You are reading a single comment by @Vaang and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
No, after phasing out nuclear power plants in Germany, the vast majority of cost lies still ahead. Demolishing those reactors and storing the nuclear waste will cost billions. The main players like RWE in Germany are already trying to get out of their contractual obligations to bear these costs.
Moreover, if you criticize the dependence on Russian gas, you must also criticize the same dependence on uranium. More than 20 per cent of uranium came from Russia and another 20 per cent from Putin's then ally Kazakhstan. With Rosatom Russia is also one of the leading suppliers of nuclear power plants worldwide. Phasing out nuclear power therefore means reducing dependence on Russia.
Vaang
Dammit
That’s not what the discussion was though - it was whether Germany should have kept its nuclear production running, which they absolutely could have done, for years. Vast majority of the cost was historic, and obviously no wait for the power. The logical position would have been to run them at a reasonable % of their maximum capacity whilst building out wind and solar, instead of shutting them all down and making Germany reliant on Russian gas. The move itself seemed in many ways to be of a part with Nordstream 2.