Phillippsburg Nuclear Power Plant by Lothar Neumann, Gernsbach
By Jo Nova
If the Germans just did nothing at all, it would have been Greener
Germany already had nuclear power in 2002, if they just kept it and didn’t build all the wind and solar plants, they wouldn’t have had to spend 697 Billion Euro on subsidies, and would have cut their emissions by 73% more.
If ever there is a statistic that says there is something rotten in the State of Climate Panic, this is surely it. I mean, does CO2 matter or doesn’t it? Do the Greens care at all, or even a bit? If there was a climate emergency and The Greens were worried about CO2, they might have protested that the EnergieWende was a reckless experiment. But if the Greens were tools for communists, foreign states or banker-investors, then they might keep choosing options that benefit other countries, help Bankers or just make Big Government bigger.
Either the German Greens have utterly failed at the very task they set out to do, or they were really aiming at something else.
Ross Pomery writes at RealClearScience and WattsUpWithThat
Study Quantifies Germany’s Disastrous Switch Away From Nuclear Power
At the dawn of the millennium, Germany launched an ambitious plan to transition to renewable energy. “Die Energiewende” initiated a massive expansion of solar and wind power, resulting in a commendable 25 percent reduction in carbon emissions by 2022…
In 2002, nuclear power supplied about a fifth of Germany’s electricity. Twenty-one years later, it supplied none. A layperson might think that cheap wind and solar could simply fill the gap, but it isn’t so simple.
Jan Emblemsvåg, a Professor of Civil Engineering at Norway’s NTNU just published a study comparing the ambitious German Energiewende renewable program with nuclear power:
“what if Germany had spent their money on nuclear power and not followed their policy from 2002 through 2022 (20 years); would Germany have achieved more emission reductions and lower expenses?”
Even German bureaucrats admit Energiewende “poses a threat to the German economy”:
German Federal Accounting Office (Bundesrechnungshof) writes about the German policy dubbed ‘Die Energiewende’ in German, and it concludes: ‘The Bundesrechnungshof warns that the energy transition in its current form poses a threat to the German economy and overburdens the financial capacity of electricity-consuming companies and households’ (Bundesrechnungshof Citation2021a).
A whole lot of wind (green) and solar (orange) power were added to the German grid and it was worse than useless:
Given these results, there can be no doubt whatsoever that if Germany had invested in NPPs [Nuclear Power Plants] instead of VREs [Variable Renewable Energy], Germany would have decarbonised more with far less nominal expenditures. The short conclusion is that Germany would have reached its climate goals with a substantial margin at half the expenditures of Energiewende.
The Germans have done this experiment so we don’t have to
Just burn that money in a pyre to the Weather Gods:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14786451.2024.2355642#d1e128
These costs do not include the added burden of expensive electricity on businesses and homes, the opportunity costs of money that could have been spent elsewhere, or the loss of talent, brains and industry to other countries.
Building new nuclear plants was still cheaper than wind and solar
The paper goes through another scenario where more nuclear plants were built with careful estimations of the costs and long times to construct plants and still concludes that the Germans would have saved $330 billion euro.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14786451.2024.2355642#d1e128
Not coincidentally, in 2024 Germany has some of the most expensive electricity in Europe, business confidence is low, and VW have just announced that after 87 years in production, they might have to close their German factories.
Volkswagen, which was founded in 1937, said on Monday that it could no longer rule out unprecedented plant closures in Germany as it seeks ways to save several billion euros.
Chief executive Oliver Blume said: “The economic environment has become even tougher and new players are pushing into Europe. Germany as a business location is falling further behind in terms of competitiveness.”
Volkswagen employs around 650,000 workers globally, almost 300,000 of whom are in Germany, and the threat of factory closures sparked an immediate fierce backlash …
REFERENCE
Emblemsvåg, J. (2024). What if Germany had invested in nuclear power? A comparison between the German energy policy the last 20 years and an alternative policy of investing in nuclear power. International Journal of Sustainable Energy, 43(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/14786451.2024.2355642
What if? The question with the unknown answer! Clearly, The Greens led Germany down a crazy paved pathway and are now attempting to force AU Labor to enact the same stupid Laws on us! What if Bob Hawke hadn’t convinced Labor to go anti-nuclear? What if Bob Hawke hadn’t forced Tasmania to cancel a second hydroelectric dam? In both instances, of which there are many more, have Greens/Marxist beginnings. John Howard failed to correct the course! Both men left power as millionaires which just goes to show that “the love of money is the root of all evil” and the curse of non-electric power-hungry people.
