I understand that it’s supposed to be a shitty comic and not a balanced, reasonable take, but if you’d like to hear a German perspective anyways:
I’m not aware of any official representative lobbying other countries to end nuclear, except of course in nations that build their totally safe reactors near our border. I’m also not aware of us being awarded or recognized for our stance. Individual Germans, like me, will of course have been fed different propaganda than you and will argue accordingly.
No one here likes the coal generators. And with how much cheaper solar is these days, they’re definitely on the way out. But we don’t have a dictatorship anymore, luckily, so even obviously good paths will face pushback, like from entire regions whose jobs are in the coal industry.
We’ve just been able to get a consensus on abolishing nuclear much more quickly for multiple reasons:
Chernobyl directly affected us, including the people running our country. Russia also attacked nuclear reactors in the Ukraine, which certainly reminded people of Chernobyl.
At the start of the Ukraine war, it was unclear whether Russia might also launch attacks on us, including our nuclear reactors.
Russia also cut off our natural gas supply. We have practically no own Uranium deposits either, so reducing dependence on foreign nations was definitely in our interest, too.
At the start of the Ukraine war, it was unclear whether Russia might also launch attacks on us, including our nuclear reactors.
RU attacking Germany is as unlikely as RU shelling London, NY, or Tokyo
Russia also attacked nuclear reactors in the Ukraine, which certainly reminded people of Chernobyl.
I think the news was that someone shelled Zaporizhzhia “Russia and Ukraine blamed each other for shelling the Russian-controlled plant.” Now, I’m not Hercule Poirot, but if RU controlled the plant at the time, wouldn’t that make UKR the most likely culprit?
Russia also cut off our natural gas supply.
Surely Russia turning a tap is less pertinent than USA literally bombing the pipeline?
We have practically no own Uranium deposits either,
So where are you buying from the rest of your resources? Surely nuclear is more feasible than coal from a purely geopolitical/economic point of view? I guess good luck with the solar panels.
You seem to be a bit confused about the situation.
It’s a bit more likely. Eastern part of Germany was USSR back in the days. Germans share common fears with Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, … for good reason. They’ve had this happen before.
A decentralised network with many different production sites for solar, wind, water etc is in many ways less vulnerable than a network with fewer very centralised production facilities.
The goal is moving away from coal and nuclear, clearly, it’s just taking too long. EU will start importing massive amounts of hydrogen overseas the next few decades, possibly also funding the green pduction itself in southern countries.
The only real german stupidity was investing in and relying on nordstream 2, because that was after Russia pulled the crimea and donbas.
At the start of the Ukraine war, it was unclear whether Russia might also launch attacks on us, including our nuclear reactors.
Russia hasn’t attacked any nuclear reactors in Ukraine for obvious reasons. The notions that Russia would attack nuclear reactors in Germany is pure absurdity that no sane person could believe.
Russia also cut off our natural gas supply. We have practically no own Uranium deposits either, so reducing dependence on foreign nations was definitely in our interest, too.
That’s a straight up lie. Russia never cut off gas supply to Germany, and in fact has repeatedly stated that one of Nord Stream pipelines is operational. German government is choosing to buy Russian LNG through third parties instead of buying pipeline gas directly.
Well, I don’t know what to tell you. These things have been broadly reported here in Germany. Whom of us was mislead, doesn’t matter for explaining why us Germans have a different stance on things.
Here’s two random articles, but I can send a whole list of links, if your search engine isn’t turning up anything:
Ah yes, “Ukrainian officials say”, very credible source. Weird how IEA never found any evidence of Russia shelling ZNPP though. And yeah, once you stop paying for a product the delivery stops. That’s how business works.
Russia stopped transfers because Europe refused to pay in a currency Russia could use. Funny how you forgot to mention that the west froze Russian foreign assets there.
Now, Europe is still buying Russian gas, but via resellers while lying to the public.
No one here likes the coal generators. […]so even obviously good paths will face pushback, like from entire regions whose jobs are in the coal industry.
This in itself is contradictory but even despite that, there’s 20.000 people left with jobs in the coal industry. You could give everyone over like the age of 50 their pension as if they worked till the regular pension age and then re-train everybody else with very generous benefits for the interrim time of like 5 years and it would be orders of magnitude cheaper than keeping that system rolling.
