Nuclear Power to end in Germany

Some countries have no nuclear power stations but want them. We are told that these countries cannot be trusted with nuclear power, because they might use nuclear power to build nuclear weapons, so we oppose their acquisition of nuclear power on self invented ethical grounds. Some countries have nuclear power stations and nuclear weapons and we think some of them can be trusted with it, and as for those we cannot trust we close our yes, cross our fingers and hope. And then there are those who have nuclear power stations but wish they hadn’t.

Germanyis one of the few nations that regard nuclear power as too dangerous. In eleven years from nowGermanywill no longer have any more nuclear power, as the nuclear reactors are closed down. Like theUnited Kingdomabout a quarter of German electricity is generated from nuclear energy. Unlike the United Kingdom Germany taxes spent nuclear fuel rods and raises 2.3 billion Euros a year from the tax.

In the United Kingdom we are told that unless we have nuclear power our economy will be unable to compete because energy prices will be too high. It is odd then, how Germany, which has a much stronger economy than the United Kingdom, founded on manufacturing, manages to compete throughout the world and expects to continue to do this without nuclear power.

Some argue that nuclear power produces fewer emissions than fossil fuel power, and so it does, but fewer emissions rather than no emissions. As uranium stocks dwindle and uranium extraction becomes more expensive from low grade ore, so the cost of uranium fuel will rise and rise and with may nuclear reactors chasing a finite fule supply energy security will be at risk. When the dust settles from the Fukushima disaster reports will be published which will say more than we should not build nuclear reactors in earthquake zones and where tsunami may happen, and the safety costs of generating nulcear power will increase.

It looks as though the Germans have made a good long term decision abut nuclear energy in terms of the economics, safety, energy security and the climate.

3 Responses

  1. How do you know that this is ” a good long term decision “?

    No doubts?

    Regards,

    • I cannot read the future but I have no doubts for the following reasons:- 1. Uranium will become increasingly expensive; much of the “low hanging fruit” has been picked and demand will increase as more nations build nuclear power stations 2. The cost of nuclear has been artificially kept low because the industry does not pay to clean up its own waste and inevitably receives subsidies from the state otherwise it would not be economically viable. These subsidies can only be given if public opinion remains broadly in favour of nuclear energy. 3. Every nuclear incident increases the safety costs of building nuclear plant 4. Storage costs of radioactive waste will rise as a result of 3 and 5. Accidents will happen and every accident dulls the public appetite for nuclear technology.

      Regards

      Robert

  2. Safe, clean alternative energy is the future. Fukishima and Chernobyl have poisoned the air, land, water and food in the surrounding areas. It is time to phase out nuclear energy and ramp up wind, solar wave energy and geothermal.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: