had 30% Coal in 2014 when they announced they would phase it out and did so slightly ahead of schedule.
Coal was the primary source for energy in Germany since the beginning of the industrial age. In the last decade we had some years were alternatives took over but since the emergence of nuclear power it was never the primary source for energy.
Don't freak out about a statistical variation. The trend is for wind power to increase and for coal power to decrease in Germany, so really the only interesting points in time are the first time when wind generated more than coal and the last time when coal generated more than wind. The first just happened in 2020, so freaking out about coal momentarily being on top in 2021 is pointless.
France will build more nuclear, and in the long run solidify its position as a huge exporter of electricity at high rates when wind is low. Weird arbitrage opportunity for them as the neighbors go all in on wind.
Solely political for federal elections following the Fukushima incident.
It’s sad, and almost infuriating, how an event that would never threaten safe nuclear plant operation in Germany set the stone rolling for “Energiewende”.
Personally i think Germany is making a huge mistake and will regret this course down the road.
Nuclear is "bad" and scary... Plus you know nuclear weapons. And solar and wind produce plenty... Apart form times when they do not, like many times during winter.
Which is a good thing. Just converting energy sources is not going to save us. We need to tackle the energy sinks too, i.e., getting smarter about how we use the available energy, i.e., mostly being more energy efficient. ("We" as in "humankind".) Raising prices is the right incentive here. In the long run, +50% is not actually that bad. There is room for a lot more.
Everyone is talking about not doing enough. Everyday, even here. There is this strange fascination like in the 70s with fossil fuels that we can just worry later about it. It's the same with nuclear energy now, maybe even worse. Using one finite polluting resource is not gonna be the answer as much as everyone on hackernews wants it to be. Sometimes when you want progress you have to burn the boats. This is Germany burning the boats so they have to force alternatives and progress.
Despite a lot of investigation it looks like Fukushima did not cause an increase in cancer deaths (and there were no direct deaths from it either).
It's sad and strange that we treat it as if it had caused hundreds or thousands of deaths, and our response to it is to increase fossil fuel use, which definitely will lead to more death and pollution.
Maybe saddest part of the whole Fukushima was that it was entirely avoidable. If proper planning and implementation was actually done. I expect Germany and European nations being culturally better to get things fixed.
My understanding was that root-cause was old design and not sufficiently secure back-up power and failure to get such on site. Which could have been done, but was not.
That fact that people look at Fukushima and say, "see this is why nuclear power is safe!" absolutely blows my mind.
The outcome we had for Fukushima was not the only one possible. It could have been better, much better, and it could have been worse, much worse. That fact that one of the most advanced and earthquake prepared nations in the world even got close to having a Fukushima event, let alone actually had one, should paint a clear picture of pitfalls of nuclear power.
We need power the scales for the world. The most urgent need for clean power is in developing countries, which are actually not the countries who would have the best chance to run a safe nuclear power plant.
Solar is already scaling, it's already safe, it's already cost effective. Utility-scale storage is already more than on the way and is dropping in price quickly, and it's not even a problem with solar until solar penetrates a larger percentage of the grid anyways. Do I think that nuclear plants in modern countries should be shutting down: No. But the real justification to supporting nuclear over solar for the future of our power grid is to be a contrarian or because you think nuclear power is cool.
The point isn't that Fukushima is great and hooray, the point is that it still killed fewer people than coal power plants do every year in pretty much every country.
And solar won't be replacing the nuclear plants that are being shut down. Coal and gas will.
Yeah, this has been known for a long time now that Germany is planning to shut down their nuclear plants. I have no clue why. There is a country in Eastern Europe and >60% of their electricity is from their nuclear power plants, and they are extending it. Imagine this country exporting electricity to Germany.
Anyways, I believe it was a pretty shitty idea to say no to nuclear.
This seems shortsighted at first look, but there's got to be more to it. During an undeniable, ongoing energy crisis every power source, a continuous one at that, should be treasured. While the phase out has been ongoing for more than a decade, could this not have been put into hold temporarily? Any expiring certifications? In any case I find it laughable that Greens themselves have contributed to the decommissioning of NPPs and are supporting of this move. So much for one the actual cleanest and certainly the one safest energy source.
The main reason behind this is to enforce decision of letting Russian gas in i.e. to have NS2 officially opened. With power shortages -- in the whole Europe -- that this shutdown will only make worse, blocking NS2 will no longer look as a viable option.
Readit News
The new government tries to accelerate the construction of renewable energy but I think their plans will fail because of worker shortage and supply chain problems.
It is in Russia's best interest to have EU countries dependent on their fossil fuels (natural gas and coal). This goal is being achieved admirably, with Poland burning coal like crazy (buying lots of Russian coal) and Germany burning Russian gas like crazy (through Nord Stream pipelines).
Shutting down the nuclear plants plays straight into that strategy.
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-coal-tops-wind-as-primary-elec...
This is so stupid, what are they thinking?
Why does that mean they can't switch it off?
The UK had 30% Coal in 2014 when they announced they would phase it out and did so slightly ahead of schedule.
https://seekingalpha.com/news/3780688-france-shuts-down-nucl...
Trading the risk of energy supply shortage for the risk of radioactive accidents.
It’s sad, and almost infuriating, how an event that would never threaten safe nuclear plant operation in Germany set the stone rolling for “Energiewende”.
Personally i think Germany is making a huge mistake and will regret this course down the road.
Accelerate what? Wind and solar are at capacity, and storage solutions do not exist at that scale.
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
It's sad and strange that we treat it as if it had caused hundreds or thousands of deaths, and our response to it is to increase fossil fuel use, which definitely will lead to more death and pollution.
Read for yourself https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_nuclear_disaster
My understanding was that root-cause was old design and not sufficiently secure back-up power and failure to get such on site. Which could have been done, but was not.
The outcome we had for Fukushima was not the only one possible. It could have been better, much better, and it could have been worse, much worse. That fact that one of the most advanced and earthquake prepared nations in the world even got close to having a Fukushima event, let alone actually had one, should paint a clear picture of pitfalls of nuclear power.
We need power the scales for the world. The most urgent need for clean power is in developing countries, which are actually not the countries who would have the best chance to run a safe nuclear power plant.
Solar is already scaling, it's already safe, it's already cost effective. Utility-scale storage is already more than on the way and is dropping in price quickly, and it's not even a problem with solar until solar penetrates a larger percentage of the grid anyways. Do I think that nuclear plants in modern countries should be shutting down: No. But the real justification to supporting nuclear over solar for the future of our power grid is to be a contrarian or because you think nuclear power is cool.
And solar won't be replacing the nuclear plants that are being shut down. Coal and gas will.
How does Nuclear Power stop mining? I see how it would reduce the need for coal, but it won’t change our appetite for metals, rocks, or gemstones.
Anyways, I believe it was a pretty shitty idea to say no to nuclear.
Deleted Comment
Dead Comment
Putin would love a good excuse to close ground pipeline tho, this would brute force Nord Stream 2.
[0] https://energy-charts.info/charts/power/chart.htm?l=en&c=DE&...
https://app.electricitymap.org/map
Tough times are coming.