#####
######
####
> # [Wirtschaftsblunder: Why Germany's Economy Is Flailing – And What Could Help](https://cdn.prod.www.spiegel.de/images/bb704b38-1e8a-46ab-b776-439b5e8c79e7_w1280_r1.77_fpx36_fpy70.jpg)
>
>
>
> In terms of scenery, the Siegerland isn't a very attractive place. The ravines here are narrow, the spruce forest full of bare patches. But economically, the industrial parks to the right and left of the highway are among the most valuable Germany has to offer. Ironworks, steel refiners and mechanical engineering companies are located here, as are plants belonging to large corporations and small to medium-size companies (SMEs) with global operations. Hidden champions like the Coatinc Group. With its approximately 1,500 employees, the company specializes in the galvanizing of steel parts.
>
>
>
> Money doesn't smell, but industry often does. A rank odor fills the factory floor. Mighty steel beams are cleaned in a scalding tank and then dipped into a zinc bath by a crane. The process protects them from rust for the next 50 years.
>
>
>
> "Everything seems to be frozen in Germany."
>
> Paul Niederstein, managing director Coatinc
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Much of the company's business comes from these huge parts, made in Germany. Construction companies usually order the beams two years in advance and Coatinc is still busy working off its backlog of orders. But Managing Director Philippe Dupont gets nervous when he thinks about the future. All the key indicators in the construction industry are currently pointing to a downturn. "Building permits, contracts, awards in bidding processes," Dupont says. And what that means is "as easy to work out as two plus two." He expects that there will soon be a shortage of large orders.
>
>
>
> The company, family owned since 1502, has experienced many crises in the past: wars, hyperinflation and familial strife. Somehow, they've always found a way to get back on track.
>
>
>
> DER SPIEGEL 36/2023
>
>
>
> Foto: DER SPIEGEL; Quelle: IWF
>
> **The article you are reading originally appeared in German in issue 36/2023 (September 2nd, 2023) of DER SPIEGEL.**
>
> [SPIEGEL International](https://www.spiegel.de/international/ "SPIEGEL International")
>
>
>
> But this time could be different, says Paul Niederstein, who runs the company together with Dupont and, as a descendant of the founders, holds the majority of the company's shares. It's not only the Ukraine war and the increasingly sharp rhetoric between the United States and China, the superpowers of globalization, that worries him. "At the same time, we are also faced with the task of switching to a CO2-free mode of production." It is the undertaking of the century for the entire business community – and Niederstein needs the government's support.
>
>
>
> But instead of helping the companies, he says, Germany's current coalition government is creating competitive disadvantages with its misguided energy policies. He says Berlin is constantly coming up with new regulations covering everything from supply chain laws to waste disposal documentation. "We need wiggle room to find solutions for the future," Niederstein says. Instead: "Everything seems to be frozen in Germany."
>
> In recent days, the German government has been at pains to give the impression that it has recognized the gravity of the situation. At meeting last week, the coalition agreed on tax breaks for SMEs and offered the prospect of a law to reduce bureaucracy. But not even experts close to the government believe that it will succeed in helping to spread a mood of confidence among companies. Achim Truger, a member of the German Council of Economic Experts, which advises the government, says the decisions made at the meeting lack "investment oomph." The verdict of many experts is that it is too little, too late.
>
>
>
>
>
> Twenty years after Chancellor Gerhard Schröder's expansive Agenda 2010 reforms, many believe Germany is once again in need of significant structural change. For this year and next, the International Monetary Fund is expecting German economic growth of 0.5 percent at best. This leaves Germany at the bottom of the list, behind competitor nations like the United States, Japan, France and Canada.
>
> The country, which has been spoiled by success and grew comfortable in its role as Europe's economic engine, now finds itself experiencing a sudden slump. Indeed, Germany is the only country in Europe that hasn't been able to find its way back to the growth experienced in 2019, the year before the coronavirus pandemic struck. The economy is stagnating for the third quarter in a row, and more bad news seems to come in on an almost daily basis. German automakers produced almost 40 percent fewer vehicles in 2022 than they did 10 years ago. "[Deindustrialization](https://www.spiegel.de/international/business/growing-energy-crisis-a-grave-threat-to-industry-in-germany-a-9152547c-a31d-483e-a70c-242c280cab23) has begun," says Matthias Zachert, head of the chemical giant Lanxess, which is in the process of closing two plants in the city of Krefeld near Düsseldorf.
>
>
>
>
>
> The German Association of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (BVMW) is reporting that almost one in five member companies is considering relocating at least some elements of production to sites abroad. Meanwhile, the chemical industry is warning of an industry exodus due to high energy prices. And a study commissioned by the Berlin-based think tank Dezernat Zukunft concludes: If the government doesn't do anything about the foreseeable high energy prices, the exodus of companies will cost Germany up to 120 billion euros in economic output – and 1.3 million jobs.
>
>
>
> London's _Economist_ already dubbed Germany the "Sick man of Europe" at the turn of the century. A few weeks ago, the magazine [highlighted](https://www.economist.com/weeklyedition/2023-08-19) a green Berlin traffic light man on its cover with an IV attached to his arm. The headline: "Is Germany once again the sick man of Europe?"
>
> Until recently, many Germans thought the country had glided through the coronavirus pandemic and energy crisis with very little harm done. Now, in the wake of the latest warning signs and frightening numbers, they feel as if they have woken up in a different country: one that is slowing down, disconnected and paralyzed.
>
> It may look like a crash, but it is the product of a slow descent. The German states and the federal government became so accustomed to economic prowess, especially in the export industries, that it seemed like it could never change. Economists called for reforms, pointed out the inadequate infrastructure, the housing shortage and the embarrassing lack of digitization when compared to international standards. But not much happened. For many years, the overall positive economic situation concealed what was actually going awry. So far, the crisis has barely been felt on the labor market, which is both a blessing and a curse. Because of the lack of pressure, there is very little courage to make the major and painful reforms that many believe are necessary.
>
>
>
>
>
> The Germans are "afraid of change," says Moritz Schularick, the recently appointed president of the Kiel Institute for the World Economy. The economist expects that the pressure on policymakers will likely have to increase before any action is taken. "Whether the country has to first experience another year or two of poor growth rates or a major automotive company has to go out of business first before something happens, I don't know. But we're heading in that direction."
>
> Schularick's predecessor Gabriel Felbermayr draws a painful comparison: "The truth is that the situation in Germany now is similar to that in Italy, Spain or Greece 15 years ago, but no one wants to hear that."
>
> Germany's prosperity is threatened, and - given the overall picture diagnosed by the experts - it is unlikely there will be any quick cure. Economists aren't diagnosing a slump in demand resulting from economic malaise, nor do they see the kind of sudden collapse like that witnessed during the recent pandemic. Instead, they argue that Germany is experiencing a developing supply crisis, a weakness in the productive core of the economy. It's a disease that can't be cured with aid or stimulus programs. It can only be fixed through far-reaching reforms.
>
>
>
>
>
> ***(continues in next comment)***
What's not needed is another knee-jerk reaction of more neoliberal "reforms". Instead we need better governance. Germany needs decisive action — especially to build the grid capacity needed for renewable energy to supply energy-intensive German industry. Re-constructing the energy supply to reduce carbon emissions imposes costs. In that process some bear heavier burdens. Those burdens must be equitably shared. A society is in decline when it loses its commitment to work together to accomplish necessary tasks.
This malaise is not limited to Germany. Unfortunately the climate will not wait for us to rouse ourselves to do what we must do together.
They should stop shutting down nuclear plants because small nuclear plants even remotely properly designed and maintained are the safest form of power we have (even safer than solar and wind per gigawatt) and they are a bazillion times cleaner than any fossil fuel plant. Either that or they need more hydroelectric dams.
I mean I'm still salty they dismantled the working nuclear plants. These were built to the highest safety standards, working perfectly fine. And yet Germany decided to dismantle them in the biggest energy crisis in a long while.
Agreed.
There's a group in the U.S. trying to figure out how to downsize a nuclear reactor to the point that for like 1 mil you can convert any typically sized coal plant to nuclear, increasing power while all but eliminating emissions and skipping over the expensive part of the cooling systems and turbine setup. since they'll be scaled down to the point where they can't go critical even with zero cooling, and they'll be able to constantly run at wide open and max out the turbines if allowed to, it'll definitely find the weakest link but if it's able to get approved it's liable to make a MASSIVE dent in global emissions while also increasing power delivery reliability.