Well, if you’ve got a plan worked out for that, maybe you’d like to present it to our government. That sounds like something they would love to know about.
Yeah, this whole comment section annoys me. So many people who don’t get that likely all of us have been fed propaganda. And even if you believe that you’re the one person who knows only the truth, then still the absolute worst thing you can do, is to ridicule others who’ve been told a different story.
The only winning strategy is to share what you’ve been told and listen to what the others have been told. That’s what my initial comment tried to start off. And like, I agree that the guy’s comment wasn’t even bad, but it was just immediately back to “Here’s the absolute facts!”. Like, what the hell am I even supposed to do with that comment? There is no reason provided why I should believe it, so honestly, they could have just not written it.
Well we at Hexbear like to assume, rightly or wrongly, that shame is the best to convince some sorts of people to rethink. People have wasted much energy trying to nicely convince these types when it turned out they were entirely unwilling to consider that they are misinformed. Your comments have mirrored how those look with a very reddit-like demeanor. If you’re sincere, consider commenting as if you’re not on reddit and looking to figure out what’s true and people will engage happily. I’ve learned a lot by doing that.
Remember, the US have spent tens of times more money on propaganda around the world than any other country (remember, US propaganda is different in form than e.g. USSR, but mostly because their way is MORE effective). Europe+the US has spent more in 40 years than the rest of the world ever. Imagine the impact this has on your worldview before reading any news or positions taken in politics around the world.
I personally ridicule people on the Internet because it’s funny. I don’t think I’m going to change any minds and I don’t care. I do stuff in real life when I want to change people’s minds. I go online for catharsis.
Plan’s right there mate. Early retirement at 0 loss after an age cutoff, 5 year former wages for the rest, have some of the boffins at the Wirtschaftsministerium calculate where the cut-off makes sense economically, done. Fuck just reuse the plans from when you dismantled any given organisation in the 90s - 2000s, I’m sure they’re still around, could be used for good for ones. This is not a hard thing to do, logistically.
Chernobyl directly affected us, including the people running our country. Russia also attacked nuclear reactors in the Ukraine, which certainly reminded people of Chernobyl.
Fear-mongering from uneducated half-wits who know next to nothing about energy production and infrastructure.
At the start of the Ukraine war, it was unclear whether Russia might also launch attacks on us, including our nuclear reactors.
Fear-mongering from uneducated half-wits who know next to nothing about geo-politics and Putin’s intentions.
Putin clearly wanted to prevent Ukraine from selling natural gas from deposits in the Black Sea to the EU. Capturing Donetsk and annexing Crimea helps that goal.
He also doesn’t want to be reminded that the Kievan Rus exist and existed independently of Muscovy.
Russia also cut off our natural gas supply. We have practically no own Uranium deposits either, so reducing dependence on foreign nations was definitely in our interest, too.
Nuclear plants would reduce Germany’s foreign dependence on energy far more than coal plants
Nuclear fission is the cleanest way to produce the required energy to build the infrastructure of an economy sans greenhouse gasses. Those wind turbines, geothermal systems, solar panels etc. all need energy to be produced.
One doesn’t need to use uranium or plutonium as fissile material for the fuel rods. For instance, India and China have working Thorium reactors.
Germany’s obstinacy in energy policy is reflective of much of the rest of the world’s ruling class. Too corrupt and too dumb to think and act responsibly regarding energy, economic, and military policy.
Foreign dependance is just false. In own country produced coal is clearly less foreign dependant than importing uranium.
All your other points are up for debate and by far not as black and white or right and wrong as you seem to believe.
We are yet to see these fancy schmancy super reactors online in Europe. Just about every new nuclear construction site in Europe in the past 15 years has become nothing short of a financial bottomless pit.
Foreign dependance is just false. In own country produced coal is clearly less foreign dependant than importing uranium.
Once again, one doesn’t need to import and use uranium for fissile material.
All your other points are up for debate and by far not as black and white or right and wrong as you seem to believe.
State your specific counterarguments. Address my points directly. Otherwise, this statement is meaningless.
