Germany decides to abandon nuclear power by 2022

[Deathshot]

Windmills really aren't pretty. They hire consultants for millions of dollars to figure out how to hide them as best as possible.

I would have to beg to differ. I love the looks of windmills.

 

[Prozac]

Shocking development in this thread! people have different opinions and points of view. Amazing.
Anyway, lets blast some solar panels into space, cover up the other side of the sun with the stuff, have a relay of satellites blast back the energy to us! We'll drown in energy till humanity dies off.

We just need to work out some minor logistic and probably some maintenance issue out, but then were set for more power then we'll ever need!

 

[Tenzo]

Shocking development in this thread! people have different opinions and points of view. Amazing.
Anyway, lets blast some solar panels into space, cover up the other side of the sun with the stuff, have a relay of satellites blast back the energy to us! We'll drown in energy till humanity dies off.

We just need to work out some minor logistic and probably some maintenance issue out, but then were set for more power then we'll ever need!

Yeah. We just need to make it happen. And i don't know if i'll see it in my lifetime.

 

[Avenger]

Are you two high? Do you have any idea how much it costs to launch things into space? Not a "minor" issue, I assure you. And how will you perform maintenance? How much will that cost? If this were to happen, it would have to GUARANTEE plenty of energy for the entire world, otherwise it's just too goddamn expensive.

 

[Tenzo]

Like i said that thing is pretty far away.

 

[Zeonix]

Seems like just about everyone missed the political and economic ramifications of getting rid of their plants, so I'll throw my two cents in the ring.

To start off, 10 years isn't enough time for Germany to replace nuclear energy with renewable energy. About a third of Germany's energy comes from nuclear power, and it costs less than a third of wind power and less than one-twentieth of solar power. What does this mean? As far as this decade is concerned, replacing nuclear energy with renewable energy isn't economically feasible, so they'll have to look elsewhere for their energy needs. Elsewhere, of course, being surrounding nations.

The way I see it, you have a few players about to try to sink their claws into Germany. First, you have France, which is always desperately trying to lash itself to Germany to prevent them from being a threat ever again. How do they go about doing this? They make themselves as essential to German plans as possible. France is about as pro-nuclear as a nation gets, so I don't doubt they'll start building extra reactors in order to export as much energy as they can to fill in the gap Germany hamfistedly created. They've already been doing this to a degree, but you can expect them to ramp up their efforts.

After France, you have Russia. Russia has been trying to secure a cement a relationship with Germany for forever and a day now, and this could finally be their ticket. Why? Such a relationship would serve to solve many of Russia's economic, military and demographic problems. Also, the two nations would essentially neutralize all of Europe, leaving Russia to do basically whatever the hell it wanted as there'd really be no one to enforce "anti-Russian" policies (which sounds worse than it actually is as these types of policies tend to benefit both America and Europe). At the very least, we prefer Germany to remain neutral when it comes to Russia. But since we're focused and involved in the Islamic world, we can't really do much in that theatre other than politely ask our friends for a favor.

In any case, Russia. So they have the Nord Stream pipeline which bypasses all the transit states between Russia and Germany, and is scheduled to go online in 2012 (currently in the process of final testing). It should produce 55 cubic meters of natural gas per year. That's enough to replace half of the electricity produced by nuclear power in Germany. All Germany would have to do is build a few natural gas-burning power plants, and they'd be good to go.

Finally, we have the dark horse. Mother****ing Poland. Poland is pretty much outclassed in every possible way by the other two nations, but they have a trump card. See, they refuse to get with the times. Most of their energy demands are met by coal. Coal is cheap. Dirt cheap. Were Germany to choose coal to replace that energy gap, they'd need only to construct a few coal plants, which can go up in a year or two and coast pennies next to nuclear power plants which cost several billion euros and can take anywhere from 5 years to a decade to construct. It's dirty, and its politicaly incorrect, but its there.

So you have France who needs to make itself important to Germany so that they'll never attack again, you have Russia who wants to make Germany its partner so it can have free reign to do as it wishes, and you have Poland stuck in the middle between a resurgent Germany and a resurgent Russia, and the overwhelming feeling that they're going to get raped any day now. France has a politically attractive plan that is economically expensive, you have the Russians who already have the fuel source ready for the picking, but would require making a deal with the devil, and you have Poland which has a politically unattractive plan that is economically dirt cheap. Also, the German plan, which is stupid. All have long-term consequences, so it'll be interesting to see which Germany goes with.

 

[DiebytheSword]

Seems like just about everyone missed the political and economic ramifications of getting rid of their plants, so I'll throw my two cents in the ring.