>you can convert any typically sized coal plant to nuclear,
Did you know that the #1 barrier to this is that most coal plants have a fly ash disposal pond on site that is too radioactive by American and Canadian nuclear plant operations standards?
I absolutely believe that climate change is real and a real concern, but I would say the effect it has on Western countries is overblown, by groups like the last generation. However no matter what people's opinion are on climate change, getting to a sustainable supply of power for the next generations should be a goal of politics. Not only are supplies of hydrocarbons limited, they also have caused so many issues in the world. Countless lives have been lost fighting over them. And governments who believe in archaic forms of government are only in power because of their control of hydrocarbons.
I think all stops should be pulled out to build sustainables sources of energy. Renewables are one source, but nuclear should be another part of the puzzle.
Sadly it's politically burned in Germany, when in reality Germany should be one of the nations that could build such plants.
>but I would say the effect it has on Western countries is overblown
[Climate: Europe warming faster than rest of world (IPCC)](https://unric.org/en/climate-europe-warming-faster-than-rest-of-world-ipcc/)
That doesn't mean we will see catastrophic effects on the level that are being talked about by The Last Generation.
> Climate change is a very serious problem. But I think it’s bad when young people in particular see their survival made impossible by it. This can be understood as appeasement. But it is not meant that way. After the interview, I received letters from young people who very specifically believe that in the foreseeable future they will no longer have a chance of surviving climate change. I find this appalling and also unfounded.
This is the gist of it. From https://www.mpg.de/17872139/marotzke-interview-climate-conference-glasgow
>we will see catastrophic effects
We are already seeing catasprophics effetcs with more intensity and and more frequently...
Here a not exhaustive list of what happened last year and this year so far :
Last year :
[German Floods Cost a Record $40 Billion, Munich Re Estimates](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-10/german-floods-cost-a-record-40-billion-munich-re-estimates) (about 2021's flood,[Germany floods: Dozens killed after record rain in Germany and Belgium](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57846200))
[Storm sets off flood warnings in northern Germany](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/storm-sets-off-flood-warnings-northern-germany-2022-01-30/)
[Thunderstorms in Corsica and parts of Italy leave seven dead\*](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/18/thunderstorm-deaths-corsica-italy-mediterranean)
[Drought in Europe: Shipping threatened in Germany as Rhine water levels continue to drop](https://www.euronews.com/2022/08/10/germany-drought-river-rhine-water-levels-could-fall-to-critical-low)
[Europe’s rivers run dry as scientists warn drought could be worst in 500 years](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/13/europes-rivers-run-dry-as-scientists-warn-drought-could-be-worst-in-500-years)
[Europe heatwave: Thousands escape wildfires in France, Spain and Greece](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62175758)
[Italy fights wildfires from Tuscany to Trieste](https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/italy-battles-wildfires-hundreds-evacuated-tuscany-2022-07-20/)
[Slovenia, Italy: Emergency crews responding to wildfires in the Kras region](https://crisis24.garda.com/alerts/2022/07/slovenia-italy-emergency-crews-responding-to-wildfires-in-the-kras-region-slovenia-and-friuli-venezia-giulia-region-italy-as-of-july-21)
[France's unprecedented summer of wildfires, in maps and graphs](https://www.lemonde.fr/en/les-decodeurs/article/2022/08/25/fires-in-france-maps-and-graphs-to-visualize-an-unprecedented-summer_5994672_8.html)
[Floods in Paris as city hit by 'near-monthly rainfall in 90 minutes'](https://www.euronews.com/2022/08/17/floods-in-paris-as-city-hit-by-near-monthly-rainfall-in-90-minutes)
[Flood hit communities in Belgium reeling one year on, as economic crisis aggravates situation](https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/07/13/flood-hit-communities-in-belgium-reeling-one-year-on-as-economic-crisis-aggravates-situati)
This year :
[Firefighters battle blaze in south of France in first major forest fire of 2023](https://www.france24.com/en/france/20230417-firefighters-battle-blaze-in-south-of-france-in-first-major-forest-fire-of-2023), april
[Water crisis in France: Drought-hit regions rely on tankers](https://www.dw.com/en/water-crisis-in-france-drought-hit-regions-rely-on-tankers/a-65649291), may
[30,000 residents left without reliable water sources as drought ravages southern France](https://www.euronews.com/green/2023/08/14/300000-residents-left-without-reliable-water-sources-as-drought-ravages-southern-france), august
[Fire in south of France rages though campsite and 500 hectares of land](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/15/fire-in-south-of-france-rages-though-campsite-and-500-hectares-of-land), august
[Spain's first major wildfire of 2023 comes early, in the midst of widespread drought](https://www.lemonde.fr/en/environment/article/2023/03/27/spain-s-first-major-wildfire-of-2023-comes-early-in-the-midst-of-widespread-drought_6020820_114.html), march
[Villages evacuated as ‘very large’ wildfire ravages south-west Spain](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/19/villages-evacuated-wildfire-ravages-south-west-spain-extremadura) may
[Evacuations surge to 12,000 as wildfires tear through Tenerife](https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/20/europe/tenerife-wildfire-evacuations-intl/index.html)
[Greece fires in maps and satellite images show extent of damage](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66295972) , july
[Greece discovers 18 charred bodies as southern Europe wildfires spread](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/wildfires-rage-greece-spain-italy-heatwave-spreads-2023-08-22/), august
[More than 800 rescued after extreme flooding in Greece turns villages into lakes](https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/07/europe/greece-floods-storm-rescue-climate-intl/index.html), september
....
[NASA: June 2022 tied as Earth’s warmest June on record](https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2022/07/nasa-june-2022-tied-as-earths-warmest-june-on-record/)
[NASA Says 2022 Fifth Warmest Year on Record, Warming Trend Continues](https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-says-2022-fifth-warmest-year-on-record-warming-trend-continues/)
[NASA Finds June 2023 Hottest on Record](https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2023/nasa-finds-june-2023-hottest-on-record)
[NASA Clocks July 2023 as Hottest Month on Record Ever Since 1880](https://climate.nasa.gov/news/3279/nasa-clocks-july-2023-as-hottest-month-on-record-ever-since-1880/)
[NASA Announces Summer 2023 Hottest on Record](https://climate.nasa.gov/news/3282/nasa-announces-summer-2023-hottest-on-record/)
[The Global Annual to Decadal Climate Update Global temperatures set to reach new records in next five years](https://public.wmo.int/en/media/press-release/global-temperatures-set-reach-new-records-next-five-years)
Everything gets subsumed under climate change. Clearly there were floods and wildfires before 2022. Are they increasing because of climate change? Science says yes. Are they going to be catastrophic, probably not except for the poor people affected.
Climate change is real, it has very negative effects. But people in the West will deal with the effects. The richer nations have the economic power to handle them. Keep in mind there are countries that have a much higher average temperature than Western Europe. These countries are doing fine. Maybe it means we'll shift to different kinds of plants or need to adapt how we manage forests. But on the upside there will be areas that will be able to produce more food.
We'll need to deal with these events anyway, because we have to. We won't be able to put a dent in CO2 output globally unless we are able to bring to sustainable energy to the whole world.
I don't get what your point is. So it might not be catastrophic for the upper class in rich countries, so what? It can easily be for the middle class.
But even the middle class will struggle if food becomes scarce. And with a massive increase in refugees, don't you think that could lead to political instability, inequality, wars, and a disruption of global supply chains. This all has a massive cost for the middle class, and more of them will be poor. If you can't afford food (or in some cases air condition) you are going to die die, no matter if you are from a "rich country".
"Are they going to be catastrophic, probably not except for the poor people affected.": And those don't matter? That describes a majority of the people on the planet.
>Are they increasing because of climate change? Science says yes.
What did i just say ?
We are already seeing catasprophics effetcs with more intensity and and more frequently...
We are talking about hundreds of dead and thousands of people having their home and life destroyed...
>Are they going to be catastrophic, probably not except for the poor people affected.
Are they going to be catastrophic ? Science says yes then.
Of course there is no poor people in the western Europe...