We are yet to see these fancy schmancy super reactors online in Europe.
Despite thoroughly well-documented European incompetence in energy policy, the need to import uranium doesn’t absolve Germany of its own hypocrisy in discourse about said policy and climate change.
Nothing is stopping Germany, and all NATO nations for that matter, in creating thorium reactors, save the aforementioned ignorance, incompetence, intransigence, and corruption. Thorium is abundant just about everywhere on Earth.
Just about every new nuclear construction site in Europe in the past 15 years has become nothing short of a financial bottomless pit.
1 simple search revealed the following:
Belarus opened Ostrovets 1 and 2 in June 2021 and November 2023.
Bulgaria has 2 planned.
Poland is planning to build a lot, the first scheduled to open in 2026.
Slovakia opened one in October 2023.
UK has 2 under construction at Hinkley point, and 6 more planned.
France has 6 more planned.
I think all of these use Uranium-235 fuel rods.
Somehow these countries can and/or have gotten the job done in the recent past and are actively building more. Germany, the largest, strongest economy in Europe can’t, for “ReAsOnS”.
British new reactors are by now more then a decade overdue and budget is spiralling out of control massively. So massively it’s causing the need for diplomacy between France (EDF) and Britain to get involved.
Same tendencies are in all European countries that tried nuclear project recently: way over budget and massive delays. Only France is somewhat better exception. Belarus is a dictatorship, if they say reactor go, reactor go. This is exactly what is meant with some fears surrounding nuclear energy. Chernobyl was real. It’s not a coincidence it happened in the USSR.
If I say ALL other points you made are not so black and white, I do not have the obligation to specify nor to elaborate. Things are rarely binary good vs evil in this world. Every energy source has advantages and disadvantages. Pro-nuclear voices are often blind for the risks, they are very tiny in possibility and very large in potential consequences at the same time.
Thorium, smr etc is still a pipedream at this point.
It is a valid strategy for a country to invest into proven technology like better insulating homes, optimising network, supporting more wind and solar and combining it with importing foreign hydrogen. This choice does not make Germany or other European countries retarded as is often portrayed. The mistakes are make in the timing, and in the reliance on 1 single foreign supplier (Russian gas), not in the fundamental choice itself to move away from nuclear. The move away from nuclear was very widely supported in German democracy. And it is valid to say this was an environmental choice: no, we don’t know what to do with the small fraction of very long lasting waste in the long term, a fact still ignored all the time by the pro-nuclear voice.
Same tendencies are in all European countries that tried nuclear project recently: way over budget and massive delays.
And yet, the countries that are developing new nuclear plants despite the hurdles all realize the fraction of greenhouse gasses in gigatons emitted vs. coal. All the sustainable energy sources and their delivery systems require energy (and a good amount, at that) to be manufactured.
I do not have the obligation to specify nor to elaborate.
No, you’re not obligated to say anything, but it shows the meaninglessness of the statement, “everything isn’t so black and white.”
Things are rarely binary good vs evil in this world.
I wasn’t talking about “good vs. evil”. I gave you the reasons why Putin, reasons that have been patently obvious to NATO in every publicly published intelligence briefing since 2008, invaded Ukraine.
Thus, citing not building power plants due to fear of Russian invasion is complete bullshit.
Simply put, why would Putin invade Germany if the Ukrainians deposed his puppet, and actively sought to exploit their territorial gas reserves and cut into his business? What’s in Germany for him? Rammstein airbase and NATO retaliation? Your precious coal?
Thorium, smr etc is still a pipedream at this point.
And yet many nations are rapidly developing them. India and China have active reactors currently. Not such a “pipe dream” if there’re working examples and a push towards developing them across the energy sector in every nuclear-capable country.
It is a valid strategy for a country to invest into proven technology like better insulating homes, optimising network, supporting more wind and solar and combining it with importing foreign hydrogen.
Once again, all of that needs tremendous amounts of energy to happen. And instead of using their already existing nuclear plants to supply it, they’re going to use coal (primarily) to do it while pressing everyone else to hit their emissions targets, akin to the hypocrisy this meme illustrated.
The move away from nuclear was very widely supported in German democracy.
Widely supported by idiots, hypocrites, and corrupt interests.
