MedEwok wrote:
Russia produces nothing of value except energy and they cannot afford to shun their customers even if they frame them as their enemies.
Pretty much like Norway 
Come on comrade Putin 
The only difference, Russia has tons of nuclear weapons, we have tons of fish
What would the rest of Europe be without Norway and Russia ? Perhaps time to rethink and build some nuclear plants, like France?
The thing is, we all live in the same continent. Natural recourses should IMO belong to everyone. This works just fine, using the method of “business as usual”, but only if we get along. Putin has decided not to get along. He has defined that we are the enemy, and for no good reason at all. More precisely, Russia has never given any impression whatsoever at any time that Norway is an enemy. We are only in bed with the enemy, which apparently is worse than being an enemy. Countries are not people is my opinion on that. That, and the fact that democracy and freedom is good, despotism is not.
MedEwok wrote:
But it also shows that even in the midst of a war Putin frames as an indirect confrontation with “the West”, Russia cannot afford to stop gas exports to Europe
LNG is nothing like a pipeline. A pipeline is fragile, politically and physically. I bet Putin regrets deeply having pipelines of gas into “enemy territory” instead of focusing on LNG, which can be sold anywhere, at any time. Gas export to Europe means nothing. The only important thing is EUs demand/need for energy, which is what drives the prices of natural gas, and now also LNG. It doesn’t matter where it is sold. The market is international, and the demand drives the prices.
LeSving wrote:
Perhaps time to rethink and build some nuclear plants, like France?
Or reactivate the ones deactivated in the post-Fukushima scare which are still in one piece? Or not shut down the rest of them? In Germany, it really looks like ideology is overpowering their actual needs 10:1.
LeSving wrote:
Countries are not people is my opinion on that.
That is something that can’t be said enough.
LeSving wrote:
Russia has tons of nuclear weapons, we have tons of fish
You can eat fish…
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Or reactivate the ones deactivated in the post-Fukushima scare which are still in one piece? Or not shut down the rest of them? In Germany, it really looks like ideology is overpowering their actual needs 10:1.
The remaining three nuclear plants in Germany will be decommissioned on April 1. The chances of another expansion of their operational permits are very slim. The Green Party will not accept it, nuclear power plants are their archenemy and even their otherwise pragmatic economic minister has shown no indication of changing course. Nuclear power will be history in Germany soon.
All the shenanigans around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant have put me off them considerably, though I suppose you could argue that Russia hasn’t dared send drones to the other nuclear power plants (as far as I can determine) so perhaps without them, Ukraine would be in an even worse position.
Germany used to produce around 150 TWh of electricity from nuclear in each year from 1985 to 2006. The last reactors were completed in 1988/1989 (by sheer coincidence around the same time the main East German plant was shut down). These are the three reactors still operating.
These are producing 4 MW between them, giving roughly 30 TWh per year capacity, so Germany has already turned off 120 TWh / 80% of its nuclear capacity.
This is more than they produced from lignite in 2021 (110 TWh). Lignite is the absolute worst fuel measured in CO2 per kWh, almost 20% more than coal and twice as much as natural gas). and infinite-times more than nuclear.
If it comes to “protecing the environment”, the credentials of the “Green” party in Germany leave something to be desired.
kwlf wrote:
All the shenanigans around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant have put me off them considerably,
It is worth remembering how extraordinary the events in Ukraine are. In the last 50 years, you can cound military invasions with the view to annex significant parts of a neighbour on one hand.
And the last time we had that many war casualties in the world was in 1988.
Not since the Vietnam War in the 70s did so many people die in a single year in war between countries.
All the shenanigans around the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant have put me off them considerably, though I suppose you could argue that Russia hasn’t dared send drones to the other nuclear power plants (as far as I can determine) so perhaps without them, Ukraine would be in an even worse position.
Yes I think not blowing up reactors is intentional, and a part of Russia’s “management of international opinion” which they aren’t very good at to start with.
If it comes to “protecing the environment”, the credentials of the “Green” party in Germany leave something to be desired.
As an admin I am very familiar with the “concept” that with a number of countries in Europe, only those from a given country are allowed to criticise that country, while criticism from anyone else (especially if resident in the country which “left the club”) tends to result in a mass forum exodus
But obviously Germany will pay a high price for this ideology, and it isn’t going to get better in the future because even a comprehensive military defeat of Russia (which is necessary for this war to end with any kind of meaningful diplomatic settlement) will still leave Russia where it was pre-invasion (same country, same leadership, same BS-buying population, same crude attitudes to neighbours, same foreign policy, same alliances, and temporarily minus half their armour and 90% of their missiles). I am amazed anybody there votes for this policy, especially as Germany has a good % of educated people.
Norway is doing well out of it but Norway is an “uncontroversial” country so (quite correctly) nobody will criticise it. The US, however, is getting well slagged off for doing the same thing but on a larger scale (“selling gas to Europe while arming Ukraine” is the standard champagne socialist slogan)
Not since the Vietnam War in the 70s did so many people die in a single year in war between countries.
The history of warfare tends to mirror the history of technology.
There are many lessons from this which I am sure are not lost on those in the business e.g. if Ukraine had loads of long range guided ammo (a lot more Himars especially the 500km range ones, Excalibur shells, etc) they could smash Russian progress. The US found it cost effective to use a guided bomb per tank but Ukraine does not have that luxury. Even every artillery shot has to have a specific target.
Interesting graph. I wonder if it counts the huge number from the Iran-Iraq war?
Peter wrote:
I am amazed anybody there votes for this policy, especially as Germany has a good % of educated people.
Yes but in this case emotion trumps education. You will find that a sizeable population of well-off Germans with higher formal education have surprisingly irrational views on some issues. E.g. most “fans” of homeopathy or alternative education (Waldorf, Steiner etc.) are part of that segment.
Fear of nuclear power has a long history in Germany. It was a major rallying cause for the foundation of the Green Party in W. Germany, which remains one of the most successful Green parties on the planet, having served in national government in a coalition from 1998 to 2005 and and again since 2021, and having had a major influence on public opinion and thus the politics of the remaining parties in-between.
In fact it was Angela Merkel, a conservative physicist with a PhD, who ultimately pulled the trigger on nuclear after the 2011 Fukushima disaster, despite there being absolutely zero chance of similar events happening in Germany.
I don’t think it is a problem to criticise German politics on this board. The outside view can help to set things into perspective and the domestic debate often circles around unrealistic assumptions in the first place.