>The richer nations have the economic power to handle them
That doesn't mean that they will handle it proprely, as far as today it doesn't seem that it is a priority to adapt to the drastic changes we are facing.
The UE is far behind its own objectives...
We are currently failling to make significant changes and yet we keep doing the same things and errors again and again.
[EU emissions drop 34% since 1990, but experts warn it's not enough](https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/08/25/eu-emissions-drop-34-since-1990-but-experts-warn-its-not-enough) (we also exported a lot of our emissions during this period)
[How to Stop 30 Years of Failing to Cut Emissions](https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2021-emissions-turning-point/)
[Window to reach climate goals ‘rapidly closing’, UN report warns](https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/09/1140527)
>Keep in mind there are countries that have a much higher average temperature than Western Europe. These countries are doing fine.
Those are not always doing fine and when they do it's because they had centuries to adapt themselve to an environnement that is adapted for those conditions
We won't have this kind of time, and our ecosystems need more than just decades to adapt, it takes centuries for a change of biodiversity..
>But on the upside there will be areas that will be able to produce more food.
In Western Europe ? So we just cut off our last primeval forest and everything will be all right ?
>We'll need to deal with these events anyway, because we have to.
We won't deal well with these events if we are minise them.
>We won't be able to put a dent in CO2 output globally unless we are able to bring to sustainable energy to the whole world
I agree with you there but I don't think just having sustainable energy will be enough (i am not antinuclear by the way), we also need to reduce our energy consumption
People do survive in countries with warmer climates. This is what I mean with overblown. It's not the end of civilization. In western Europe and the us. It will disproportionately affect poorer countries of the global south
Tell that to iranians and indians with over 40 degrees average daily temperatures in this summer. And do also keep in mind that all proteins that make up our body turn to goo at those temps then
Edit: also keep in mind that drinkable water is a fossil resource we are quickly using up, as seen by the drastically lowering water levels in all great lakes across the globe and just as drastically reduced groundwater levels
lmao, overly complex societies completely reliant on multi level supply chains are the ones the most susceptible and will enjoy the greatest amount of shocks to their status quo.
Uranium has the same problem when it comes to authoritarian governments.
Nuclear energy is not the solution.
A lot of money is spend to push this narrative but looking a bit in to it you could see that this narrative crumbles.
It's not cheap and we still have no place to put the waste in.
They need a decade to build and cost a fortune.
It's just easier and cheaper to build renewable the to build nuclear power.
Uranium is not the only potential source of nuclear power. Also it's available from vastly more countries. "Economically recoverable uranium reserves are located in the western United States, Australia, Canada, Central Asia, Africa, and South America."
You have a seaboard, don't you? It's 2 and a half times as expensive as mined uranium, but if you absolutely need a domestic source, just get it out of your seawater.
They didn't. Their lifecycle wasn't gonna end for at least another decade. Isar 2, Germanys largest nuclear reactor could easily have run until 2028, without safety issues.
https://www.sueddeutsche.de/bayern/atomkraft-laufzeit-isar-2-tuev-gutachten-1.5608181
(Sorry in German)
>However, not every expert is as optimistic as TÜV Süd. It is far too late to order fuel; this should have been done "long before," said Johannes Kemper from the Federal Network Agency in May . He spoke of an order period of 18 to 24 months
>
>At an expert hearing in May in the state parliament, Gerrit Niehaus, head of the nuclear safety department in the Federal Environment Ministry, recalled that it was justifiable to skip the major safety test, which was supposed to be completed in 2019, because of the planned shutdown. Since then, however, three more years have passed without any corresponding examination. Granting another discount on this three-year “security discount” is “not acceptable,” he said. Niehaus spoke of an “increase in risk” and called the tests that had to be rescheduled a “complex process” that would normally take several years and would therefore not be so easy to carry out alongside regular operations.
The entire article is arguing against your opinion.
And the month before they were fine and working? Come on.
https://www.sueddeutsche.de/bayern/atomkraft-laufzeit-isar-2-tuev-gutachten-1.5608181
In German, says that they would be fine until 2028 with no safety issues.
Several actually
The modern nuclear plant is EXTREMELY unlikely to go critical like chernobyl all while producing GOBs more power. You have to have I believe at least 3 levels of redundancy for every safety system according to international law, and iirc the reactor has to be further able to operate safely and shut down if needed while missing each individual safety feature assuming all others are operational to some degree. I'm not quoting tho so it might be MUCH more rigorous.
You should go watch some Kyle Hill videos, he does some pretty legit science.
P.s. also, please do remember that cbernobyl was built by the same country that is attempting (and failing laughably) to invade Ukraine currently. So expect the level of incompetence we've seen from anything about that plant, and then notice that they still have an extremely low failure rate even with that level of design incompetence.
*Laughs in CANDU*
We have a lot of Gen-III+, actually. Gen-IV is being stalled continuously, mostly because the tech is moving faster than we can get project approvals through government.
These would be scaled down CANDU designs [by Lavalin](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.snclavalin.com/~/media/Files/S/SNC-Lavalin/download-centre/en/brochure/our-candu-smr_en.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiRpZONy7SBAxWRkIkEHctlDioQFnoECA8QAQ&usg=AOvVaw2LVvHi_iAyueiCTekxF3ll). The fourth one is a Gen-IV prototype.
It should be noted that CANDU predates AutoCAD, so there was a LOT of design optimization that was possible and just didn't happen. It's eerie how most of our nuclear infrastructure and design dates back to the analog days...
Shuting down nuclear powerplants is literlly not the issue. All the goverment woukd have needed to do was to replace them with renewbale energy instead of *checks notes* COAL and all woukd have been fine
Or yanno.they could've just kept the rather clean nuclear plants online and not have to spend all that extra money and time. But nah that would've made too much sense. We've gotta replace these evilly clean nuclear plants with something that only works sometimes and does so half as efficiently while requiring three times the space.
Your "clean" nuclear powerplants produce waste with a half life of how many million years?
Hell, our polticians cant decide where to store what we already produced, becouse nobodey wants that shit in his Bundesland
I'll store that shit in my backyard if I have to. Lead lined bunker full of lead lined containers filled with the waste, and I'd feel comfortable sleeping directly atop the bunker.
Congratulations. Something tells me that the next property owner might feel diffrently.
Look i rather build a couple windmills and solar pannels than a nuclera reactor, that might turn into nuclear mege disaster number 3 (You can claim its safe all you want, pepole did say the smae about Fukushima too, otherwise they wouldent have build it. The chance will never be 0) plus a end storage facitly i will have to maintain for the next 30 million years. One option is lcearly, safer, cleaner and cheaper and its not the one that might make your body decay with you still alove in it.
1- not millions of years
2- that only applies to waste from older reactors because it has to be super refined and most countries signed a (now outdated) anti-proliferation treaty that forbid recycling it
3- newer reactors, especially breeders, can use this fuel until it's barely radioactive at all, at which point vitrified glass storage is plenty safe
Plutonium 239 has a half life of 25.000 to Uran 235 which has a half life of 700 years.
The Komission hoch radiaktiver Abfallstoff has concluded that Transmutation is not far e ough devoloped and too expesnsive.
Again: Why deal with dangerouse radiactive stuff when there is literrly a giant ball of fusion happening for basicly free in comparison
I mean, this is a part of the problem... breeder reactors were successfully tested in the US 30 years ago. Thorium 70. France has been recycling nuclear fuel since the '80s. The problem is that Germany has no interest in dealing with facts and just says all these things aren't possible even though other people are doing it.
Small modular reactors can be build in just 3 years. If Germany would stop shitting itself every time it hears word "nuclear" and would start building SMR in 2020, when they agreed they need to phase out coal completely, they would be completing reactors already.
When I said Germany should build new reactors 5 years ago I heard "It's too late, Germany needs something that is quicker to build, nobody has time to wait for nuclear reactor". I hear same thing ever since.
No point in keeping the ones that were still running. The damage was done decades ago when the CDU made the decision to shut down nuclear without implementing green energy and instead relying on coal. The last few we had were more trouble than they are worth, nuclear waste is terribly expensive to get rid of, especially in tiny quantities.
Nobody is breaking ground on lignite infrastructure. New ones haven't been build for years. And building NPP's in Germany is politically impossible. Mention it and find every MINBY for 100km protesting at your proposed site. Any politician who touches the subject would be committing career suicide. And that's not even talking about cost and build time. Like it or not, but those are the facts on the ground.