400
Bob Hawke? I remember Bob Hawke. As head man at the Australian Council of Trade Unions he spent the whole of the 1970s busting any firms that tried to innovate. He demanded all the benefits of innovation up front for “The Workers”, thereby depriving industries of the capital needed to undertake the innovation. He backed up his campaign with strikes on our energy supply. Remember the times 70 or so oil refinery workers went on strike, shutting the refineries down? Remember the great power station strikes?
Having brought the economy to its knees he moved into parliament and engineered “The Wages Pause”, later renamed “The Accord”, because he wasn’t ready for a complete collapse, which would have taken control of the situation out of his hands.
Then he dumped the last of the old guard Labor leaders, won an election and resumed as Prime Minister his campaign of destruction of private capital, promoting Bond and Skase with their nefarious activities as he deliberately engineered the crash of 1987.
Everybody knew that what they were doing would lead to a crash, but still they did it because Hawke was showing the way.
So Hawke got hiss crash, but was outsmarted. The people on top of the pile could remember the 1930s. There is but little fun to be had on top of a pile that is flat, so instead of extracting every pound of flesh they took losses sufficient to prevent the pile from collapsing, which left them still on top and the Hawkes still on the outer.
Having failaed to get his scorched earth economy he then promoted massive investment in tourism, then bankrupted that investment with his Pilots’ Strike.
I remember Bob Hawke.
90
I am trying to think of the quote “Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make believe them the Greenies”.
I am note sure that is the correct translation.
250
Divine Deception of Environmental Appeasement
The provided phrase “Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make believe them the Greenies” appears to be a modified or altered version of the traditional saying “Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad” (Quos Deus vult perdere, prius dementat). The original phrase does not mention “Greenies”.
90
dementat == mad
A more logical translation might be “demented” in the modern context.
In which case “Greenie” might be an acceptable modern substitution?”
200
Re “Whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad”
I first saw that as “they first make confident”
Check on things like “ElBowen” and “Green speak”
00
One has to wonder who is really the driver of the anti-nuclear insanity in Germany? Can the German people really be that stupid? Makes one consider the possibility of some kind of foreign interference!
GLL
280
Find who funds the watermelons activity and you have it.
220
“Can the German people really be that stupid?”
1848 – Communist Manifesto by Germans Marx and Engels
1871 – Bismarck starts world’s first Socialist Welfare State
1882 – Friedrich Nietzsche – “God is Dead”
1914 – Kaiser Wilhelm falls in Love with Islam and starts WWI
1933 – Germany elects Hitler, starts WWII, kills all the productive Jews and loves Islam.
1945 – Germany sorry it murdered Jews with 165 Nobel prizes in physics, chemistry and medicine
2010 – Germans wrecks economy with Energiewende -2,000 BC technology – windmills and sunshine
2018 – So sorry we killed the Jews so ex-Commie Merkel lets in 10,000,000 illiterate Muslims
I don’t know. You tell me.
320
2010- 2020 US funds and teaches Wuhan scientists how to create pandemics.
2020 US elects Joe Biden, millions cross border, fentanyl kills 80,000 Americans each year
2022 US gives Afghanistan to Taliban after 2,500 soldiers died and they spent $2T
290
Jo Nova,
As an American I can make a much longer list than yours, but you are correct. The entire Western World is committing suicide. These days The Left hates its own countries and wants them destroyed.
Australia, NZ, Canada, the US and the UK were once decent countries. Parts of America still are, like Montana where I live. There is a remnant in each country that must fight. I pray we find the courage to stop it before it is too late.
180
Here’s an interesting series.