To start off, 10 years isn't enough time for Germany to replace nuclear energy with renewable energy. About a third of Germany's energy comes from nuclear power, and it costs less than a third of wind power and less than one-twentieth of solar power. What does this mean? As far as this decade is concerned, replacing nuclear energy with renewable energy isn't economically feasible, so they'll have to look elsewhere for their energy needs. Elsewhere, of course, being surrounding nations.

The way I see it, you have a few players about to try to sink their claws into Germany. First, you have France, which is always desperately trying to lash itself to Germany to prevent them from being a threat ever again. How do they go about doing this? They make themselves as essential to German plans as possible. France is about as pro-nuclear as a nation gets, so I don't doubt they'll start building extra reactors in order to export as much energy as they can to fill in the gap Germany hamfistedly created. They've already been doing this to a degree, but you can expect them to ramp up their efforts.

After France, you have Russia. Russia has been trying to secure a cement a relationship with Germany for forever and a day now, and this could finally be their ticket. Why? Such a relationship would serve to solve many of Russia's economic, military and demographic problems. Also, the two nations would essentially neutralize all of Europe, leaving Russia to do basically whatever the hell it wanted as there'd really be no one to enforce "anti-Russian" policies (which sounds worse than it actually is as these types of policies tend to benefit both America and Europe). At the very least, we prefer Germany to remain neutral when it comes to Russia. But since we're focused and involved in the Islamic world, we can't really do much in that theatre other than politely ask our friends for a favor.

In any case, Russia. So they have the Nord Stream pipeline which bypasses all the transit states between Russia and Germany, and is scheduled to go online in 2012 (currently in the process of final testing). It should produce 55 cubic meters of natural gas per year. That's enough to replace half of the electricity produced by nuclear power in Germany. All Germany would have to do is build a few natural gas-burning power plants, and they'd be good to go.

Finally, we have the dark horse. Mother****ing Poland. Poland is pretty much outclassed in every possible way by the other two nations, but they have a trump card. See, they refuse to get with the times. Most of their energy demands are met by coal. Coal is cheap. Dirt cheap. Were Germany to choose coal to replace that energy gap, they'd need only to construct a few coal plants, which can go up in a year or two and coast pennies next to nuclear power plants which cost several billion euros and can take anywhere from 5 years to a decade to construct. It's dirty, and its politicaly incorrect, but its there.

So you have France who needs to make itself important to Germany so that they'll never attack again, you have Russia who wants to make Germany its partner so it can have free reign to do as it wishes, and you have Poland stuck in the middle between a resurgent Germany and a resurgent Russia, and the overwhelming feeling that they're going to get raped any day now. France has a politically attractive plan that is economically expensive, you have the Russians who already have the fuel source ready for the picking, but would require making a deal with the devil, and you have Poland which has a politically unattractive plan that is economically dirt cheap. Also, the German plan, which is stupid. All have long-term consequences, so it'll be interesting to see which Germany goes with.

Quite the political analysis. Very interesting about Poland, which I never thought about. As you said, I don't think they can make the cuts. Regarding their options, I could see them punting and extending the nuke plant shut down as it becomes unrealistic to do.

 

[Prozac]

Are you two high? Do you have any idea how much it costs to launch things into space? Not a "minor" issue, I assure you. And how will you perform maintenance? How much will that cost? If this were to happen, it would have to GUARANTEE plenty of energy for the entire world, otherwise it's just too goddamn expensive.

Fix your sarcasm detector, kthx.
Though, about your method of getting it into space. There are quite some interesting developments in that field. One being a sort of elevator, which is propelled by lasers.

[video=youtube;zO1EV6A76ZE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zO1EV6A76ZE&feature=player_embedded[/video]

Shows promise.

 

[Avenger]

About a third of Germany's energy comes from nuclear power, and it costs less than a third of wind power and less than one-twentieth of solar power.

Source?

The way I see it, you have a few players about to try to sink their claws into Germany. First, you have France, which is always desperately trying to lash itself to Germany to prevent them from being a threat ever again. How do they go about doing this? They make themselves as essential to German plans as possible. France is about as pro-nuclear as a nation gets, so I don't doubt they'll start building extra reactors in order to export as much energy as they can to fill in the gap Germany hamfistedly created. They've already been doing this to a degree, but you can expect them to ramp up their efforts.

Uh, I'm not sure you're aware of this, but France and Germany are in the EU. You know, that organization created for the specific purpose of preventing war in Europe ever again? I'm pretty sure France isn't all that worried about Germany. That would be highly irrational. And so you're aware, France also relies heavily on nuclear energy. How would they explain to the voters that they're still using nuclear energy, but buying it more expensively?

It should produce 55 cubic meters of natural gas per year. That's enough to replace half of the electricity produced by nuclear power in Germany. All Germany would have to do is build a few natural gas-burning power plants, and they'd be good to go.