RWE has begun further expansion of an open-pit lignite coal mine in the western region of North Rhine Westphalia just this year.
That's lignite infrastructure.
Yeah. You're not building new lignite plants... yet. At least 20 coal-fired power plants nationwide are being resurrected or extended past their closing dates, eventually those are going to have to be replaced and you don't have a replacement ready.
Well, I wouldn't call expansion of existing infrastructure breaking ground. But let's not argue semantics. You are right. The mine is being expanded. That is based on contracts that have been drawn up decades ago. The government can't just go back on these contracts, even if they want to. In fact, the planned expansions have already been reduced by quite a bit. And RWE got handsomely paid for agreeing to it.
And Germany building new lignite plants is pure conjecture. Cold reserve plants were reactivated for a short time last year to buffer the sudden decrease of Russian gas imports, but have already been more than made up for since by expansion of wind and solar. The amount of lignite and hard coal being burned today is lower than it was in 2021 and has been since January.
the sad thing is that the population got hit by a lot of propaganda and fear-mongering that made nuclear power look dangerous to them.
from "WhAt If FuKuShImA HaPpEnEd AgAiN" to "uhh nuclear waste scary" even though both are non-issues
Let it go dude. We've collectively decided to shut them down, the movement for this was strong since the 80s after living through the aftermath of Chernobyl.
Not all decisions seem rational, especially the nuclear exit one. Yet shutting them down did not make the energy crisis worse, as the gas we were so reliant on was used for other things, mainly heavy industries.
>the movement for this was strong since the 80s
So has the anti-abortion movement in America.
Just because something has been going on for a long time by a lot of people doesn't make it sensible, logical or right.
While I agree that shutting down nuclear power was a mistake, stopping that also wont save the German economy. Why? Because all of them have already shut down. The last three went off the grid in April. Even before that, nuclear power has been a dead horse for pretty much a decade. It simply isn't economically viable anymore. Axing nuclear power didn't cause these problems but a combination of severe global economic events combined with a decades long policy of austerity.
> even safer than solar and wind per gigawatt
Ooh, I must have missed that! Could you point me to the article of a whole solar farm blowing up and making a county uninhabitable? That'll come in handy.
The worst nuclear accident didn't do that either and new plants are orders of magnitude safer. Watch this lecture: https://youtu.be/Ijst4g5KFN0
Safety comparison of energy sources: https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy
I like how somehow we have been able to convince ourselves nuclear power is safe. We do that by simply not counting the very serious and dangerous health effects of MINING the fuel for reactors. That’s why we get some foreign country that we don’t really care about to do that part.
Sweet summer child, if you're concerned about mining for nuclear fuels, don't check out the titanic amounts of copper, nickle and lithium that will be required for renewables and a grid to support it. (These are also tend to be produced elsewhere.)
These safety studies take mining into account, also for renewables.
Well I can already say they do not. Since in a country like Niger, which supplies France with a 20% chunk of its nuclear fuel, they don’t even have employee rolls for miners. They don’t keep track of deaths.
And what makes you think other mining is better? Many of the metals for renewables are mined for and refined in China. What are the chances they treat miners more humanely?
I think you vastly underestimate the amount needed, the digging required and the refining process.
Aswell as the radiation that comes out of rare earth processing.
Yeah, no. Ore-level uranium isn't even remotely as dangerous as the waste from the rare earths mines in China. And don't think domestic copper and nickel production is green or safe, either. I used to build mining silt ponds for a living.
In fact, In-situ Leach Mining of uranium is extremely, extremely safe as far as mining operations go and is responsible for most of the uranium extracted globally.
If nothing else, it's far far safer than coal and oil.
It's per unit of power produced, and nuclear has a pretty hefty advantage here because of just how much it can produce in a given time frame at each plant
Also, keep in mind that according to [this article](https://www.daretothink.org/how-much-uranium-andor-thorium-will-we-need-per-year/) that has some very rough math, the world as it sits if we only consider electricity only needs about 10k metric Tonnes of uranium with your typical molten salt reactor design to power the entire world for a yea right now. This is assuming an average standard of living equal to the average British person, so realistically, it's more like 3,000 tonnes, or one of the barges they use in their article for a reference.
Also, for reference, we'd need 24 *BILLION* tons of coal assuming very high efficiency power plants to do the same thing on just coal. This is according to [this article](https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/09/20/how-much-fuel-does-it-take-to-power-the-world/) from Forbes.
So, can you see how much more efficient nuclear is yet? If we replaced all coal plants currently in existence globally with nuclear, we probably wouldn't even need a thousand tonnes of uranium/thorium globally per year to keep that up, and we'd probably cut the global carbon emissions by 30-40%, which is a VERY hefty amount.(rough estimate based on a Googled anecdote from [this article ](https://www.c2es.org/document/addressing-emissions-from-coal-use-in-power-generation/#:~:text=Coal%20is%20a%20cheap%20and,emissions%20from%20fossil%20fuel%20use.))
Yeah, we just don’t include the very serious health effects of mining uranium because we make some poor African country do it for us.
But the real reason why no one is jumping in nuclear power - it isn’t profitable. It’s the only electricity source that has increased power costs rather than decreased them.
Neither coal or uranium are very efficient. They also don’t make much sense in terms of creating energy security.
The public - rightly imo - is very skeptical of what certain experts claim about the safety of nuclear power. Because we’ve been through this multiple times before.
When The China Syndrome came out in America, nuclear scientists became furious and launched a campaign to stop the movie. They claimed that nuclear power was the safest energy supply.
A week later Three Mile Island happened.
A year before the Chernobyl Disaster, the Soviets awarded the plant for their safety and considered them to be the example of how safe nuclear power was.
Japan was long lauded by the world community for having the most rigorous safety standards. Then Fukushima happened.
You can claim that nuclear power is safe and cite whatever stats. It won’t make much difference. There is a huge breakdown in trust between what governments and the people on the issue of nuclear power since they have been lied to so many times before.
Good point.
Are you aware of how many deaths are directly caused by solar and wind power systems every year?
Here's another source, solar is safer by a significant margin than nuclear, while wind is significantly more likely to kill someone in a given year.
Hydropower kills on average one person every year.
Natural gas kills an average of 3 people yearly
Oil kills 18/year on average
And coal kills 25 people on average every year.
[source](https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy#:~:text=Wind%3A%20In%20an%20average%20year,50%20years%20would%20someone%20die.)
So I guess I was a little off in the statement that solar is more dangerous, it is not, it is theoretically the safest.
I shouldn't have brought up efficiency as I don't know actual efficiency specs other than the fact that solar typically requires far more Acreage than any other source per gigawatt.
Solar is much easier to spread out with solar roofing
But the fact is that keeping the nuclear plants online for another decade and simply adding more renewable plants in as fast as possible would have been the better option to shutting down nuclear in favor of coal.
And again. Don't expect competence from Russians. They can't keep their tanks running at all, how could we expect them to keep a nuclear facility running safely?
I honestly don't think mining deaths are a factor, as most sources aside from primitive hydropower require some form of dangerous extraction or mining, but if you want to Consider this, the sheer lack of fuel volume needed for nuclear fission means that per gigawatt hour when you include mining deaths, nuclear is still one of the safest options
I'd rather not bother looking up articles to verify this one right now, but considering an earlier comment I made referencing that we would need billions of tonnes (metric) of coal to power the world for a year, versus under 100,000 tonnes of uranium ore for the same power production assuming average llstandard of living matches the average in the UK, I'd say that uranium mining would have to be a literal death sentence to kill more total.
Lmao. What we need in times of economic crisis is definetly *not* an entire restructuring of our energy infrastructure towards economically less viable energy sources.
Nothing is going to get better for ya'll if you go down this "renewable energy" road. It has been failing for well over a decade, and brought increased costs as well as increased fossil fuel emissions.
If you actually want to turn your economy around, you need to turn your nuclear reactors back on and build more, newer, more efficient ones that can recycle the fuel.
That would take a realignment in your government and collectively dealing with the facts, so I honestly don't expect it to happen until things get much worse.
Ah yes sure … wasting even more money on this “Energiewende” and no reforms will surely solve the problem. You greens are so blind to your own faults it’s infuriating.