Perhaps not everything we’ve been told is true.
https://odysee.com/@injektiopiikki:c/Eurooppa-Viimeinen-taistelu—Osa-1:4
All 10 episodes are interesting.
10
They were stupid enough to allow a megalomaniac to encourage them into an WW2 pretty much the way the Americans are being led to WW3 by Washington neocons
183
All is not lost. Germany can import nuclear power from France, Czechia and, once the interconnector is finished, from the NEW nuclear station in Finland, which reduced the retail cost by 74% when it started running.
As Albo & Bowen say “it is expensive”.
Retail Price of electricity (Aus ¢/kWh) in Europe
Ireland No nuclear, lots of wind turbines 82¢
Germany No nuclear, lots of wind turbines & solar 81¢
Great? Britain (14% nuclear), lots of wind turbines 79¢
EU average 46.4¢
France (65% nuclear + 35% renewables) 43.8¢
Norway (98% hydro). 24 ¢
Hungary (16% nuclear) it can fluctuates daily 19.7 – 26.2¢
Poland (66% coal fired) 18-20¢
170
“Electric Car-Nage” has something to say on that and also the government implemented rationing of petrol car sales in Britain. This bloke is entertaining. 10 minutes duration.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sh0hN7mIOxo
170
Aren’t they ratioing the number of ICE sales to the EV sales and as EV sales sink, the ICE sales are reducing too. ?
110
That’s it in a nutshell.
The consumers are not buying EVs in the quantity that the government has mandated.
They consumers don’t want them.
The car manufacturers have to pay a penalty fee of 15,000 pounds for every ICE car that is sold over their allotted quota so they are restricting the availablity of ICE cars. This means if you buy a new ICE car now you probably won’t get it before next year at the earliest.Even if the manufacturer has the car in stock he won’t give it to you if it exceeeds his allotted sales of ICE quota.
The end result – a depressed new car sales market and an increased demand for used ICE vehicles at higher prices.
Either way the consumer loses.
Another great government policy in action!
220
I have three diesel vehicles – one landcruiser and two Subaru’s (before they stopped using diesel engines). I’m not getting rid of them any time soon.
190
Germany: A Deepening Crisis
Germany’s anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD) is celebrating a “historic success”, with a big victory for the far-right party in the eastern state of Thuringia.
The AfD won almost a third of the vote, nine points ahead of the conservative CDU, and far in front of Germany’s three governing parties.
The result gives the far right its first win in a state parliament election since World War Two, although it has little hope of forming a government in Thuringia because other parties are unlikely to work with it.
The AfD came a close second in Sunday’s other big state election, in the more populous neighbouring state of Saxony…
36% of under-30s in Thuringia voted for the AfD, far more than any other party.
The AfD opposes Germany’s support for Ukraine, which has helped it politically.
Another major contributing factor to the AfD’s rise has been the perception by many in the east that they have been “left behind” since reunification, a perception inevitably sharpened by Germany’s growing economic woes.
It is unlikely to have been a coincidence that Volkswagen waited until after the vote before announcing that it was considering closing factories in Germany for the first time in its history.
The Financial Times:
Lower than expected demand for electric vehicles in Europe has hit the region’s carmakers, including VW, which is also struggling with a shrinking market share in China, its most profitable market…
Analysts have long urged Volkswagen to carry out the job cuts to make the cost savings work at a time when heavy investments are needed to make the transition to EVs.
Ah yes, the green new dole.
VW has an EV-manufacturing plant in Zwickau, Saxony. The company has already postponed plans to build its new Trinity line there.
VW is also having to contend with rising competition from what its CEO coyly referred to “new entrants” (the Chinese) coming into the market.
Germany’s high energy costs will not have helped either (the CEO talked about the way “Germany as a business location is falling further behind in terms of competitiveness”).
Those costs are, as I mentioned the other day, due to the cutting off of “cheap” Russian gas, Merkel’s decision to reintroduce Germany’s abandonment of nuclear power, and the country’s ill-considered rush into renewables, above all into wind. Opposition to wind turbines has been a vote-winner for the AfD.
60
A big plus for the AfD is the rejection of renewables and climate madness, they are totally in favour of coal and nuclear power.
