In 2021, the Grohnde nuclear power plant in Lower Saxony on the Weser River was shut down. Now, immediately next to it, the Emmerthal energy cluster is growing with three very large battery storage systems, ground-mounted photovoltaic systems, and a new substation for several 380-kilovolt high-voltage lines.

  • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 days ago

    The plants where at a age where they had to be practically rebuild,

    Were German NPPs especially poorly built? Every other country is happily running plants from the 70s and 80s.

    And the total amount of nuclear power in Germany was never enough to entirely replace coal burning.

    The fuck are you talking about? Before the phase-out started in 2009 Germany was producing about 20 GW from both nuclear and lignite. They produce basically no nuclear power and lignite only very recently dipped below that number. Quite plainly, those numbers could have been reversed.

    Everything you posted after that is speculation based on wrong data.

    You really need to stop riding a dead horse

    You need to stop lying. This was a political move, made to appease like you who dislike nuclear and are unaware that lignite is significantly worse for the entire planet. It was a popular political move and you agree with it, which is quite visible in your username.

    Neither of those points make it a smart move. Germany spent massive effort to eliminate by far the least bad fossil fuel, and kept by far the worst fossil fuel. It’s great that they’re moving the right way on production, but they started at the wrong end in the shut down.

    • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 days ago

      No, this was a rational move based on economic factors and actually caring about reactor safty of half a century old and outdated designs.

      You need to take your head out of your nuclear villiage bubble and rationally assess the situation.

      I am not even against running existing nuclear power plants that are somewhat recently build and relatively safe. But building new ones makes absolutely no economic sense and is actively bad for the climate since much better alternatives exist.

      • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 days ago

        No, this was a rational move based on economic factors

        The economic factors being the ones they specifically created to only apply to nuclear. Nobody is mandating lignite plants to store their CO2 till the end of time.

        actually caring about reactor safty of half a century old and outdated designs.

        Right, except they also shut down all the ones that aren’t super old, outdated and unsafe.

        I am not even against running existing nuclear power plants that are somewhat recently build and relatively safe.

        But they’re not doing that. They shut them all down, and kept lignite running, constantly postponing their shutdown.

        But building new ones makes absolutely no economic sense and is actively bad for the climate since much better alternatives exist.

        Sure, that’s fine. But it’s plainly stupid to shut down a good, safe and working NPP, and keep a lignite plant going, when you could have done the reverse. That’s my entire point.

        • poVoq@slrpnk.netM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 days ago

          Right, except they also shut down all the ones that aren’t super old, outdated and unsafe.

          Two of them, which just barely didn’t make the minimal threshold of not having been operated already beyond their original intended lifespan. They were just as unsafe and outdated as the others.