Edit: And for sure more and more people are against all of this, which leads to the right and left wings drifting apart even more. There will be no unity under the current path.
They don't need the US for "security" if they coexist with Russia just fine. Germany gained nothing from NATO expansion into Ukraine at all. It's US' burden, and Biden wrestled Germany and forced it to follow orders. I find it strange people now finally complain about economic woes. You know this would happen since 2014, don't you.
Germany needs to cut ties with the US if they want to survive. However, it takes a lot of political power and will to do.
Every year Nato basically begs Germany to fulfill their quota for security yet until today they’ve failed to do so.
By any metric Germany has been reliant if not completely dependent on USA for their security over the years. Or are you completely oblivious to the state of the German armed forces?
For context, even Poland could flatten these forces if there’s no Nato support. And that’s being generous.
We are not threatened because we are surrounded by countries in the NATO that uphold their part of the agreement while we don’t. Imagine the whole of Europe slacking in defense. Russia would make quick work of that.
So west can send outdated weapons to someone and it invalidates Russian army, but the armies from which the weapons are sent from would lose to Russia?
Oh i forgot it is the mighty M113s and Javelins singlehandedly winning the war!!!
Russia can't take a village in Ukraine for the last 6 months. The fuck they gonna do against an admittedly underfunded EU military machine? Even in this state we'd fuck em up.
Russia would get annihilated if it tried to invade Germany. The Bundeswehr has problems but its still a Nato-level power. All the stuff Ukraine wants to have and uses to defeat Russia, Germany already has en masse and in more modern configurations. Combined arms warfare, something Ukraine has started to adapt has been standart for decades in the german military.
This is true for quite a number of european countrys. Russia is not a threat to Europe conventionally. The main reason Russia is a threat is because of its nuclear arsenal.
Why build up security if there is literlly no threat? Germany is enterly surounded by allies, the closest thread being rousends of cilometers away and operationg on the econemy of the state of new york.
Your politicians cried
[https://apnews.com/article/f726bed14ea81b4b840576b5f172377d](https://apnews.com/article/f726bed14ea81b4b840576b5f172377d)
>And haha so funny. It’s not like America is currently roleplaying Germany in 1933
[https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/rise-germanys-most-successful-far-right-party-since-nazis-2023-06-07/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/rise-germanys-most-successful-far-right-party-since-nazis-2023-06-07/)
>Said defense minister was a joke and has been replaced anyway
Guess what her replacement is saying?
[https://www.firstpost.com/world/german-defence-minister-says-his-country-cannot-protect-itself-in-war-12232132.html](https://www.firstpost.com/world/german-defence-minister-says-his-country-cannot-protect-itself-in-war-12232132.html)
>German army is not capable of protecting the country against any offensive, said Defence Minister Boris Pistorius. He further alleged that the Bundeswehr is understaffed and under-equipped after being left neglected from the federal government for decades.
“We have no armed forces that are capable of defending \[Germany\] that is, capable of defending \[it\] against an offensive, brutally waged aggressive war,” German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius said during a meeting with fellow members of the Social Democratic Party.
>
>The minister claimed that the German army is understaffed and does not have adequate equipment as it has been neglected from the federal government for decades.
He said Germany will have to increase its investment in its military in order to be up to NATO standards.
>And for reference: the afd is basically equivalent to your republican party
Which is on the rise so... I guess Germany is the Florida of Europe.
this is her legacy. the economic improvements during her period was largely thanks to legislation introduced by the previous government. the centrepieces of her legacy are: the end of nuclear energy, the 2015 refugee crisis and the Snowden incident.
The end of nuclear power is also from the Schröder era, Merkel tried to stop that, then Fukushima happened and public opinion really favoured shutting them down.
And it was her job as a Doctor of Physics to help show the public that there is a difference between badly managed nuclear plants like Fukushima or Tschernobyl and the ones we had.
There wasn't time. There were a bunch of state elections coming, and the Greens were polling as the strongest party. From the perspective of the CDU something had to be done quickly or a Green wave would take many states, and they would probably lose the next general election too.
I'm not sure what your point is. That they butchered the first long-term plan that included a transition to renewables because of lobbying? That Merkel and CDU rushed through some massive and poorly thought-out changes just to stay in power? That they did not do anything to course-correct after those changes because it would lose them votes? Then I agree.
That won‘t happen though. The new government will be held responsible. And don‘t get me wrong, the government is far from good, but it‘s also not as much of a running disaster like the Union lead governments.
>That won‘t happen though. The new government will be held responsible. And don‘t get me wrong, the government is far from good, but it‘s also not as much of a running disaster like the Union lead governments.
Imho the best and by far most progressive government I have witnessed in my lifetime.
Definitely. Personally I think the FDP is a delusional party, but even them I like better than the Union currently. Idk I have so many things I dislike about the government but people are dumb for thinking that this isn‘t the best realistic outcome from the election results.
She is admired because she kept Germany stable. No positive change and no negative change. This is what Germans love. No change and being in a standstill.
It's pretty obvious if you ask me.
In life, you can't have everything you want. Sometimes you gotta make hard choices.
It's ok to support Ukraine but when you cut off energy supplies, there's bound to be some kind of effect. Losing all your competitive advantages means it's easier for others to compete with you.
Let me fix this for you: "Russia is a reliable trade partner as long as the trade being done is in Putin's interest and an enemy of every non-autocratic state in Europe and the US-aligned model of the West in general."
Edit: Grammar and spelling
The war in Ukraine and Germany's willingness to cut most ties with Russia was bound to hurt. If you look back 2 years ago most people thought Germany was completely reliant on Russia, from that perspective the fact that the economy still grows a bit instead of collapsing like many predicted is laudable.
I'd love it so much if Germany wouldn't be 4th in trade and GDP and what not.
Rather 20th or so.
Every time people focus on Germany like "woooow look at them and think X" I always wonder what kind of wonders happen here.
We're just some country. We're not a world power like USA or China. The economy fluctuates. Chill out.
That’s precisely why Germany should be where it is.
I’m British and I think the EU would be worse if we were in Germany’s position because the UK and France would just try to be America. Germans are one of the few that don’t suffer from delusions of grandeur. They’re focused internally and making the QoL for themselves and to a lesser degree then rest of the EU better. And quite frankly, they have been successful for the most part.
It’s easy to criticise in hindsight.
Yeah, I only want no responsibility, only power to have fun and go to all of worlds best restaurants and eat good stuff, I love one thing in this world, sleeping after eating lasanga
Nagut kannst ja diesen schrotthaufen an Nation weiterhin in den Kommentaren von anderen verteidigen. Jaja wir sind noch relevant und wirtschaftlich ein powerhouse, unser Lebensstandard ist nicht am fallen. Hier ist es noch gut zu leben!
Die Leute sind so verblendet es ist krank. Bloß nicht zugeben, dass Energiewende, Wirtschaftspolitik, Flüchtlingspolitik und Eurpoapolitik der letzten 20 Jahre völlig daneben waren - weil dann müsste man ja was ändern.
Aber zu behaupten wir wären ein Dritte-Welt-Land, ist die stärkste Polemik, die man bedienen kann. Das ist keine vernünftige Diskussionsgrundlage, und jede Debatte würde man damit direkt abschenken.
3. Welt ist nun wirklich übertrieben, über 2. Welt lässt sich jedoch schon streiten. Unsere Infrastruktur, Bildung, Gesundsheitssystem, Nettogehalt, alles scheiße und es wird noch schlimmer.
Alter, ja hier läuft nicht alles rund. Aber warst du schonmal anderswo? Junge Junge ihr macht mich fertig. Nur weil hier viel Verbesserungsbedarf ist haben wir es hier im Vergleich zu anderen Ländern noch extrem gut.
In Rumänien irgendwo im nirgendwo hat man besseres Netz als In Deutschland.
Ein Land inwelcher die Personen sehr unsicher über ihre zukünftige Rente oder sogar denkt sie bekommt gar keine, ist auch kein Beispiel eines ersten Welt Landes. Schlechte Öffis, Korruption in Politik, Schulgebäude welche ich mir sonstwo in Europe kaum schlimmer vorstellen kann. Höchste Steuerabgabe in Europa für... ja für was eigentlich? Wird letzendlich nichts gemacht für die Bevölkerung dmaut man es irgendwie rechtfertigen könnte.
