Comment by natmaka
5 months ago
> Not shutting down the existing nuclear plants is a pure positive
Ask Japan, and especially Fukushima's residents, about this.
> building out renewables and/or nuclear plants in the east.
Germany chose renewables and cannot quickly phase out its huge coal industry.
> For the money we wasted on intermittent renewables so far
Source (with investments' perimeters and maturities)?
> Nuclear power is well-suited for district heating and industrial heat applications
If, and only if, it is designed for it, and with the appropriate networks. France nuclear does nearly 0 district heating and 0 industrial heat.
> Germany shut down its reactors for idiotic reasons:
Reason: "Fukushima"
> All West German reactors would have survived the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake
In Japan until 2011, officially "all reactors will survive..."
> we don't have Tsunamis in Germany
Tsunamis are not the sole cause potentially triggering a nuclear accident.
> How does shutting down those plants make sense again?
Refusing nuclear-induced challenges (risk of major accident, waste, dependency towards uranium, difficult decommissioning, risk of weapon proliferation...) while another approach (renewables) is now technically adequate makes sense.
> Japan is reactivating its nuclear plants.
Some sing this song since 2015. In the real world Japan, just like China, massively invests on... renewables! Surprise! And very few reactors were reactivated: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-fossil-renewa...
>> or that only a minority of environmentalists decided to do so is misleading as,
> Again, such a good thing that that claim wasn't made in this thread
It is nearly always made, in a form or another, in each and every thread about nuclear energy. In this very post:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45230099
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45227286
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45227025
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45228112
> Who "closed" reactors Read on: https://x.com/HannoKlausmeier/status/1784158942823690561 > The law that required nuclear reactors to be closed was passed by the Red/Green coalition in 2002. Don't omit anything: "The phase-out plan was initially delayed in late 2010, when during the chancellorship of centre-right Angela Merkel, the coalition conservative-liberal government decreed a 12-year delay of the schedule." Source: 4 comments natmaka Reply
> Ask Japan, and especially Fukushima's residents, about this.
Yes, let's ask Japan!
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-12-16/japan-see...
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/commentary/2024/12/26/world/ger...
>> Germany shut down its reactors for idiotic reasons:
> Reason: "Fukushima"
QED.
> > Japan is reactivating its nuclear plants.
>Some sing this song since 2015
And it still happens to be true. And only in the weird minds of anti-nuclear activists are renewables and nuclear power incompatible. Almost the entire industrialized world is investing massively in both nuclear and renewables.
And once again: The law that required nuclear reactors to be closed was passed by the Red/Green coalition in 2002. Governments are bound by the law of the land.
Now other governments should have scrapped those laws, but they didn't. So they bear some responsibility for this disaster, but the main responsibility is still with Red/Green (2002) in general and the Greens in particular, because they were the ones pushing it.
It is also really telling that for some reason everyone wants to ascribe this huge "success" to their political enemies...
Japan: no comment nor "someone sees something" changes anything to the (already stated) facts: since Fukushima (2011) Japan did not restart its nuclear reactors and is quickly building renewables: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-fossil-renewa...
> the entire industrialized world is investing massively in both nuclear and renewables
Nope: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/electricity-fossil-renewa...
Why do you lie so blatantly on something that is so easily checked and disproven?
Japan has restarted at least 14 reactors.
https://www.modernpowersystems.com/analysis/re-establishing-...
https://pris.iaea.org/pris/CountryStatistics/CountryDetails....
Or even just Wikipedia:
"As of January 2022 there are 33 operable reactors in Japan, of which 12 reactors are currently operating.[87] Additionally, 5 reactors have been approved for restart and further 8 have restart applications under review."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Japan#Nuclear...
Your ourworldindata links says nothing about current investments. It is therefore not a repudiation of what I wrote about investments in nuclear and renewables.
Here's what ChatGPT says:
Is the industrialized world massively investing in both nuclear energy and renewables?
ChatGPT said:
Yes — there is strong evidence that in many (though not all) of the industrialized world, there is a massive investment push in both renewables (especially solar and wind) and nuclear, though the balance, pace, and scale differ a lot by region. Below are key takeaways, some of the caveats, and what seems likely going forward.
Nuclear energy
Interest in building new nuclear capacity has increased. Many countries are extending the life of existing reactors, and new reactors are under construction. For example: 63 nuclear reactors globally are under construction as of 2025, representing over 70 GW of capacity.
Annual investment in nuclear (both in building new reactors and extending existing ones) has risen by almost 50% since 2020, now exceeding USD 60 billion per year. (IEA)
Some countries are making major new commitments: UK’s investment in the Sizewell C plant, public & private funds for modular reactors, Canadian incentives for SMRs, etc.
Research indicates that global nuclear capacity might more than double by 2050 (from ~398 GW now to ~860 GW).
1 reply →