German Government Lied About Nuclear(michaelshellenberger.substack.com)
michaelshellenberger.substack.com
German Government Lied About Nuclear
https://michaelshellenberger.substack.com/p/anti-nuke-greens-menace-europe
37 comments
Yes. The most reliable product of the nuclear industry and its advocates, since earliest days, is falsehood.
> The author also did a 180 on climate change and is now a full conspiracy nutjob.
How is he a “conspiracy nutjob“?
How is he a “conspiracy nutjob“?
He's not a conspiracy nutjob. He's a paid PR rep.
It's his job to create conspiracy nutjobs, so he does sound like one sometimes, like when he writes articles saying that environmentalists don't like nuclear power because they are intentionally trying to destroy modern society.
But he doesn't actually believe any of it, which makes it worse.
It's his job to create conspiracy nutjobs, so he does sound like one sometimes, like when he writes articles saying that environmentalists don't like nuclear power because they are intentionally trying to destroy modern society.
But he doesn't actually believe any of it, which makes it worse.
Paid by whom? And how do you know what anyone actually believes?
Although he directly cites Habeck explaining the situation, the author does not understand his point:
There is no electricity shortage in germany, there is a large dependency of the industry on natural gas in production processes. Sometimes used for heating, which might get substituted by elctrical heating. More often gas is used in chemical processes, where there is no direct substitute.
There is no electricity shortage in germany, there is a large dependency of the industry on natural gas in production processes. Sometimes used for heating, which might get substituted by elctrical heating. More often gas is used in chemical processes, where there is no direct substitute.
But the reality is that gas is used to generate electricity in Germany. That gas is supposed to be used elsewhere in places where it cannot easily be substituted. Instead of relying on nuclear for that energy production Habek is all about coal, which is - no matter how you twist it - worse than nuclear.
Freeing up gas from gas based electricity plants would surely mean that it can be used for something else.
There is one, a big and huge one. Don't worry, you will find out on your next electricity invoice that gas is used to produce electricity and by letting nuclear power plants run a little bit longer, we could save huge amounts of gas.
Where on the invoice can I find the amount of electricity generated using gas?
It's about 13%. We have one grid in Germany so it's the same for everyone.
I don't agree with him. Continuing with Nuclear just for geopolitical reasons is only a stopgap. No country except finland has a permanent storage option for waste, and I think it's very admirable that Germany is going nuclear-free. It's just as unsustainable as fossil fuels, it's just on a much longer timeframe so we can push it forward. The current climate crisis shows what that leads to.
And it could be that those fuel rod offers were refused for a technical reason or something. It feels a bit like we're only getting one side of the story here.
And it could be that those fuel rod offers were refused for a technical reason or something. It feels a bit like we're only getting one side of the story here.
> It's just as unsustainable as fossil fuels, it's just on a much longer timeframe
What good is solving nuclear waste storage that might become a problem in a thousand years, if we are done in by global warming (which nuclear can help offset) in a hundred?
What good is solving nuclear waste storage that might become a problem in a thousand years, if we are done in by global warming (which nuclear can help offset) in a hundred?
I just don't think it's a good idea exchanging a long-term problem with an longer-term problem. It's like paying off a loan with other loans.
And we're not going to be extinct from global warming. It's a huge unprecedented problem but nobody said it's going to wipe us out.
And we're not going to be extinct from global warming. It's a huge unprecedented problem but nobody said it's going to wipe us out.
Why would you store it? You can recycle it
https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/frances-efficiency-in-t...
This is only one type of waste.
> Through recycling, up to 96% of the reusable material in spent fuel can be recovered.
That 4% is still substantial and very long lived (10,000 year+)
> Through recycling, up to 96% of the reusable material in spent fuel can be recovered.
That 4% is still substantial and very long lived (10,000 year+)
> It's just as unsustainable as fossil fuels, it's just on a much longer timeframe so we can push it forward.
In that case, solar energy isn't long-run sustainable either -- the sun is going to burn out in just a few billion years.
In that case, solar energy isn't long-run sustainable either -- the sun is going to burn out in just a few billion years.
No but that's a problem that's truly far away. Fuel is a problem now and it will be for 10.000 years. Considering we've never had a civilisation last more than a few hundred, and we haven't been able to live even a hundred without major wars, this is really a problem IMO.
> Considering we've never had a civilisation last more than a few hundred [years] ...
Huh? Current "Western" (= more or less global) civilisation is a direct continuation (via the Renaissance and Enlightenment) of medieval European civilisation, which was a pretty direct continuation (via "Dark ages" and Migration Era) of antique Graeco-Roman civilisation. So a couple millennia, not centuries.
Huh? Current "Western" (= more or less global) civilisation is a direct continuation (via the Renaissance and Enlightenment) of medieval European civilisation, which was a pretty direct continuation (via "Dark ages" and Migration Era) of antique Graeco-Roman civilisation. So a couple millennia, not centuries.
Also it's a major step brackwards geopolitically unless you're Russia, USA, UK, or France.
> We have a heating problem or an industry problem, but not an electricity problem — at least not generally throughout the country.
I don't even get that logic. The easy substitution for gas heating is electric heating (all you need is to plug a cheap portable electric heater in a power socket).
[edit] also it seems 12% of the german electricity is generated with gas. So more nuclear should directly translate in more gas available to some other use, shouldn't it?