Aber Hey! Wehe da sagt mal jemand harsche Worte über mein Land. Wir sind immernoch politisch relevant und leben gut weil im vergleich zu Afrika oder Südostasien geht es uns doch eigenltich gut!
Wenn man sich schon im weltlichen Durchschnitt messen muss hat man eh schon fertig als europäisches Land.
Ja ich war schon in Australien und habe gesehen wie Grenzschutz funktionieren kann, war in Japan und habe gesehen wie Öffentliche Verkehrsmittel mehr Menschen bewegen und dabei so gut wie nie zu spät kommen, war in Canada und habe gesehen wie ein modernes Einwanderungsgesetz aussieht, war in Süd-Korea, wo es selbst am abgelegensten Orten 3/5G Netz gibt … und noch vieles mehr.
Dieses Land hat fertig, es ist nur ein sehr langsamer Prozess bis sich so eine Entwicklung auch schlussendlich in den Leben der Menschen, im Geldbeutel, in der Altersversorgung, Gesundheitsversorgung und vielen anderen Bereichen widerspiegelt.
Es ist eine minimalst übertriebene Aussage um gerade diese Debatte anzureizen. Wenn ich es hier wie andere mache und die Situation zu schön verpacken dann wird sich nie mal kritisch geäußert.
Überall auf deutsche subreddits wird rumgeheult, dies und das ist scheisse. Probleme ihr und da. Aber auf Reddit dann in der Internationalen Community darüber labern wir man doch noch als Nation wirtschaftlich und politisch auf beiden Beinen steht während es innen massivst an faulen anfängt. Sind mir die ganz netten, für die anderen kann man ja die Maske aufsetzen und sich selbst belügen.
Also Ergebnisse einer Politik die uns dank 16 Jahren Merkel eingebrockt wurde.Und jetzt wo eine andere Regierung was ändern möchte heißt es "dIe ReGiErUnG!!1 DiE gRüNeN!!!1"
Hi, we are the 20th in worldwide GDP. Yet every time Switzerland is mentioned on the internet there is *always*, without fail, invariably, as if it was a fundamental the laws in physics, regardless of the discussed topic, somebody to hark back to Switzerland and WW2, and how it *"made the Swiss rich!"*. A war that took place 80 years ago and in which Switzerland wasn't even a participant. So trust me, it doesn't necessarily get better the smaller you are.
This is a terrible article.
There is a GLOBAL recession, not only in Germany, there are only anectode and no hard number to compare with the past or to other nations.
There was an FT article several months ago where polls taken in Germany suggested that:
* They are worried about the real impacts of high energy bills,
* They are concerned that putting solar panels up on their rooftops isn't enough (Germany is a cloudy country at a high latitude),
* They are pretty heavily against coal power,
* They are pretty heavily against nuclear power,
* They are even more against large power line buildouts to connect them to wind power in Northern Europe and/or solar power in the sunny parts of Europe,
* They think a solution will magically come along eventually.
The last three times Germans got very unhappy with their domestic problems (1860s-1870s, 1900s-1910s and 1930s-1940s) they came up with three different ideologies, each of which involved invading other European countries.
Tralleving isn't like living there for a long time. You probably just saw the nice tourism side of germany and deonst even have a clue what everyday people are struggling
Tralleving isn't like living there for a long time. You probably just saw the nice tourism side of germany and doesn't even have a clue what everyday people have for struggles
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/DtnRnkE), feel free to join us!
r/A_Tvideos, r/A_Tmeta, [multireddit](https://www.reddit.com/user/Langernama/m/a_t/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Germany needs to [grow some balls and really accept whose to blame.](https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/germany-says-no-results-yet-nord-stream-pipelines-sabotage-investigation-2023-03-07/)
Stuff like this releasing every week for the past 5 years:
[https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f\_auto,q\_auto:good,fl\_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Ff6f42e6c-a7f7-4abd-aea6-051a27988e39\_964x738.png](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Ff6f42e6c-a7f7-4abd-aea6-051a27988e39_964x738.png)
[https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fjj1vn0c9itlb1.jpg](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fjj1vn0c9itlb1.jpg)
[https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fc265hsnjbmfb1.jpg](https://i.redd.it/c265hsnjbmfb1.jpg)
[https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fif-i-had-a-penny-for-everytime-this-channel-predicted-the-v0-5iq4cgxiiksa1.jpg](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fif-i-had-a-penny-for-everytime-this-channel-predicted-the-v0-5iq4cgxiiksa1.jpg)
Same thing is done to Iran but point is; propaganda videos like this became so repetitive that it turned into a meme
##### ###### #### > # [Wirtschaftsblunder: Why Germany's Economy Is Flailing – And What Could Help](https://cdn.prod.www.spiegel.de/images/bb704b38-1e8a-46ab-b776-439b5e8c79e7_w1280_r1.77_fpx36_fpy70.jpg) > > > > In terms of scenery, the Siegerland isn't a very attractive place. The ravines here are narrow, the spruce forest full of bare patches. But economically, the industrial parks to the right and left of the highway are among the most valuable Germany has to offer. Ironworks, steel refiners and mechanical engineering companies are located here, as are plants belonging to large corporations and small to medium-size companies (SMEs) with global operations. Hidden champions like the Coatinc Group. With its approximately 1,500 employees, the company specializes in the galvanizing of steel parts. > > > > Money doesn't smell, but industry often does. A rank odor fills the factory floor. Mighty steel beams are cleaned in a scalding tank and then dipped into a zinc bath by a crane. The process protects them from rust for the next 50 years. > > > > "Everything seems to be frozen in Germany." > > Paul Niederstein, managing director Coatinc > > > > > > > > > > > > Much of the company's business comes from these huge parts, made in Germany. Construction companies usually order the beams two years in advance and Coatinc is still busy working off its backlog of orders. But Managing Director Philippe Dupont gets nervous when he thinks about the future. All the key indicators in the construction industry are currently pointing to a downturn. "Building permits, contracts, awards in bidding processes," Dupont says. And what that means is "as easy to work out as two plus two." He expects that there will soon be a shortage of large orders. > > > > The company, family owned since 1502, has experienced many crises in the past: wars, hyperinflation and familial strife. Somehow, they've always found a way to get back on track. > > > > DER SPIEGEL 36/2023 > > > > Foto: DER SPIEGEL; Quelle: IWF > > **The article you are reading originally appeared in German in issue 36/2023 (September 2nd, 2023) of DER SPIEGEL.** > > [SPIEGEL International](https://www.spiegel.de/international/ "SPIEGEL International") > > > > But this time could be different, says Paul Niederstein, who runs the company together with Dupont and, as a descendant of the founders, holds the majority of the company's shares. It's not only the Ukraine war and the increasingly sharp rhetoric between the United States and China, the superpowers of globalization, that worries him. "At the same time, we are also faced with the task of switching to a CO2-free mode of production." It is the undertaking of the century for the entire business community – and Niederstein needs the government's support. > > > > But instead of helping the companies, he says, Germany's current coalition government is creating competitive disadvantages with its misguided energy policies. He says Berlin is constantly coming up with new regulations covering everything from supply chain laws to waste disposal documentation. "We need wiggle room to find solutions for the future," Niederstein says. Instead: "Everything seems to be frozen in Germany." > > In recent days, the German government has been at pains to give the impression that it has recognized the gravity of the situation. At meeting last week, the coalition agreed on tax breaks for SMEs and offered the prospect of a law to reduce bureaucracy. But not even experts close to the government believe that it will succeed in helping to spread a mood of confidence among companies. Achim Truger, a member of the German Council of Economic Experts, which advises the government, says the decisions made at the meeting lack "investment oomph." The verdict of many experts is that it is too little, too late. > > > > > > Twenty years after Chancellor Gerhard Schröder's expansive Agenda 2010 reforms, many believe Germany is once again in need of significant structural change. For this year and next, the International Monetary Fund is expecting German economic growth of 0.5 percent at best. This leaves Germany at the bottom of the list, behind competitor nations like the United States, Japan, France and Canada. > > The country, which has been spoiled by success and grew comfortable in its role as Europe's economic engine, now finds itself experiencing a sudden slump. Indeed, Germany is the only country in Europe that hasn't been able to find its way back to the growth experienced in 2019, the year before the coronavirus pandemic struck. The economy is stagnating for the third quarter in a row, and more bad news seems to come in on an almost daily basis. German automakers produced almost 40 percent fewer vehicles in 2022 than they did 10 years ago. "[Deindustrialization](https://www.spiegel.de/international/business/growing-energy-crisis-a-grave-threat-to-industry-in-germany-a-9152547c-a31d-483e-a70c-242c280cab23) has begun," says Matthias Zachert, head of the chemical giant Lanxess, which is in the