No, we don’t know what to do with the small fraction of very long lasting waste in the long term, a fact still ignored all the time by the pro-nuclear voice.
Yes, we do. And with thorium reactors, such operations don’t need to occur.
Reexamine and reassess nuclear power programs regularly, of course.
Shut everything down and burn coal, in light of the direction of the climate of our planet? And do that while publicly claiming how “green and clean” you are? And everyone else had better hit their emissions targets?
Go fuck yourself, Germany. Oh wait. You already did.
I understand that it’s supposed to be a shitty comic and not a balanced, reasonable take, but if you’d like to hear a German perspective anyways:
I’m not aware of any official representative lobbying other countries to end nuclear, except of course in nations that build their totally safe reactors near our border. I’m also not aware of us being awarded or recognized for our stance. Individual Germans, like me, will of course have been fed different propaganda than you and will argue accordingly.
No one here likes the coal generators. And with how much cheaper solar is these days, they’re definitely on the way out. But we don’t have a dictatorship anymore, luckily, so even obviously good paths will face pushback, like from entire regions whose jobs are in the coal industry.
We’ve just been able to get a consensus on abolishing nuclear much more quickly for multiple reasons:
Just a couple of sidenotes
RU attacking Germany is as unlikely as RU shelling London, NY, or Tokyo
I think the news was that someone shelled Zaporizhzhia “Russia and Ukraine blamed each other for shelling the Russian-controlled plant.” Now, I’m not Hercule Poirot, but if RU controlled the plant at the time, wouldn’t that make UKR the most likely culprit?
Surely Russia turning a tap is less pertinent than USA literally bombing the pipeline?
So where are you buying from the rest of your resources? Surely nuclear is more feasible than coal from a purely geopolitical/economic point of view? I guess good luck with the solar panels.
You seem to be a bit confused about the situation.
It’s a bit more likely. Eastern part of Germany was USSR back in the days. Germans share common fears with Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, … for good reason. They’ve had this happen before.
A decentralised network with many different production sites for solar, wind, water etc is in many ways less vulnerable than a network with fewer very centralised production facilities.
The goal is moving away from coal and nuclear, clearly, it’s just taking too long. EU will start importing massive amounts of hydrogen overseas the next few decades, possibly also funding the green pduction itself in southern countries.
The only real german stupidity was investing in and relying on nordstream 2, because that was after Russia pulled the crimea and donbas.
Russia hasn’t attacked any nuclear reactors in Ukraine for obvious reasons. The notions that Russia would attack nuclear reactors in Germany is pure absurdity that no sane person could believe.
That’s a straight up lie. Russia never cut off gas supply to Germany, and in fact has repeatedly stated that one of Nord Stream pipelines is operational. German government is choosing to buy Russian LNG through third parties instead of buying pipeline gas directly.
Well, I don’t know what to tell you. These things have been broadly reported here in Germany. Whom of us was mislead, doesn’t matter for explaining why us Germans have a different stance on things.
Here’s two random articles, but I can send a whole list of links, if your search engine isn’t turning up anything:
Ah yes, “Ukrainian officials say”, very credible source. Weird how IEA never found any evidence of Russia shelling ZNPP though. And yeah, once you stop paying for a product the delivery stops. That’s how business works.
Russia stopped delivering gas to 5 european countries in May 2022 because those countries refused to pay in rubels.
Then they announced in June 2022 that they would only deliver half of the agreed-upon volumes to Germany, Austria, Slovakia, Czechia and Italy.
In September 2022 Russia stopped gas transfers via Nord Stream 1 completely, “because of technical difficulties”.
Those are facts. Russia stopped these gas transfers. No one else.
Russia stopped transfers because Europe refused to pay in a currency Russia could use. Funny how you forgot to mention that the west froze Russian foreign assets there.
Now, Europe is still buying Russian gas, but via resellers while lying to the public.
Those are the actual facts.
I think you mean America cut off your natural gas supply when they blew up the Nordstream
No, Russia had already stopped delivering natural gas at the end of August 2022. The pipelines got blown up on the 26th September 2022.
Yeah… Suppliers tend to do that when you stop paying them.