81
Toyota’s Hybrid Strategy vs Electric Vehicles
Toyota’s decision to prioritize hybrid vehicles over battery-electric vehicles (BEVs) is supported by several factors.
Firstly, hybrids have been shown to be more efficient and effective in reducing CO2 emissions in the near term.
According to the data, hybrids have taken a long time to capture market share, accounting for only 5.5% of the light vehicle market in 2021. This slow adoption can be attributed to their complexity and higher production costs compared to traditional internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles.
Hybrid’s Edge in the Market
Toyota’s success with hybrids is evident, with a third of their global sales comprising hybrid vehicles. The Prius Prime SE, a plug-in hybrid, has been ranked as the least-polluting vehicle on American roads, even surpassing some EVs. This achievement is a testament to Toyota’s expertise in hybrid technology and their ability to balance emissions reduction with customer preferences.
Customer Choice and Affordability
Toyota’s focus on hybrids also acknowledges the reality of customer choice and affordability. Many consumers cannot yet afford the higher upfront costs of BEVs, and hybrids offer a more accessible option for those seeking reduced emissions.
Government Lobbying and Regulatory Environment
Toyota’s lobbying efforts have also played a role in their decision. The company has been advocating for governments to maintain a balanced approach to emissions reduction, recognizing that BEVs may not be the most effective solution in all regions.
For instance, in West Virginia, where 90% of power is generated from coal, an EV is only marginally cleaner than a hybrid or plug-in vehicle.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Toyota’s decision to prioritize hybrid vehicles over BEVs is a strategic move that acknowledges the complexities of emissions reduction, customer preferences, and regulatory environments.
By focusing on hybrids, Toyota can continue to reduce emissions while providing customers with a more affordable and accessible option.
This approach also allows the company to maintain its market leadership and expertise in hybrid technology, while also preparing for a future where BEVs will play a larger role.
Follow up
. What are the key technological advancements in hybrid vehicles that distinguish them from battery-electric vehicles?
. How do government incentives and regulations impact the market demand for hybrid vehicles compared to battery-electric vehicles?
. What are the implications of Toyota’s hybrid-focused strategy on their research and development investments in battery-electric vehicles?
🌐
thedrive.com
Toyota Is Right: We Need More Hybrid Cars and Fewer EVs. Here’s Why
🌐
cnn.com
Toyota hits the gas on hybrids as EV sales cool. But what does that mean for the planet? | CNN
50
Toyota’s Strategy: Hybrid Over Electric?
Based on the provided information, Toyota’s decision to focus on hybrid vehicles instead of fully electric vehicles (EVs) seems to be a well-thought-out strategy.
Here are some key points that support this conclusion:
. Cost-effectiveness: Hybrids offer a more affordable option for customers, with the added technology typically costing less than $2,000 per vehicle. This makes them more competitive in the market.
. Performance: Modern hybrids often provide more power than their gasoline-only counterparts, eliminating a major consumer concern.
. Market demand: According to Cox Automotive, demand for EVs is expected to remain modest in the near future. Toyota’s hybrid sales have seen a significant 66% increase in the first half of 2024, indicating strong customer interest in hybrid technology.
. Multi-pathway strategy: Toyota’s Chairman Akio Toyoda has emphasized the company’s commitment to a “multi-pathway” approach, which includes hybrids, EVs, hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles, and other technologies. By focusing on hybrids, Toyota can maintain a broad product lineup and cater to a wider range of customer preferences.
. Patent infringement concerns: The lawsuit filed by Antonov Automotive Technology BV Plc against Toyota over alleged patent infringement related to hybrid drivetrain components highlights the complexity and potential risks involved in developing EV technology.
By sticking to hybrids, Toyota may be avoiding potential legal and financial liabilities.
In conclusion, Toyota’s decision to prioritize hybrid vehicles over EVs appears to be a prudent choice, driven by a combination of factors including cost-effectiveness, performance, market demand, and a multi-pathway strategy.
Follow up
. How do hybrid vehicles’ lower upfront costs impact Toyota’s sales and revenue compared to fully electric vehicles?
