Germany to end all nuclear power by 2022

[Chris]

Germany's ruling coalition says it has agreed a date of 2022 for the shutdown of all of its nuclear power plants.

Environment Minister Norbert Rottgen made the announcement after a meeting of the ruling coalition that lasted into the early hours of Monday.

Chancellor Angela Merkel had set up an ethics panel to look into nuclear power following the disaster at the Fukushima plant in Japan.

Germany saw mass anti-nuclear protests in the wake of the disaster.

'Sustainable energy'

Mr Rottgen said the seven oldest reactors, which were already subject to a moratorium, and the Kruemmel nuclear power plant, would not resume.

Six others would go offline by 2021 at the latest and the three newest by 2022, he said.

Mr Rottgen said: "It's definite. The latest end for the last three nuclear power plants is 2022. There will be no clause for revision."

Mrs Merkel's Christian Democrats had met with its junior partners on Sunday after the ethics panel had delivered its conclusions.

BBC News - Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022

 

[American Horse]

Which will increase demand for oil and coal; meanwhile a recent survey revealed only 29% of Americans feel we should not rely more heavily on nuclear as a source of energy

 

[RWatt]

this is a bad idea

 

[Chris]

this is a bad idea

Actually it's a great idea.

Just ask the people of Fukushima.

 

[RWatt]

in the longterm i suspect Fukushima could be a bigger disaster for the indirect impact it has on increasing carbon emissions

 

[dilloduck]

EEEk
A petroleum crisis---someone raise the price of gas quickly !

 

[Big Fitz]

Germany's ruling coalition says it has agreed a date of 2022 for the shutdown of all of its nuclear power plants.

Environment Minister Norbert Rottgen made the announcement after a meeting of the ruling coalition that lasted into the early hours of Monday.

Chancellor Angela Merkel had set up an ethics panel to look into nuclear power following the disaster at the Fukushima plant in Japan.

Germany saw mass anti-nuclear protests in the wake of the disaster.

'Sustainable energy'

Mr Rottgen said the seven oldest reactors, which were already subject to a moratorium, and the Kruemmel nuclear power plant, would not resume.

Six others would go offline by 2021 at the latest and the three newest by 2022, he said.

Mr Rottgen said: "It's definite. The latest end for the last three nuclear power plants is 2022. There will be no clause for revision."

Mrs Merkel's Christian Democrats had met with its junior partners on Sunday after the ethics panel had delivered its conclusions.

BBC News - Germany pledges to end all nuclear power by 2022

This deserves a retitle.

1. Germany energy grid fails by 2022.
2. Germany goes back to coal by 2022.
3. Germany to have economic collapse by 2022.
4. Experts predict decline in German economic output by 2022.

One of the goddamn dumbest moves I've seen by a nation in a long time.

 

[Big Fitz]

this is a bad idea

Actually it's a great idea.

Just ask the people of Fukushima.

Yeah, you're going to base the fact that Fukushima was an absolute FREAK accident for every other reactor in the world. Just like you freeznik Luddites did after Chernobyl 24 years ago. There's no chance possible that future safeguards will be developed due to the mistakes made at fukushima? Noooooooo...

Fucking reactionary dingleberries with the mental capacity of a squashed apricot and the courage of a possum.

 

[Mr. H.]

Germany intends to export their emissions. Out of sight, out of mind.
Clear conscience.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

this is a bad idea

Actually it's a great idea.

How's that?

Just ask the people of Fukushima.

Fukushima was an incredibly rare occurrence. There are no safety guarantees in life in anything. Nuclear power is still the cleanest energy in existence.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Germany intends to export their emissions. Out of sight, out of mind.
Clear conscience.

It's the typical cowardly overreaction of the Euro-wimps.

 

[Baruch Menachem]

Meanwhile, they will have to expand the environmental damage done by some of the filthiest coal in Europe.

To say nothing of how they run their mining operations

And ignoring the fact your average coal plant emits huge amounts of radioactive materials on a daily basis.

Shows the danger of running policy based on fear and superstition.

As to the decision made in Germany... That is the democratic process. My understanding is that the CDU was, prior to Fukushima, trying to wean Germany off coal and go Nuke. However since Germany was downwind of the last big disaster, and here comes another one just as bad or worse, the electoral calculus within the CDU changed dramatically. Five, ten years down the line, when folks are dealing with the issues of increased pollution and decreased power supplies, they may change their minds.

 

[Toronado3800]

Not sure I would go that far. Someday we may need nuclear power and I would like my country to be good at it instead of an importer.

My opinion rides the fence on this one. Glad to see the usual small government types here crossing the fence in favor of big government grants for projects if it helps the country. Shows maturity. I get sick of partisanship.

One thing I have wondered. Do the electric companies which operate our plants privately pay to store the spent fuel rods? With government subsidies what is the actual cost of nuclear power? Google didnt tell me quick enough so I am asking.

Oh, my position. I am not excited by new plants. Maintaining our current level is what I support. The economics seem not to be there yet.

 

[Chris]

The Germans have developed a home that is so well insulated that it doesn't need a furnace.

The Israelis are building the largest solar energy plant in the world.

The Danes already get 15% of their energy from wind power.