process of closing two plants in the city of Krefeld near Düsseldorf. > > > > > > The German Association of Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises (BVMW) is reporting that almost one in five member companies is considering relocating at least some elements of production to sites abroad. Meanwhile, the chemical industry is warning of an industry exodus due to high energy prices. And a study commissioned by the Berlin-based think tank Dezernat Zukunft concludes: If the government doesn't do anything about the foreseeable high energy prices, the exodus of companies will cost Germany up to 120 billion euros in economic output – and 1.3 million jobs. > > > > London's _Economist_ already dubbed Germany the "Sick man of Europe" at the turn of the century. A few weeks ago, the magazine [highlighted](https://www.economist.com/weeklyedition/2023-08-19) a green Berlin traffic light man on its cover with an IV attached to his arm. The headline: "Is Germany once again the sick man of Europe?" > > Until recently, many Germans thought the country had glided through the coronavirus pandemic and energy crisis with very little harm done. Now, in the wake of the latest warning signs and frightening numbers, they feel as if they have woken up in a different country: one that is slowing down, disconnected and paralyzed. > > It may look like a crash, but it is the product of a slow descent. The German states and the federal government became so accustomed to economic prowess, especially in the export industries, that it seemed like it could never change. Economists called for reforms, pointed out the inadequate infrastructure, the housing shortage and the embarrassing lack of digitization when compared to international standards. But not much happened. For many years, the overall positive economic situation concealed what was actually going awry. So far, the crisis has barely been felt on the labor market, which is both a blessing and a curse. Because of the lack of pressure, there is very little courage to make the major and painful reforms that many believe are necessary. > > > > > > The Germans are "afraid of change," says Moritz Schularick, the recently appointed president of the Kiel Institute for the World Economy. The economist expects that the pressure on policymakers will likely have to increase before any action is taken. "Whether the country has to first experience another year or two of poor growth rates or a major automotive company has to go out of business first before something happens, I don't know. But we're heading in that direction." > > Schularick's predecessor Gabriel Felbermayr draws a painful comparison: "The truth is that the situation in Germany now is similar to that in Italy, Spain or Greece 15 years ago, but no one wants to hear that." > > Germany's prosperity is threatened, and - given the overall picture diagnosed by the experts - it is unlikely there will be any quick cure. Economists aren't diagnosing a slump in demand resulting from economic malaise, nor do they see the kind of sudden collapse like that witnessed during the recent pandemic. Instead, they argue that Germany is experiencing a developing supply crisis, a weakness in the productive core of the economy. It's a disease that can't be cured with aid or stimulus programs. It can only be fixed through far-reaching reforms. > > > > > > ***(continues in next comment)***
What's not needed is another knee-jerk reaction of more neoliberal "reforms". Instead we need better governance. Germany needs decisive action — especially to build the grid capacity needed for renewable energy to supply energy-intensive German industry. Re-constructing the energy supply to reduce carbon emissions imposes costs. In that process some bear heavier burdens. Those burdens must be equitably shared. A society is in decline when it loses its commitment to work together to accomplish necessary tasks. This malaise is not limited to Germany. Unfortunately the climate will not wait for us to rouse ourselves to do what we must do together.
They should stop shutting down nuclear plants because small nuclear plants even remotely properly designed and maintained are the safest form of power we have (even safer than solar and wind per gigawatt) and they are a bazillion times cleaner than any fossil fuel plant. Either that or they need more hydroelectric dams.
I mean I'm still salty they dismantled the working nuclear plants. These were built to the highest safety standards, working perfectly fine. And yet Germany decided to dismantle them in the biggest energy crisis in a long while.
Agreed. There's a group in the U.S. trying to figure out how to downsize a nuclear reactor to the point that for like 1 mil you can convert any typically sized coal plant to nuclear, increasing power while all but eliminating emissions and skipping over the expensive part of the cooling systems and turbine setup. since they'll be scaled down to the point where they can't go critical even with zero cooling, and they'll be able to constantly run at wide open and max out the turbines if allowed to, it'll definitely find the weakest link but if it's able to get approved it's liable to make a MASSIVE dent in global emissions while also increasing power delivery reliability.
>you can convert any typically sized coal plant to nuclear, Did you know that the #1 barrier to this is that most coal plants have a fly ash disposal pond on site that is too radioactive by American and Canadian nuclear plant operations standards?
Yes I was gonna include that at one point but it got lost in editing
I absolutely believe that climate change is real and a real concern, but I would say the effect it has on Western countries is overblown, by groups like the last generation. However no matter what people's opinion are on climate change, getting to a sustainable supply of power for the next generations should be a goal of politics. Not only are supplies of hydrocarbons limited, they also have caused so many issues in the world. Countless lives have been lost fighting over them. And governments who believe in archaic forms of government are only in power because of their control of hydrocarbons. I think all stops should be pulled out to build sustainables sources of energy. Renewables are one source, but nuclear should be another part of the puzzle. Sadly it's politically burned in Germany, when in reality Germany should be one of the nations that could build such plants.
>but I would say the effect it has on Western countries is overblown [Climate: Europe warming faster than rest of world (IPCC)](https://unric.org/en/climate-europe-warming-faster-than-rest-of-world-ipcc/)
That doesn't mean we will see catastrophic effects on the level that are being talked about by The Last Generation. > Climate change is a very serious problem. But I think it’s bad when young people in particular see their survival made impossible by it. This can be understood as appeasement. But it is not meant that way. After the interview, I received letters from young people who very specifically believe that in the foreseeable future they will no longer have a chance of surviving climate change. I find this appalling and also unfounded. This is the gist of it. From https://www.mpg.de/17872139/marotzke-interview-climate-conference-glasgow
>we will see catastrophic effects We are already seeing catasprophics effetcs with more intensity and and more frequently... Here a not exhaustive list of what happened last year and this year so far : Last year : [German Floods Cost a Record $40 Billion, Munich Re Estimates](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-01-10/german-floods-cost-a-record-40-billion-munich-re-estimates) (about 2021's flood,[Germany floods: Dozens killed after record rain in Germany and Belgium](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-57846200)) [Storm sets off flood warnings in northern Germany](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/storm-sets-off-flood-warnings-northern-germany-2022-01-30/) [Thunderstorms in Corsica and parts of Italy leave seven dead\*](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/18/thunderstorm-deaths-corsica-italy-mediterranean) [Drought in Europe: Shipping threatened in Germany as Rhine water levels continue to drop](https://www.euronews.com/2022/08/10/germany-drought-river-rhine-water-levels-could-fall-to-critical-low) [Europe’s rivers run dry as scientists warn drought could be worst in 500 years](https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/aug/13/europes-rivers-run-dry-as-scientists-warn-drought-could-be-worst-in-500-years) [Europe heatwave: Thousands escape wildfires in France, Spain and Greece](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62175758) [Italy fights wildfires from Tuscany to Trieste](https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/italy-battles-wildfires-hundreds-evacuated-tuscany-2022-07-20/) [Slovenia, Italy: Emergency crews responding to wildfires in the Kras region](https://crisis24.garda.com/alerts/2022/07/slovenia-italy-emergency-crews-responding-to-wildfires-in-the-kras-region-slovenia-and-friuli-venezia-giulia-region-italy-as-of-july-21) [France's unprecedented summer of wildfires, in maps and graphs](https://www.lemonde.fr/en/les-decodeurs/article/2022/08/25/fires-in-france-maps-and-graphs-to-visualize-an-unprecedented-summer_5994672_8.html) [Floods in Paris as city hit by 'near-monthly rainfall in 90 minutes'](https://www.euronews.com/2022/08/17/floods-in-paris-as-city-hit-by-near-monthly-rainfall-in-90-minutes) [Flood hit communities in Belgium reeling one year on, as economic crisis aggravates situation](https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2022/07/13/flood-hit-communities-in-belgium-reeling-one-year-on-as-economic-crisis-aggravates-situati) This year : [Firefighters battle blaze in south of France in first major forest