That’s not the case though. Russia stopped supplying gas to 5 countries in May because those countries refused to pay in rubles.
The stop of supplying gas to Germany at the end of August/start of September was not at all related to that.
This in itself is contradictory but even despite that, there’s 20.000 people left with jobs in the coal industry. You could give everyone over like the age of 50 their pension as if they worked till the regular pension age and then re-train everybody else with very generous benefits for the interrim time of like 5 years and it would be orders of magnitude cheaper than keeping that system rolling.
Well, if you’ve got a plan worked out for that, maybe you’d like to present it to our government. That sounds like something they would love to know about.
So immediately snippy.
Yeah, this whole comment section annoys me. So many people who don’t get that likely all of us have been fed propaganda. And even if you believe that you’re the one person who knows only the truth, then still the absolute worst thing you can do, is to ridicule others who’ve been told a different story.
The only winning strategy is to share what you’ve been told and listen to what the others have been told. That’s what my initial comment tried to start off. And like, I agree that the guy’s comment wasn’t even bad, but it was just immediately back to “Here’s the absolute facts!”. Like, what the hell am I even supposed to do with that comment? There is no reason provided why I should believe it, so honestly, they could have just not written it.
Well we at Hexbear like to assume, rightly or wrongly, that shame is the best to convince some sorts of people to rethink. People have wasted much energy trying to nicely convince these types when it turned out they were entirely unwilling to consider that they are misinformed. Your comments have mirrored how those look with a very reddit-like demeanor. If you’re sincere, consider commenting as if you’re not on reddit and looking to figure out what’s true and people will engage happily. I’ve learned a lot by doing that.
Remember, the US have spent tens of times more money on propaganda around the world than any other country (remember, US propaganda is different in form than e.g. USSR, but mostly because their way is MORE effective). Europe+the US has spent more in 40 years than the rest of the world ever. Imagine the impact this has on your worldview before reading any news or positions taken in politics around the world.
I personally ridicule people on the Internet because it’s funny. I don’t think I’m going to change any minds and I don’t care. I do stuff in real life when I want to change people’s minds. I go online for catharsis.
Plan’s right there mate. Early retirement at 0 loss after an age cutoff, 5 year former wages for the rest, have some of the boffins at the Wirtschaftsministerium calculate where the cut-off makes sense economically, done. Fuck just reuse the plans from when you dismantled any given organisation in the 90s - 2000s, I’m sure they’re still around, could be used for good for ones. This is not a hard thing to do, logistically.
It’s not cheaper for corrupt politicians who receive bribes from the coal industry, however
What does Chernobyl have to do with Germany deciding to appease a few billionaires and burn more coal?
I’m not aware of those billionaires caring whether they get paid to burn coal or paid to build solar farms.
Well they own and are currently profiting from coal mines, they don’t own solar farm construction companies.
The lobbyist groups involved are very PRO-nuclear, hence why there’s so many nuclear posts on literally every single social media platform.
https://www.ans.org/news/article-4390/nuclear-bros-take-to-social-media-to-spread-the-word/
Fear-mongering from uneducated half-wits who know next to nothing about energy production and infrastructure.
Fear-mongering from uneducated half-wits who know next to nothing about geo-politics and Putin’s intentions.
Putin clearly wanted to prevent Ukraine from selling natural gas from deposits in the Black Sea to the EU. Capturing Donetsk and annexing Crimea helps that goal.
He also doesn’t want to be reminded that the Kievan Rus exist and existed independently of Muscovy.
Nuclear plants would reduce Germany’s foreign dependence on energy far more than coal plants
Nuclear fission is the cleanest way to produce the required energy to build the infrastructure of an economy sans greenhouse gasses. Those wind turbines, geothermal systems, solar panels etc. all need energy to be produced.
One doesn’t need to use uranium or plutonium as fissile material for the fuel rods. For instance, India and China have working Thorium reactors.
Germany’s obstinacy in energy policy is reflective of much of the rest of the world’s ruling class. Too corrupt and too dumb to think and act responsibly regarding energy, economic, and military policy.
Foreign dependance is just false. In own country produced coal is clearly less foreign dependant than importing uranium.
All your other points are up for debate and by far not as black and white or right and wrong as you seem to believe.