I'm pretty sure you've messed up the metrics there. For one, saying "55 cubic meters of natural gas" isn't really telling you a goddamn thing about what's going on. You have to specify temperature and pressure to measure how much gas. Plus, I'm pretty sure a single cow can pump out 55 cubic meters of natural gas in a year. Or at least somewhere in that area. Missed a decimal point?

As for Russia in general, I don't think Germany would trust Russia that much. Russians aren't trusted in Europe as far as I can tell.

Poland might be a bigger problem. They're poor, they want to export, and Germany might be dumb enough to accept. I don't know, this whole thing seems fishy to me. I don't expect Germany to go through with such a stupid act.

Though, about your method of getting it into space. There are quite some interesting developments in that field. One being a sort of elevator, which is propelled by lasers.

I wouldn't count on this working. Your best bet is a space slingshot, really, and they're nowhere near done planning that.

 

[Prozac]

Why shouldn't we count on an innovating work in progress.. I find it awkward you'd say something like that, and especially the way you worded it. I mean you can dismiss things, but you tend to dismiss things and overly explain your reasoning behind the dismissal.

It seems every comment you had in this thread is negative, even if it basically agrees with what you're saying.
Is this because we partly tread on what you're apparently studying, and you think you have to put us in our place? Basically, from my perspective, it seems like you want to seem superior through disagreeing in such a way that it looks like you know what's really going on. If that's the case, I can certainly understand the psychological reasoning behind it, but I don't approve of it because nothing good comes of it, also it seems the behavior caries through even after we leave your so called area of expertise.

Simply put, What's up Avenger? y u act liek dis?

 

[Zeonix]

Source?

Turns out it's 1/4 of their total energy, as of April of this year. Apparently, I was looking at stats from '95:
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf43.html


Uh, I'm not sure you're aware of this, but France and Germany are in the EU. You know, that organization created for the specific purpose of preventing war in Europe ever again? I'm pretty sure France isn't all that worried about Germany. That would be highly irrational. And so you're aware, France also relies heavily on nuclear energy. How would they explain to the voters that they're still using nuclear energy, but buying it more expensively?

I'm not sure you're aware of this, but because France is only bordered by two countries, one of which is useless Spain, it's their prerogative to prepare for and against an event that occurred not once, but twice in the same century. If you don't think their foreign and domestic policy is shaped by those two itsy bitsy wars, you're insane, or arguing for the sake of arguing, neither of which are above you. If you think the concept of the EU is enough to make the idea of a continental war vanish from the minds' of your leaders, it is perhaps in your favor that you aren't one of those leaders. Which is precisely why every nation spies on every other nation. There's cooperation, sure, but let's not pretend everyone is singing kumbaya.

If you read my post, I made it pretty clear I was aware France is as pro-nuclear as it gets. Germany's issue is with the power plants existing in their nation. Importing energy is slightly more cost efficient than maintaining your own nuclear plants, upgrading them and perhaps having to build additional plants to fuel future energy demands. Also, they'd be importing energy from a source that already exists. It'd be a waste not to, and Germans are all about efficiency. It's a viable option, because Germany considers it to be a viable option. But, as stated, it is only one of many.

I'm pretty sure you've messed up the metrics there. For one, saying "55 cubic meters of natural gas" isn't really telling you a goddamn thing about what's going on. You have to specify temperature and pressure to measure how much gas. Plus, I'm pretty sure a single cow can pump out 55 cubic meters of natural gas in a year. Or at least somewhere in that area. Missed a decimal point?

If by messing up the metrics, you mean using the metrics listed on their site, then sure:

http://www.nord-stream.com/en/

As for Russia in general, I don't think Germany would trust Russia that much. Russians aren't trusted in Europe as far as I can tell.

It isn't a matter of trust. It's a matter of economics and give and take. Is the juice worth the squeeze and all that jazz. For Germany, it very well could be. Russia isn't a bad ally to have, nor would it be a bad thing to have a short-term symbiotic relationship with a potential enemy, especially if they become more dependent on your friendship than you.

Poland might be a bigger problem. They're poor, they want to export, and Germany might be dumb enough to accept. I don't know, this whole thing seems fishy to me. I don't expect Germany to go through with such a stupid act.

Doubt it. Choosing Poland creates tension with Russia, which is kind of the point. They're hoping the dependence on their coal will be enough to keep Germany in their corner should Russia's sphere of influence continue to expand.

I wouldn't count on this working. Your best bet is a space slingshot, really, and they're nowhere near done planning that.

Whatever.

Word up, dogg.

