Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Strong disagree. That would imply that Germany should be criticized more than the US, but this cannot be. The US did not close its nuclear plants, but is still at 60% fossil fuels.

I don't think this is a coincidence because when Diablo Canyon was extended, the first thing that happened is that they asked for a billion dollars so they are able to even run. Nuclear is an expensive distraction and a hog of resources (time and money)




Is it that more expensive if you take into account all the externalities from burning coal? Increased cancer risk due to high radiation, other pollution etc. CO2 is just the cherry on top..

> That would imply that Germany should be criticized more than the US, but this cannot be.

This is tangential and there is also no need to resort to whataboutism for no reason.


There's no whataboutism, I wasn't saying Germany might be bad, but look at someone else. I'm asking a question about the logical conclusion of what you're saying: the most important thing is to keep nuclear plants alive before coal is removed. Sure, but it can't be right. Many countries are doing that, e.g. the US, and failing to decarbonize as quickly as Germany. So it's illogical and irrational.

Furthermore there can't be whataboutism because Germany is a leader in fossil fuel reduction this century. So there's nothing "bad" to accept and to do whataboutism about.


> Sure, but it can't be right.

I don’t follow. I mean you might be right. But using US as an example hardly make sense because they didn’t really try to ‘decarbonize’ that hard..

> because Germany is a leader in fossil fuel reduction this century

Germany was emitting ~500 grams per kWh back in 2000 and 385 in 2022. That not that spectator at all considering they weren’t at all trying to change this until the mid 2010s.

EU wide CO2 emissions have continuously decreased from around 520 grams to less than 250 in the same period.

So not only Germany wasn’t a leader throughout 90%+ of this century, they it was much worse than average…


It was emitting 500 grams per kWh 5 years ago when coal was a lot lower than 2000. Did not really check the numbers, but it can't be correct.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: