:: :: :: :: ::
Germany will have elections this autumn.
In Germany's federal governing Grand Coalition, the mainstream within the center-right CDU/CSU parties (who lead polls) was and is friendly to both developing and operating companies in the nuclear industry, and wants to bring back a future for nuclear through the back door - and not the election campaign.
Within the Social Democrats (SPD, which is rather down in the polls), there is great unison between the Coal, Gas and Renewables party wings (</snark>) against nuclear. After Krümmel, it seems they think clubbing the CDU with the nuclear issue with a popular demand (72% want the immediate closure of the oldest plants) can be a suitable last-ditch effort.
So, in the last two days, the talk of closing Krümmel became a concrete demand on the SPD's part, and they are blasting the CDU for resisiting. Including party boss Franz Müntefering ("Shut that thing down at last!") and chancellor candidate Steinmeier ("I really don't get why the CDU/CSU ... make themselves the mouthpiece of the nuclear lobby to this extent").
Meanwhile, the local leaders of the CDU are following the Merkel Tactic (from when Merkel was Kohl's federal environment minister and had to manage the scandal of contaminated nuclear waste containers): they are scolding the operator (Vattenfall) publicly, threantening consequences (taking away Vattenfall's operating license).
Hessen PM Roland Koch, strongly pro-nuclear, said that "the stupidity of the companies in communication is barely describable anymore". Then he followed it up with a really interesting variation on the default CDU position (demanding extended running times for existing plants): he demanded unlimited running times for safe plants [ = drop Krümmel to save the rest], and said that this has to be done until renewables can take over fully "by the middle of this century". *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
But, Koch's change of rhetoric is not to be underestimated: it's the first time I hear a CDU figure talk of 100% renewables! It's as if he said, "OK, Ypsilanti and Scheer were right in saying 100% renewables is possible, but not in 10-15 but 40 years". *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
Well, it's a change of rhetoric - it signals a weakened position, and could be used against him in the future. Sadly, if CDU+FDP will reign come October, the job won't be done now... *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
In Germany it's still a very hot potato, while in Sweden it's a wedege issue for the right, which repeatedly bashes the left with it, as the leftist elite (and for a long time also the bourgeoise elite) are strong opponents, while the general population is the most pro-nuclear in the entire world!
If I speculate this might have something to do with us not having any coal/gas special interests, and renewables means either biomass heat or hydro, the latter which is dominated by big players with massive nuclear assets (Vattenfall, E.On and Fortum).
I also think it's related to our extremely exhaustive 40 year debate on nuclear. This huge exposure means the public has had to learn the basic technical issues and with that the fear of the "unknown" and spooky "radiation" has receded. Peak oil is not an energy crisis. It is a liquid fuel crisis.
I would say that also reflects the reason the question is looked at "keep current plants", in addition to the question in the 80ies breaking up the swedish bloc system and making majority governments impossible for a while. A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!
