Is the shutdown of the nuclear reactors premature?

Dusseldorf On April 15, the time has come: the last three German nuclear power plants will be shut down. This should actually have happened at the end of last year, but the energy crisis triggered by the Russian war of aggression persuaded the traffic light coalition to let the remaining three reactors run beyond the winter.

While Economics Minister Robert Habeck believes that the energy supply in Germany is secure and that the phase-out of nuclear power is even irreversible, many people in Germany are not so sure. In a survey by the opinion research institute Yougov on behalf of the German Press Agency, 65 percent of those questioned were in favor of keeping the nuclear power plants running.

The Handelsblatt readership is also not unanimous as to whether the exit next Saturday is the right step.

“I don’t think the energy supply in Germany is secure! The three nuclear power plants should continue to run without time limits,” writes one reader. Germany should not part with nuclear energy, but rather invest in new nuclear technology instead.

On the other hand, another reader writes: “The point in time is not premature, because a nuclear meltdown does not ask about the time.” Germany should rather work on being one of the “ideas, developers and producers” of renewable forms of energy and to create many new jobs.

We have put together a selection for you from the letters from the Handelsblatt readers.

German energy policy is incomprehensible

“I don’t think the energy supply in Germany is secure! The three nuclear power plants should continue to run without time limits. The ones already in decommissioning should be reactivated. The latest technology for nuclear power generation should also be researched and installed in Germany. The current German energy policy is incomprehensible and, in my opinion, does not do justice to an industrial location.”
Ulrich Kramer

Ring in the energy transition

“In my opinion, Germany’s nuclear phase-out is an essential step towards promoting renewable energies while reducing dependence on fossil fuels.

Whether the energy supply without nuclear power is sufficient and whether climate-neutral energy supply is realistic by 2025 is influenced by an interplay of complex factors from the economy, politics and society, which must be considered in the overall context. If the political framework conditions are implemented by creating incentives for the expansion of renewable energies, there is a real chance of successfully launching the energy transition.

Personally, I am skeptical about this measure and hope that there will not be new entanglements at the political level that will lead our country to a new state of dependency. In addition, the individual responsibility that every citizen bears to reduce their personal energy requirements in everyday life in a meaningful and sustainable way should not be forgotten.”
Tom Sauer

Seriously negligent

“In my opinion, it is very negligent in the current (world/European) situation to do without nuclear power altogether.

The Greens’ policy, driven by moral exaltation and pure dogma, has long since bid farewell to reality. And the fact that we then ask our European neighbors to please use less energy can hardly be surpassed in terms of absurdity. As an American newspaper put it: ‘…the most stupid government of all time…’ Many thanks to our ‘Values ​​and Economic Destruction’ Minister Habeck.”
Frank Bauer

>> Also read our comment: Shut down nuclear power plants – but promote nuclear research

Digitization and reason are being passionately thwarted

“Other countries have already solved the problem with smart energy solutions and significantly lower electricity costs. We had to set up an intelligent energy network with Norway (Nordlink) in northern Germany, because this has unfortunately not been possible for ten years due to the lack of networks with southern Germany, and has even been massively blocked. Digitization and reason are being passionately thwarted by the gas/oil/coal and CSU lobby. Söder will not say anything new or intelligent on this topic in the election year. He doesn’t need it either, because there is an ecological electricity network with Austria.

That’s why we will never get a national consensus, but each federal state is trying to catch up with its EU neighbors. Electricity trading takes place in Paris anyway, and the big customers buy there. Unfortunately, as always, the consumer is in the wrong. Classic nuclear power is extremely expensive and dangerous. On the other hand, small, modern, decentralized systems could definitely make sense. Unfortunately, the networks, intelligence, competence and national digitization are also missing here. It’s nice that we at least have the best motorway network in the world.”
Bernd Otto

It doesn’t matter now

“Even as a young man (born in 1964) I was against nuclear power. But now it’s about four to six years of life extension of the nuclear power plants. If these nuclear power plants are still safe, then nothing speaks against them:

• After all, low-level and medium-level radioactive waste is still dangerous for 500 years – after 30,000 years it is only safe.
• After 1,000 years, the highly radioactive waste still radiates around five times more than the uranium ore, and it is only after 200,000 years that they are probably harmless.

Conclusion: Four to six years no longer matters.”
Torsten Kleinfeldt

Is the shutdown date premature?

“No, the point in time is not premature, because a nuclear meltdown doesn’t ask about the time. A shutdown can never be soon enough with such a dangerous bridging technology. We should move away from the belief that we (the so-called First World) can have energy at all times.

In addition, a specialization in renewable technologies can create as many jobs as it destroys elsewhere. Gasoline and diesel engines are being replaced by electric motors, lignite, hard coal and nuclear power are being replaced by renewable energies such as water, wind, solar and eventually fusion energy, that’s the way things are going.

We should try to be among the idea generators, developers and producers and not later among the importers and beneficiaries of the technologies.”
Thorsten Beckers

If you would like to have your say on this topic in the Handelsblatt, write us a comment, either by e-mail [email protected] or on Instagram at @handelsblatt.

More: From blackouts to brain drains – there are many fears associated with the nuclear phase-out. How great the risks really are – and what needs to happen now so that the energy transition does not fail.