Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

diablosinmusica t1_j0vnslk wrote

The switch from nuclear came after the Fukushima disaster. It wasn't about money. It was about lobbying. Nuclear power is cheaper than fossil files in the long run. Using the cost of plants as the overall cost is a lobbying tactic that only helps those who's interests lie in fossil fuels. By 2030 Putin will be almost 80. He'll have gotten what he wanted.

1

ceratophaga t1_j0vyaew wrote

This is just wrong. The decision to phase out eventually was made by chancellor Kohl in the '80s because of the epical financial failure of the THTR-300 and the corruption scandals around the NPP in Mülheim-Kärlich. When the Greens came into power as a junior partner in the late '90s they created a plan on when to exit nuclear and how to replace it (and fossil) with renewables. Then Merkel came into power and slashed the entire renewable stuff, investing into more coal first and then into gas.

All that Fukushima did was triggering the so called "Atom-Moratorium" which was a shutdown of all NPPs for general inspections, with the results being so devastating several plants weren't allowed to reboot.

2

Big_ifs t1_j0w01fv wrote

Nuclear Power Plants in Germany were all very old, an enormous investment would have been necessary to keep nuclear power in the game. The switch was decided ~10 years before Fukushima to invest in renewables instead, but then overturned by a new (conservative) government to kill renewables. After Fukushima, that same government decided to end nuclear power again, but without doing much for renewables this time.

Because of Putin's Russia, Germany (and Europe as a whole) will become independent from Russian energy in only a few years. Russia will be absolutely powerless by 2030 and without a working economy.

1