The Chinese are the largest manufacturers of solar panels in the world.

Their are many ways of dealing with energy...conservation, solar, wind, etc...

As Buckminster Fuller said, "Their isn't an energy crisis. There is only a crisis of ignorance."

 

[Big Fitz]

The Germans have developed a home that is so well insulated that it doesn't need a furnace.

The Israelis are building the largest solar energy plant in the world.

The Danes already get 15% of their energy from wind power.

The Chinese are the largest manufacturers of solar panels in the world.

Their are many ways of dealing with energy...conservation, solar, wind, etc...

As Buckminster Fuller said, "Their isn't an energy crisis. There is only a crisis of ignorance."

Apparently ecostupidityis contageous, and there are pockets of this economical suicide in all nations.

Buckminister Fuller was a helluva an engineer for a philosopher.

 

[Chris]

The time frame in question when dealing with radioactive waste ranges from 10,000 to 1,000,000 years,[36] according to studies based on the effect of estimated radiation doses.[37] Researchers suggest that forecasts of health detriment for such periods should be examined critically.[38] [39] Practical studies only consider up to 100 years as far as effective planning[40] and cost evaluations[41] are concerned. Long term behavior of radioactive wastes remains a subject for ongoing research projects.[42]

[edit] Geologic disposalThe process of selecting appropriate deep final repositories for high level waste and spent fuel is now under way in several countries (Schacht Asse II and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant) with the first expected to be commissioned some time after 2010. The basic concept is to locate a large, stable geologic formation and use mining technology to excavate a tunnel, or large-bore tunnel boring machines (similar to those used to drill the Channel Tunnel from England to France) to drill a shaft 500–1,000 meters below the surface where rooms or vaults can be excavated for disposal of high-level radioactive waste. The goal is to permanently isolate nuclear waste from the human environment. Many people remain uncomfortable with the immediate stewardship cessation of this disposal system, suggesting perpetual management and monitoring would be more prudent.

Because some radioactive species have half-lives longer than one million years, even very low container leakage and radionuclide migration rates must be taken into account.[43] Moreover, it may require more than one half-life until some nuclear materials lose enough radioactivity to cease being lethal to living things. A 1983 review of the Swedish radioactive waste disposal program by the National Academy of Sciences found that country’s estimate of several hundred thousand years—perhaps up to one million years—being necessary for waste isolation “fully justified.”[44] Aside from dilution, chemically toxic stable elements in some waste such as arsenic remain toxic for up to billions of years or indefinitely.[45]

Radioactive waste - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Toronado3800]

The time frame in question when dealing with radioactive waste ranges from 10,000 to 1,000,000 years,[36] according to studies based on the effect of estimated radiation doses.[37] Researchers suggest that forecasts of health detriment for such periods should be examined critically.[38] [39] Practical studies only consider up to 100 years as far as effective planning[40] and cost evaluations[41] are concerned. Long term behavior of radioactive wastes remains a subject for ongoing research projects.[42]

[edit] Geologic disposalThe process of selecting appropriate deep final repositories for high level waste and spent fuel is now under way in several countries (Schacht Asse II and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant) with the first expected to be commissioned some time after 2010. The basic concept is to locate a large, stable geologic formation and use mining technology to excavate a tunnel, or large-bore tunnel boring machines (similar to those used to drill the Channel Tunnel from England to France) to drill a shaft 500–1,000 meters below the surface where rooms or vaults can be excavated for disposal of high-level radioactive waste. The goal is to permanently isolate nuclear waste from the human environment. Many people remain uncomfortable with the immediate stewardship cessation of this disposal system, suggesting perpetual management and monitoring would be more prudent.

Because some radioactive species have half-lives longer than one million years, even very low container leakage and radionuclide migration rates must be taken into account.[43] Moreover, it may require more than one half-life until some nuclear materials lose enough radioactivity to cease being lethal to living things. A 1983 review of the Swedish radioactive waste disposal program by the National Academy of Sciences found that country’s estimate of several hundred thousand years—perhaps up to one million years—being necessary for waste isolation “fully justified.”[44] Aside from dilution, chemically toxic stable elements in some waste such as arsenic remain toxic for up to billions of years or indefinitely.[45]

Radioactive waste - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hey, this country is three, no wait, two hundred years old. What makes you think it won't last another 500,000! Lol.

Would firing the stuff into the sun be such a bad idea? I mean we have ICBMs laying around all over the place just getting old. Long.as they don't go all Challenger on us nothing bad will come of it.

 

[Old Rocks]

The tonnage of nuclear waste that we already have would make that impractical, Toronado.

 

[Old Rocks]

There are nuclear reactors, presently in design stage, that theoretically would burn our present waste, and the resultant isotopes would be very short lived. Trakar is far more qualified to address that than I am.

 

[martybegan]

Germany will be the first big test, if they do it the right way, of a country trying to go with renewables plus conservation as the primary method of electricity generation. There are however, methods they can use to cheat, one of them being buying power from france, which as most people know, generates most of thier power from nukes.

Lets see if they can keeo thier baseline grid going once they give up on nukes, and lets see if they can do it without going back to fossil fuels.

Quite frankly I am glad to see someone else try it before us.