. What technological advancements in hybrid systems have enabled Toyota to achieve improved fuel efficiency and performance?
. How does Toyota’s hybrid strategy align with global emissions regulations and targets, such as the European Union’s CO2 standards?
🌐
carbuzz.com
Toyota’s Hybrid Assault About To Go Into Overdrive
🌐
reuters.com
Toyota bets big on hybrid-only models as EV demand slows | Reuters
🌐
en.wikipedia.org
Hybrid Synergy Drive – Wikipedia
30
Toyota bets big on hybrid-only models as EV demand slows
By Norihiko Shirouzu
AUSTIN, Texas, Aug 15 (Reuters) – Toyota may be one of the slowest legacy automakers to develop electric vehicles but it could be the first to jettison cars powered only by gasoline.
Almost three decades after launching the Prius, its pioneering gasoline-electric hybrid, Toyota is moving to convert most, and eventually maybe all, of its Toyota and Lexus line-up to hybrid-only models, two Toyota executives told Reuters.
Toyota’s stubborn focus on hybrids over EVs is part of a broader challenge by the world’s biggest automaker to the prevailing industry and regulatory orthodoxy that all cars will be electric in the near future.
Toyota Chairman Akio Toyoda said in January that he believed the global share of EVs would top out at just 30%.
The Japanese automaker instead touts a “multi-pathway” strategy that includes EVs along with hybrids, hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles, green fuels and, potentially, other technologies yet to emerge.
The automaker’s hybrid strategy aims to solidify its already dominant position in a part of the market that has found a new lease on life as demand for EVs slows, partly due to their high prices and charging hassles.
Toyota’s hybrids don’t need charging and switch seamlessly between gasoline and electric power, or use both at once, depending on driving conditions. Its plug-in hybrids can be charged and typically travel about 40 miles (64 km) on battery power, like an EV, before their gasoline engines are required.
Toyota hasn’t set a deadline for producing an all-hybrid lineup, and that certain models, such as pickups and economy cars, may take longer because of consumer price sensitivity on entry-level versions.
Toyota’s hybrid boom owes to decades of investments in bringing down the cost and boosting the efficiency and performance of its gasoline-electric powertrains.
For most Toyota models, the decision to go hybrid-only is becoming a no-brainer for the automaker and its customers because the technology for a traditional hybrid now typically adds less than $2,000 to a car’s retail price.
In addition, while early hybrids were slow, today’s models often offer more power than their gasoline-only variants.
Those advances eliminate the two biggest consumer concerns that for years made hybrids largely an automotive niche, accounting for less than 3% of all U.S. sales as recently as 2019. Now they’re at 11.3% and rising fast, according to auto services specialist Cox Automotive.
Toyota has seen far more dramatic growth because of its dominance of the hybrid sector, bringing the automaker to the tipping point that has pushed executives to now consider an all-hybrid lineup. Hybrids accounted for just 9% of Toyota sales in 2018 but 37% as of June.
The hybrid sales surge has been a key factor driving its profit and stock price to all-time highs this year.
Christ said Toyota expects hybrid sales to keep accelerating. “Next year,” he said, “we definitely will be well over 50% of our total volume.”
20
Toyota is betting the house on cars people really want to buy
The Japanese brand is doubling down on cars that consumers yearn for.
James Ochoa Aug 15, 2024
Dollars and sense
Additionally, hybrids require less research and development commitment and raw materials than EVs; costs that are transferred to the consumer.
According to an internal Toyota document shared to its U.S. dealer network that was viewed by Jalopnik, Toyota corporate body explained that its hesitation toward EVs is based on the lack of EV charging infrastructure, affordability and most importantly, a finite amount of critical resources like lithium, cobalt, nickel and graphite.
The bigwigs explained something they called the 1:6:90 rule, where considering the amount of raw materials needed for the battery in one battery-electric vehicle designed for Americans’ range anxiety, six plug-in hybrid batteries could be made or 90 batteries for hybrid-electric vehicles like the Prius or Camry.
“For the same limited resources, instead of replacing one internal-combustion engine, you can replace 90,” the Toyota executives said.
