Summary

Rafael Grossi, head of the IAEA, called Germany’s decision to fully phase out nuclear power “illogical,” noting it is the only country to have done so.

Despite the completed phase-out in 2023, there is renewed debate in Germany about reviving nuclear energy due to its low greenhouse gas emissions.

Speaking at COP29, Grossi described reconsidering nuclear as a “rational” choice, especially given global interest in nuclear for emissions reduction.

Germany’s phase-out, driven by environmental concerns and past nuclear disasters, has been criticized for increasing reliance on Russian gas and missing carbon reduction opportunities.

    • Iceblade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      There is a larger usage of fossil fuels than there otherwise would have been. A certain portion of new renewables replaced nuclear power instead of fossil fuelled plants.

      So yes, Germany did prioritize removing safe, clean energy over removing dirty, dangerous energy.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      20 hours ago

      You tried, but it didn’t work out as expected.

      Also, on a side note, with nuclear you could export energy to other countries so that they don’t need to rely on coal gas & oil so much.

      • Don_alForno@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        18 hours ago

        We tried and it did and does work. Renewables are going up, fossils are going down.. We are burning less coal than ever. Any claims to the point of “replaced nuclear with coal” are disinformation and lies.

        with nuclear you could export energy to other countries

        We are exporting energy to other countries.

        Nuclear is the most expensive form of power,. it’s unsafe and inflexible. It doesn’t make sense, it never did, and all those other kids jumping off the bridge don’t change that.

        • Valmond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          18 hours ago

          You could have exported more. It could have been a smother transition.

          You are also trying to put words in my mouth, I did not say coal replaced nuclear.

          Your fearmongering concerning nuclear makes me think that you are with the bridge jumping kids.

      • Landslide7648@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        20 hours ago

        It actually worked better than expected. It’s simply a long process.

        Snd until we have a good, permanent solution where to store nuclear waste that won’t be an issue for hundreds of future generations, it’s simply irresponsible to air for nuclear instead of renewables

        • Valmond@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          18 hours ago

          That’s cool!

          Yes restarting nuclear today seems stupid especially if it’s only for german consumption. Best case scenario is we plaster solar panels all over the world IMO but the production capacity isn’t there before another ten years or so, but that beats new nuclear too.

          Shutting down nuclear today is a more complicated matter IMO.