 

[Avenger]

Turns out it's 1/4 of their total energy, as of April of this year. Apparently, I was looking at stats from '95:
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf43.html

I figured as much. You haven't taken into account the longevity of solar power. The return on investment is pretty great, as it's not terribly hard to maintain or keep a solar plant going. I've said this before, and I'll say it again: this is renting vs owning. I would rather own a house than rent a house if I had the choice, just like I would rather invest in renewable energy than in fossil/fissile fuels.

I'm not sure you're aware of this, but because France is only bordered by two countries, one of which is useless Spain, it's their prerogative to prepare for and against an event that occurred not once, but twice in the same century. If you don't think their foreign and domestic policy is shaped by those two itsy bitsy wars, you're insane, or arguing for the sake of arguing, neither of which are above you. If you think the concept of the EU is enough to make the idea of a continental war vanish from the minds' of your leaders, it is perhaps in your favor that you aren't one of those leaders. Which is precisely why every nation spies on every other nation. There's cooperation, sure, but let's not pretend everyone is singing kumbaya.

The US has had what, twelve wars since WW2. How many has Europe had, and how many were between members of the EU? The EU is quite complicated, and it would be ridiculously stupid for one country to attack another.This is quite literally the reason it was founded, and you're not giving it enough merit. The EU has been incredibly stabilizing in terms of relations between its member states, and in a few decades one might compare the EU to the US. Is South Carolina fearing the mighty NY army?

If by messing up the metrics, you mean using the metrics listed on their site, then sure:

It says billion cubic meters, which makes around a billion times more sense.

Why shouldn't we count on an innovating work in progress.. I find it awkward you'd say something like that, and especially the way you worded it. I mean you can dismiss things, but you tend to dismiss things and overly explain your reasoning behind the dismissal.

It might be a great idea, but a lot of people have had great ideas. Tesla wanted to have wireless energy and information transfer by creating a plasma channel into the ionosphere and pumping power into it. It wasn't the most realistic prospect ever construed, regardless of how innovative it was. Firing things into space will be very expensive regardless, and there are more problems and consequences in doing this than you might think. Space-debris, meteors, comets, radiation, and space dust makes it very tricky to handle things in space after you get it up, as well.

It seems every comment you had in this thread is negative, even if it basically agrees with what you're saying.
Is this because we partly tread on what you're apparently studying, and you think you have to put us in our place? Basically, from my perspective, it seems like you want to seem superior through disagreeing in such a way that it looks like you know what's really going on. If that's the case, I can certainly understand the psychological reasoning behind it, but I don't approve of it because nothing good comes of it, also it seems the behavior caries through even after we leave your so called area of expertise.

you will give

 

[Zeonix]

The EU is not the US. The US is a union of smaller entities, all of which identify with being American. If I ask you what you are, you're not going to say European. You're going to say Norwegian. That overarching identity isn't there, and will probably never be there. Sure as **** not in our lifetimes, anyway. The US has plans for every conceivable scenario. This includes Canada attacking us without warning. Why? Because that's what your government is supposed to do, and it's what France most certainly does, especially after the aforementioned tiny bitty battles that left the nation ****ed twice. Comparing the US to the EU shows an incredible lack of understanding of the US, which is to be expected, but let's not pretend we're experts on things that we're not. Unless you're me.

Typos and pedantry aside, you've yet to make a single point. If you want to argue, give me something to work with.

 

[Avenger]

I made a pretty good point about the investment value with solar power, no?

 

[Zeonix]

No, you didn't, since they'd be injecting far more capital into solar power than they would with any other option. The cost efficiency simply isn't there yet.

 

[Avenger]

They'd inject more capital now, not later. The maintenance is lower and the fuel costs are virtually non-existent. Don't be stupid.

 

[Zeonix]

Considering how inefficient and expensive it is now, they'd be forced to not only buy a ridiculous number of units now, but eventually upgrade to non ****ty ones latter. Which, you know, adds up. Or should Germany start borrowing from China, too?

I'm going to call Merkel and let her know you've solved their problem. I can't believe they didn't consider this option!

 

[Avenger]

It's not inefficient or expensive now, don't be absurd. The only reason people aren't buying solar power in bundles is because there isn't enough of it to go around. It's selling like crack, and demand is far higher than supply.

 

[Zeonix]

I'm going to pull a you and ask you to source wherever the hell you found replacing a quarter of the energy created by nuclear power with solar power is cost effective and efficient. I mean, ****, if one of the most efficient nations on the planet isn't considering solar power as an option in the short-term, there's a reason for it. They're getting rid of nuclear power to go green eventually. Clearly, they've considered all options at this point.

 

[Avenger]

I'll do some checking with the specialists I know to make sure and get back to you. I might have to crunch some numbers (set-up costs, lifespan, operational costs, environmental effects), since most wesbites are way outdated on these subjects. I'm a bit busy reading for exams, but I'll get to it within a week I think.