“The overall carbon reduction of these 90 vehicles over their lifetimes is 37 times as much as a single battery-electic vehicle.”
30
November 5th is a referendum on America’s energy independence
Towards the end of the 19th century, Karl Benz invented a machine that changed the world.
It was crude, but like the Wright brothers’ first plane, it transported humans without needing horses and hay. This first three-wheel car used a fuel called gasoline. Others, like Henry Ford, heard about this invention and came up with their own versions of automobiles.
Benz and Ford did not know it at the time, but they also planted the seeds of the suburbs, highways, drive-in movie theaters, motels, fast-food restaurants, road trips, car dealerships, car repair shops, and car junk yards. Barack Obama dreams of transforming America, but Benz and Ford transformed the world with their gas-powered machines.
Gang Green, aka the environmental movement, wants to limit our mobility through legislative mandates. A vote for Donald Trump in November assures our mobility for another four years.
A vote for Kamala Harris, a Gang Green advocate, is a vote to restrict our mobility.
As I said before, Benz and Ford changed the whole world.
Even the scientists shivering in Antarctica use diesel or gas vehicles to move around, while all the other continents hum with the traffic of fossil fuel vehicles.
Like religious zealots, members of Gang Green preach a different gospel of mobility. They judge us as polluters if we drive our fossil fuel vehicles.
They say we should buy electric-powered cars that are kinder to the environment.
They don’t tell us that the batteries running these cars cost between $6,000 and $20,000.
They don’t tell us that these batteries need fossil fuel plants for recharging. They also don’t tell us that they are three times heavier than fossil fuel cars and need tire replacement much more frequently.
70
Thanks again to Jo Nova for trying to educate us, but I’m afraid few people today understand that toxic W & S are unreliable disasters and can only further bankrupt any country that doesn’t wake up.
The data is very easy to understand and yet the stupid Labor, Greens and Teals will try their very best to follow Germany’s diastrous journey down the drain.
I think that at least 40% of the Aussie voters don’t understand the data at all and it is very difficult to educate them because so much of the MSM and elites will not allow it.
300
Hi Neville, Your 40% estimate may be far too low given the MSM and political distortions and omissions of truth. Is it greed or ignorance or something else that is driving the decisions of those in power everywhere? It is hard to fathom the sudden proliferation of absurdity around the world.
180
I think the figure would be over 50% of Aussie voters.
The public are constantly fed the lie that high electricity prices are due to “unreliable” and old fossil fueled plants. It’s also surprising the number of people that believe claims such as “Canberra is powered by 100% renewable energy”.
In a world where a man can put on a dress and claim… “I am woman, hear me roar” – nothing should surprise me however.
230
As George Carlin says “The average voter is stupid. That makes at least half of them even more stupid.”
90
Jo has and continues to educate us! It’s the non us that will cause the heartache
130
Should we call Jo ‘Miss Information’? 🙂
20
Given the Non-Stop Brainwashing of my Grandkids in Private Schools on Climate Change & Global warming, and my Youngest Daughter thinking TEALS & Greens are Great – I would put it at well above 50% In Australia
As per Tuesday Thread – RedBridge Group poll shows ‘big problem’ for Labor as progressive women abandon Labor over Gaza and climate issues
A new poll shows Australia heading towards minority government, with the Albanese government’s positions on visas for Gazan refugees and climate change creating a “very big problem for Labor”.
Mr Welsh said the views of progressive women, particularly those under the age of 34, were primarily driven by two issues; climate change and visas for Gazan refugees, with the cost of living and housing “sort of there as background radiation”.
From the Comments
– Wait till these young females grow up and have to face the real world.
– They would be the ones who have recently left schools or uni and have not worked out that what they experienced was not education but indoctrination.
Once they have a bit of life experience the sensible ones will work this out.
– Young people might wanna think twice before voting for the Greens because one of the Greens main policies is an inheritance tax which means when your parents pass away half their inheritance goes the the Govt instead of you.
