• CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    German Green Party abhors nuclear energy; after Fukushima the government closed all the nukes and coal filled the gap “but renewables will be ready soon”.

    ETA the greens weren’t government but their anti nuclear stance was a helpful part.

    • lurch (he/him)@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      3rd quarter of 2025 Germany had 64.1 % renewables and rising and imported only 8.2% more than it exported. Source: https://www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2025/12/PD25_436_43312.html

      Also, it’s building giant battery storage: https://www.heise.de/news/Energiewende-Europas-groesser-Batteriespeicher-soll-in-Alfeld-entstehen-9530856.html

      Unfortunately the CDU is currently ruling and they’ll try to slow it down.

      • kossa@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        And “imports” do not happen, because there isn’t enough domestic energy to be had, like right-wing fearmongers want you to believe.

        They happen because the European grid is working as intended and it just is the economically viable option to import instead of firing up expensive plants.

    • ShotDonkey@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Totally BS what you talk. Es war Altmeier (CDU) der die Energiewende in die Scheiße gefahren hat. Now shut the fuck up.

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Fukushima was such bullshit. It was never a good design in a reasonable place and they knew it when they built it. It’s like saying we shouldn’t wear shoes in snow because your neighbor wore Crocs in 3ft snow drifts while hiking and lost their feet.

      • Wrufieotnak@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        No, your example is wrong.

        It’s like saying nobody should go into the snow because it can’t be 100% ensured that all shoes are snowready.

        • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Closer, but still wrong.

          It’s like saying that wearing designer boots that are on a decade’s back order and gradually fall apart as summer progresses is not how to keep your feet cool during endlessly worsening heat caused by the neighbors burning sneakers like the Springfield Tire Fire from The Simpsons.

          (Compared to renewable energy, nuclear is more expensive, takes much longer to build, is more wasteful, and is becoming less and less effective and safe as a result of climate change warming the water sources the plants depend on)

          • Wrufieotnak@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            True, and it still doesn’t include that the boot industry has no interest in building proper snow safety but just to make it as cheap as possible and if the boots fail, the state should pay you for your wet and cold feet.