And giving up on nuclear energy seems to me a bad idea, as long as there are no non-greenhouse gasses alternatives available. Global warming is a much bigger threat than a hypothetical nuclear leakage from deposite places in year 2300. (We'll probably have the techonology to deal with it then, if we survived global warming)
Heh, that "as long as" is not valid. And the German Greens did more than anyone else for that to be the case.
Global warming is a much bigger threat than a hypothetical nuclear leakage from deposite places in year 2300.
Global warming may be over by 2300. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
Renewable energy is not quite there when it comes to providing reliable baseload electricity.
Also, I do not believe that you can do a radical overhaul of a massive infrastructure such as energy production that quickly. You will have to go through several transitory periods, and until renewables can pick up a dominant share of the energy production mix, you will need to rely on traditional forms of energy for a little while.
I am more concerned with burning more oil (provided there is enough left) and coal than a moderate increase in nuclear energy. 'La fin désastreuse a répondu aux moyens indignes' Germain Tillion
Regarding radical overhaul, I am thinking of decades too (two decades, at most). However, what you fail to consider is that moving from coal/gas to nuclear would be such a radical overhaul (except in France) too, and it woud take longer than say to wind - building a nuclear plant usually takes 5-10 years and incredible sums of money, while the aim is for an at least 30-year period for paying that back (for wind that is usually put at 20 years).
Change to nuclear won't influence oil use. Change from coal to nuclear would be very little in France, but much bigger elsewhere - not moderate. In fact, if that happened, we would not just face Peak Oil, but Peak Uranium too. Nuclear is a dead-end in my opinion even as an energy solution, not just as an unsolved pollution problem. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
there was a diary about this the other day. I had no idea there were only this few nucelar power stations in Germany...
In 2003 for example, imports from France totalled 20.2 TWh, that's just 3.3% of the total German production. However, according to VDEW, most of that transited Germany to third countries (the Netherlands and Italy), and wasn't destined for German consumers.
Furthermore, even that part which went for Germany means little of Germany's total export/import balance isn't considered. That balance is positive! In 2003, a total of 53.7 TWh was exported, and 45.7 TWh imported; in 2004, it was 51.5 TWh exports vs 44.2 Twh imports.
Finally, just as nuclear energy can be transited, so can renewable energy. Transfers between countries are one of the possible solutions to reduce the impact of wind(/sun/wave) intermittance. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