And the final comment is what I will be saying to my Youngest Daughter & Son-in-law before next State & Federal Election – “If you want to inherit this House – Don’t Vote Labor/TEAL/Greens – Vote Liberal”
150
Old Ozzie, i wish it were true that people may “grow up” and “work it out ” after some life experience, yet there are far too many women (and males) of middle and senior age that have bought in to the lies of the “Climate catastrophe” and other Marxist ideology that continue to be the vocal useful idiots for Government, academia and other nefarious groups pushing these agendas.
As you say the propaganda fed to the masses from school age and up is relentless and saturating, unfortunately we are in a group bubble on this blog and other such sites but the information isn’t getting out to the masses.
70
That is where taking the slightest notice of the watermelons will get you, you only had to listen to that wally Adam Bandt raving about rental properties, if what he proposed was actually done, it would actually make the problem worse, not better, they have no idea about anything.
190
Surely the Russians would benefit from less nuclear power in Europe, don’t know why the Germans were targeted , possibly because they have an imbedded greens contingent.
110
The Germans panicked after Fukushima
140
No. Angela Merkel saw another and better opportunity to destroy Germany. Merkel was an East German communist before reunification so her allegiance has always been to the old USSR. She also made Germans unsafe by allowing in hundreds of thousands of aliens from mainly Muslim countries. Merkel did everything she could to weaken Germany economically and culturally.
110
Merkel may have instigated it, but she was democratically elected, presumeably on her “Green” policies.
So Germany got what they wanted !
Most blame should go to the Media whohave huge power to colour the message and influence voters.
Until the media start to broadcast a more balanced and truthful messsage, the result will be the same.
Voters must check what/who exactly they are empowering before blindly following the popular message.
00
Australian version of this story. “ If Australia had upgraded or built new coal plants in 2002, the country could have saved $X b. “ Not sure how much X would be, but possibly on a population basis it would be at least $100b. Also, who gives a continental about emissions anyway.
230
BTW Germany is a very small country of about 350 thousand sq klms and NSW is about 801 thousand sq klms.
Just another reason why Australia should think carefully before destroying up to 28,000 klms of our wild areas to change to toxic W & S energy.
160
Germany is a nation of hot heads, or more accurately, has a lot of hot heads who get active within it. Communism, Fascism, all come from German hot heads. The great walk through the institutions, by Rudi whatever his name is, German. Greenism…
I suggest the place should have remained Bavaria, Prussia etc. Ever since the state evolved it started making problems – including the BMW engine.
122
It is amazing that no one, not a single person, warned about this fiasco in prior years. I’m shocked, shocked, I tell you!
{I shall add a sarc tag to that. 😇}
120
If you were to state the truth regarding politics or any other progressive policy in Germany there would be a visit from the authorities , a date in court and fines and imprisonment . Same in the UK . Dissent is verboten . You will comply . Didn’t end well last time…..
140
Can someone please send this link to our esteemed energy minister.Sir Brownout Of Bowen.Perhaps it’s not too late to turn this ship of fools around.
100
Waste of time. Bowen is a believer and his faith will never be shaken. Like the Black Knight any setback to his Green agenda is merely a flesh wound.
80
The German Federal Guv’ment will soon find out how good that their “Poly Sillies” have been once the Federal Election is held next year.
The current German Federal Guv’ment will be booted out.
And so will be Albo Sleezy in Australia in 2025. Good riddance to Bad Rubbish.
100
Australia’s Inflation is not currently being caused by International events.
It is Home Grown and it has been caused by the Feral Guv’ment and the States/Territories and their spending.. Just look at all of the Feral/State Guv’ment charges/fees/surcharges and their increases.
Dim Chalmers has it all wrong as he has no idea how to manage a Household Budget which always needs to balance. A Feral Guv’ment can just borrow and make the Feral Budget balance.
Happy daze.
90
The Greens are a misnomer they are Reds and if Germany fails to realise they have been duped into financial surrender by a very clever politician and strategist and it wasn’t Biden or his substitute 2B, Harris. Americans too are being led by the snout to it’s end game. DJT is their would be Saviour globalists are working overtime to subvert him!
110
Just to lists some of the facts again.
There is no climate crisis, just look up the available data.
If Aussies agreed to live in caves from today the difference to CC would be SFA in ten years or by 2050 or by 2100.