We are yet to see these fancy schmancy super reactors online in Europe. Just about every new nuclear construction site in Europe in the past 15 years has become nothing short of a financial bottomless pit.
Once again, one doesn’t need to import and use uranium for fissile material.
State your specific counterarguments. Address my points directly. Otherwise, this statement is meaningless.
Despite thoroughly well-documented European incompetence in energy policy, the need to import uranium doesn’t absolve Germany of its own hypocrisy in discourse about said policy and climate change.
Nothing is stopping Germany, and all NATO nations for that matter, in creating thorium reactors, save the aforementioned ignorance, incompetence, intransigence, and corruption. Thorium is abundant just about everywhere on Earth.
1 simple search revealed the following:
I think all of these use Uranium-235 fuel rods.
Somehow these countries can and/or have gotten the job done in the recent past and are actively building more. Germany, the largest, strongest economy in Europe can’t, for “ReAsOnS”.
I’ve heard that Germany today has problems with expertise to operate nuclear sites. Not sure how much of a problem that would be, though.
British new reactors are by now more then a decade overdue and budget is spiralling out of control massively. So massively it’s causing the need for diplomacy between France (EDF) and Britain to get involved.
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/cost-edfs-new-uk-nuclear-project-soars-40-bln-2023-02-20/
Same tendencies are in all European countries that tried nuclear project recently: way over budget and massive delays. Only France is somewhat better exception. Belarus is a dictatorship, if they say reactor go, reactor go. This is exactly what is meant with some fears surrounding nuclear energy. Chernobyl was real. It’s not a coincidence it happened in the USSR.
If I say ALL other points you made are not so black and white, I do not have the obligation to specify nor to elaborate. Things are rarely binary good vs evil in this world. Every energy source has advantages and disadvantages. Pro-nuclear voices are often blind for the risks, they are very tiny in possibility and very large in potential consequences at the same time.
Thorium, smr etc is still a pipedream at this point.
It is a valid strategy for a country to invest into proven technology like better insulating homes, optimising network, supporting more wind and solar and combining it with importing foreign hydrogen. This choice does not make Germany or other European countries retarded as is often portrayed. The mistakes are make in the timing, and in the reliance on 1 single foreign supplier (Russian gas), not in the fundamental choice itself to move away from nuclear. The move away from nuclear was very widely supported in German democracy. And it is valid to say this was an environmental choice: no, we don’t know what to do with the small fraction of very long lasting waste in the long term, a fact still ignored all the time by the pro-nuclear voice.
And yet, the countries that are developing new nuclear plants despite the hurdles all realize the fraction of greenhouse gasses in gigatons emitted vs. coal. All the sustainable energy sources and their delivery systems require energy (and a good amount, at that) to be manufactured.
No, you’re not obligated to say anything, but it shows the meaninglessness of the statement, “everything isn’t so black and white.”
I wasn’t talking about “good vs. evil”. I gave you the reasons why Putin, reasons that have been patently obvious to NATO in every publicly published intelligence briefing since 2008, invaded Ukraine.
Thus, citing not building power plants due to fear of Russian invasion is complete bullshit.
Simply put, why would Putin invade Germany if the Ukrainians deposed his puppet, and actively sought to exploit their territorial gas reserves and cut into his business? What’s in Germany for him? Rammstein airbase and NATO retaliation? Your precious coal?
And yet many nations are rapidly developing them. India and China have active reactors currently. Not such a “pipe dream” if there’re working examples and a push towards developing them across the energy sector in every nuclear-capable country.
Once again, all of that needs tremendous amounts of energy to happen. And instead of using their already existing nuclear plants to supply it, they’re going to use coal (primarily) to do it while pressing everyone else to hit their emissions targets, akin to the hypocrisy this meme illustrated.
Widely supported by idiots, hypocrites, and corrupt interests.
Yes, we do. And with thorium reactors, such operations don’t need to occur.
Reexamine and reassess nuclear power programs regularly, of course.
Shut everything down and burn coal, in light of the direction of the climate of our planet? And do that while publicly claiming how “green and clean” you are? And everyone else had better hit their emissions targets?
Go fuck yourself, Germany. Oh wait. You already did.