I don't even get that logic. The easy substitution for gas heating is electric heating (all you need is to plug a cheap portable electric heater in a power socket).
[edit] also it seems 12% of the german electricity is generated with gas. So more nuclear should directly translate in more gas available to some other use, shouldn't it?
Gas is used as a preliminary product in chemical processes. Thus the industry needs gas, not electrical heating.
Way not to understand the comment you replied to: Yes, the industry needs gas, not electrical heating. And at the moment, most gas in Germany is used for industrial purposes; some, to heat homes; and some, to generate electricity.
Therefore any gas freed up, by not being used to generate electricity or heat homes, can be used for those industrial purposes in stead. So using nuclear power in stead of gas to generate electricity, and electricity in stead of gas to heat homes, frees up some gas for industrial use.
Sheesh.
Therefore any gas freed up, by not being used to generate electricity or heat homes, can be used for those industrial purposes in stead. So using nuclear power in stead of gas to generate electricity, and electricity in stead of gas to heat homes, frees up some gas for industrial use.
Sheesh.
I also read that with incredulity "but not an electricity problem". Germany generates lots of electricity from coal and gas, emitting lots of carbon dioxide. That's a problem.
Germany can get coal from somewhere else. Germany cannot get gas from somewhere else, at least not in sufficient quantities.
In 2021, gas was used for 17% of the generated electricity [1]. This percentage is artificially high, since CO2 offsets for gas compared to other energy resources made it very attractive.
Adjusting that down, the remaining 10% or so can easily be replaced by other sources, or imported.
OTOH, about 50% of German households are heated with gas. You cannot replace all 200 million of those installations with electric heating (even if we wanted to, electric heating wastes the most energy).
The industry is also highly dependent on natural gas, e.g. to produce glass (including solar panels), or as a raw material, e.g. to produce fertilizer, or other chemicals. That cannot be replaced by electricity. Should those industries not be able to continue working because of a gas shortage, this will have a ripple effect for the whole German economy.
Yet the internet echo chamber mob continues to claim that Germany has an electricity problem, and could just instantly turn off the Russian gas if they'd just switch to nuclear... and you have to tell every single one of the to do some research. The internet has truly become an ugly place.
[1] https://www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2022/03...
In 2021, gas was used for 17% of the generated electricity [1]. This percentage is artificially high, since CO2 offsets for gas compared to other energy resources made it very attractive.
Adjusting that down, the remaining 10% or so can easily be replaced by other sources, or imported.
OTOH, about 50% of German households are heated with gas. You cannot replace all 200 million of those installations with electric heating (even if we wanted to, electric heating wastes the most energy).
The industry is also highly dependent on natural gas, e.g. to produce glass (including solar panels), or as a raw material, e.g. to produce fertilizer, or other chemicals. That cannot be replaced by electricity. Should those industries not be able to continue working because of a gas shortage, this will have a ripple effect for the whole German economy.
Yet the internet echo chamber mob continues to claim that Germany has an electricity problem, and could just instantly turn off the Russian gas if they'd just switch to nuclear... and you have to tell every single one of the to do some research. The internet has truly become an ugly place.
[1] https://www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2022/03...
> You cannot replace all 200 million of those installations with electric heating
Why not? That seems entirely tractable to me, given 4 months and a large enough budget. It’s undesirable for other reasons, sure, but if it’s between literally freezing to death and surviving, I know which one I’d choose.
Why not? That seems entirely tractable to me, given 4 months and a large enough budget. It’s undesirable for other reasons, sure, but if it’s between literally freezing to death and surviving, I know which one I’d choose.
German government itself is a lie.
> As such, anti-nuclear Greens are putting Europe in grave danger.
Everyone who is advocating sanctioning is putting europe in a grave danger. Be it "green" agenda or anti-russian agenda.
Sadly it's the modern way to redistribute wealth.
Everyone who is advocating sanctioning is putting europe in a grave danger. Be it "green" agenda or anti-russian agenda.
Sadly it's the modern way to redistribute wealth.
I think it's the reverse. Not sanctioning Russia, letting them march forward will put Europe in grave danger.
If we read the article, the share of people thinking the same is shrinking. Russia never declared any intentions to "march forward", I think it's been political scaremongering for a while.
If you listened to the rhetoric from Russian state-sanctioned media you would know that's not true. It was was scaremongering that Russia would invade Ukraine, until it wasn't.
Russia didn't declare its intention to start a war with Ukraine. They just spent years talking about how terrible they are and someone should do something about them.
You might want to check out what they're saying about the rest of Europe.
You might want to check out what they're saying about the rest of Europe.
And? If I’m saying someone is an idiot that doesn’t mean I’m going to do something about it.
The conversation is becoming pointless, if you’d like to believe Russia would conquer the whole Europe it’s your choice. My only advice would be to switch off the tv and think.
The conversation is becoming pointless, if you’d like to believe Russia would conquer the whole Europe it’s your choice. My only advice would be to switch off the tv and think.
Appeasement has been tried.
[deleted]
Here is the real statement of the ministry WITH the nuclear experts from all energy companies. Yes, they could run them longer... two for 80 days in a lower efficiency "Steckbetrieb" and one for ONE year but they all have no certification to run. Expected more from a bestselling author...
https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Nuklear...