If the wealthy OECD countries also retired to live in caves the difference would also be SFA.
And the Royal Society and even the “Conversation” parrots etc tell us that they believe that the atmospheric co2 levels wouldn’t change for thousands of years, even if all Human co2 emissions stopped today.
Again why would anyone want to follow these lefty loonies when they truly believe it’s all BS and nonsense?
140
BTW here Jo Nova tries to explain the co2 lag after temperature changes and if you find Jo’s Vostok graph from 150 K to 100 K you’ll notice that co2 levels ( orange graph) remained the same from about 127 K to 115 K. The co2 levls were about the same (260 ppm) for about 12 K years, although the Eemian temps were dropping all the time and eventually into the full glaciation before our Holocene.
https://joannenova.com.au/global-warming-2/ice-core-graph/
90
It was never about the CO2, it was all about the renewables grift.
140
Yes, we still use fossil fuel for 90% of our power. If we had switched to HELE generators we could have perhaps a 50% reduction for a fraction of the cost and no new transmission lines or wind towers or solar farms. It’s nothing to do with renewables. It’s all about the cash. And driving Australia back into the stone age.
170
I’m inclined to think that watermelon [bright red interior, greenie skin] are about destroying our civilisation.
The money is a [nice] side hustle.
Auto
20
The test is what is the situation in China? I understand they have at least 50 nuclear power stations and 1,400 coal power stations, and consumers pay 8 cents per kWh.
80
‘The test is what is the situation in China?’
They are leading the charge on nuclear fusion power.
23
Think the title is wrong.
To get the 73% reduction they had to invest the money they spent on wind and solar into nuclear plants, not just keep the old plants.
60
The title says “If Germany just kept nuclear power,…”. If read as ‘kept going with …’ then there’s no suggestion that they wouldn’t keep investing in it. Even as is, it doesn’t suggest that they would close the waller – there surely would be an expectation of ongoing costs.
10
Is going “green” with wind, solar, EVs etc., really about climate change or is it about finding an endless money pit to support growth of fiat economies? As the movement continues, it’s obvious the technology is not fit for purpose and the information about it is skewed in favour of the transition. Governments are favouring some businesses over others, restricting access to natural resources that should be making Australian’s wealthy and denying access to cheap energy, which would naturally drive productivity yet endless government spending on the green path is driving us to poverty.
70
It is worth distinguishing between Greens and their leaders and funders. Most Greens genuinely believe in imminent climate catastrophe.
Angela Merkel is most responsible for this fiasco. She took the decision to close Germany’s nuclear raectors after the Fukushima ‘disaster’ in which nobody died, in addition to decarbonising. Yet she has a doctorate in physical chemistry – a proper science – which would have offered her deeper insight into the science and the consequences than any committee of economists.
The German economy underpins the Euro currency. If Germany ceases to be able to subsidise the Mediterranean countries then this hubristic experiment of monetary union without fiscal union is toast, with enormous consequences. Those consequences are all bad in the short term (although not in the long!) So expect a battle soon between bankers and greens.
For that and for the longterm consequences of her 2015 refugee policy (“Wir schaffen das”), Merkel might go down in history as Germany’s worst ever Reichskanzler. Given who is is up against for that title, that would be some achievement.
60
Maybe I’m becoming cynical with age, but with all green dreams, the greater the cost and the greater the failure, the more the left will embrace the idea.
60
Germany has gone down this crazy transition but at least they have access to neighbours such as France when theyre in a wind drought. Why would an island such as Australia embark on such a crazy transition . There are no neighbours to go to when there are blackouts.
If Libs dont get in next election we’re totally stuffed.
40
What you want is a single-issue energy party – with broadly centrist policies on everything else – that will cause the major parties to change energy policy for fear of leaching votes.
30
VW has 39 plants and 90,000 employees in China and 50 million customers – all made with cheap electricity produced from coal.
20
[…] From JoNova […]
00
[…] Link: https://joannenova.com.au/2024/09/renewable-fiasco-if-germany-just-kept-nuclear-power-it-could-have-… […]
00