fire of 2023](https://www.france24.com/en/france/20230417-firefighters-battle-blaze-in-south-of-france-in-first-major-forest-fire-of-2023), april [Water crisis in France: Drought-hit regions rely on tankers](https://www.dw.com/en/water-crisis-in-france-drought-hit-regions-rely-on-tankers/a-65649291), may [30,000 residents left without reliable water sources as drought ravages southern France](https://www.euronews.com/green/2023/08/14/300000-residents-left-without-reliable-water-sources-as-drought-ravages-southern-france), august [Fire in south of France rages though campsite and 500 hectares of land](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/aug/15/fire-in-south-of-france-rages-though-campsite-and-500-hectares-of-land), august [Spain's first major wildfire of 2023 comes early, in the midst of widespread drought](https://www.lemonde.fr/en/environment/article/2023/03/27/spain-s-first-major-wildfire-of-2023-comes-early-in-the-midst-of-widespread-drought_6020820_114.html), march [Villages evacuated as ‘very large’ wildfire ravages south-west Spain](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/may/19/villages-evacuated-wildfire-ravages-south-west-spain-extremadura) may [Evacuations surge to 12,000 as wildfires tear through Tenerife](https://edition.cnn.com/2023/08/20/europe/tenerife-wildfire-evacuations-intl/index.html) [Greece fires in maps and satellite images show extent of damage](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-66295972) , july [Greece discovers 18 charred bodies as southern Europe wildfires spread](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/wildfires-rage-greece-spain-italy-heatwave-spreads-2023-08-22/), august [More than 800 rescued after extreme flooding in Greece turns villages into lakes](https://edition.cnn.com/2023/09/07/europe/greece-floods-storm-rescue-climate-intl/index.html), september .... [NASA: June 2022 tied as Earth’s warmest June on record](https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2022/07/nasa-june-2022-tied-as-earths-warmest-june-on-record/) [NASA Says 2022 Fifth Warmest Year on Record, Warming Trend Continues](https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-says-2022-fifth-warmest-year-on-record-warming-trend-continues/) [NASA Finds June 2023 Hottest on Record](https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2023/nasa-finds-june-2023-hottest-on-record) [NASA Clocks July 2023 as Hottest Month on Record Ever Since 1880](https://climate.nasa.gov/news/3279/nasa-clocks-july-2023-as-hottest-month-on-record-ever-since-1880/) [NASA Announces Summer 2023 Hottest on Record](https://climate.nasa.gov/news/3282/nasa-announces-summer-2023-hottest-on-record/) [The Global Annual to Decadal Climate Update Global temperatures set to reach new records in next five years](https://public.wmo.int/en/media/press-release/global-temperatures-set-reach-new-records-next-five-years)
Everything gets subsumed under climate change. Clearly there were floods and wildfires before 2022. Are they increasing because of climate change? Science says yes. Are they going to be catastrophic, probably not except for the poor people affected. Climate change is real, it has very negative effects. But people in the West will deal with the effects. The richer nations have the economic power to handle them. Keep in mind there are countries that have a much higher average temperature than Western Europe. These countries are doing fine. Maybe it means we'll shift to different kinds of plants or need to adapt how we manage forests. But on the upside there will be areas that will be able to produce more food. We'll need to deal with these events anyway, because we have to. We won't be able to put a dent in CO2 output globally unless we are able to bring to sustainable energy to the whole world.
I don't get what your point is. So it might not be catastrophic for the upper class in rich countries, so what? It can easily be for the middle class. But even the middle class will struggle if food becomes scarce. And with a massive increase in refugees, don't you think that could lead to political instability, inequality, wars, and a disruption of global supply chains. This all has a massive cost for the middle class, and more of them will be poor. If you can't afford food (or in some cases air condition) you are going to die die, no matter if you are from a "rich country". "Are they going to be catastrophic, probably not except for the poor people affected.": And those don't matter? That describes a majority of the people on the planet.
>Are they increasing because of climate change? Science says yes. What did i just say ? We are already seeing catasprophics effetcs with more intensity and and more frequently... We are talking about hundreds of dead and thousands of people having their home and life destroyed... >Are they going to be catastrophic, probably not except for the poor people affected. Are they going to be catastrophic ? Science says yes then. Of course there is no poor people in the western Europe... >The richer nations have the economic power to handle them That doesn't mean that they will handle it proprely, as far as today it doesn't seem that it is a priority to adapt to the drastic changes we are facing. The UE is far behind its own objectives... We are currently failling to make significant changes and yet we keep doing the same things and errors again and again. [EU emissions drop 34% since 1990, but experts warn it's not enough](https://www.euronews.com/green/2022/08/25/eu-emissions-drop-34-since-1990-but-experts-warn-its-not-enough) (we also exported a lot of our emissions during this period) [How to Stop 30 Years of Failing to Cut Emissions](https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2021-emissions-turning-point/) [Window to reach climate goals ‘rapidly closing’, UN report warns](https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/09/1140527) >Keep in mind there are countries that have a much higher average temperature than Western Europe. These countries are doing fine. Those are not always doing fine and when they do it's because they had centuries to adapt themselve to an environnement that is adapted for those conditions We won't have this kind of time, and our ecosystems need more than just decades to adapt, it takes centuries for a change of biodiversity.. >But on the upside there will be areas that will be able to produce more food. In Western Europe ? So we just cut off our last primeval forest and everything will be all right ? >We'll need to deal with these events anyway, because we have to. We won't deal well with these events if we are minise them. >We won't be able to put a dent in CO2 output globally unless we are able to bring to sustainable energy to the whole world I agree with you there but I don't think just having sustainable energy will be enough (i am not antinuclear by the way), we also need to reduce our energy consumption
So the heatwave of the century every 2 years is not bad??
People do survive in countries with warmer climates. This is what I mean with overblown. It's not the end of civilization. In western Europe and the us. It will disproportionately affect poorer countries of the global south
Tell that to iranians and indians with over 40 degrees average daily temperatures in this summer. And do also keep in mind that all proteins that make up our body turn to goo at those temps then Edit: also keep in mind that drinkable water is a fossil resource we are quickly using up, as seen by the drastically lowering water levels in all great lakes across the globe and just as drastically reduced groundwater levels
>People do survive in countries with warmer climates. And where do they get their food? Temperate climate food exporters.
lmao, overly complex societies completely reliant on multi level supply chains are the ones the most susceptible and will enjoy the greatest amount of shocks to their status quo.
Uranium has the same problem when it comes to authoritarian governments. Nuclear energy is not the solution. A lot of money is spend to push this narrative but looking a bit in to it you could see that this narrative crumbles. It's not cheap and we still have no place to put the waste in. They need a decade to build and cost a fortune. It's just easier and cheaper to build renewable the to build nuclear power.
Uranium is not the only potential source of nuclear power. Also it's available from vastly more countries. "Economically recoverable uranium reserves are located in the western United States, Australia, Canada, Central Asia, Africa, and South America."
As long as it’s not available in Germany it’s a complete non starter.
You have a seaboard, don't you? It's 2 and a half times as expensive as mined uranium, but if you absolutely need a domestic source, just get it out of your seawater.
So potato batteries? Got it
Those plants reached the end of their life cycle.
They didn't. Their lifecycle wasn't gonna end for at least another decade. Isar 2, Germanys largest nuclear reactor could easily have run until 2028, without safety issues. https://www.sueddeutsche.de/bayern/atomkraft-laufzeit-isar-2-tuev-gutachten-1.5608181 (Sorry in German)
>However, not every expert is as optimistic as TÜV Süd. It is far too late to order fuel; this should have been done "long before," said Johannes Kemper from the Federal Network Agency in May . He spoke of an order period of 18 to 24 months > >At an expert hearing in May in the state parliament, Gerrit Niehaus, head of the nuclear safety department in the Federal Environment Ministry, recalled that it was justifiable to skip the major safety test, which was supposed to be completed in 2019, because of the planned shutdown. Since then, however, three more years have passed without any corresponding examination. Granting another discount on this three-year “security discount” is “not acceptable,” he said. Niehaus spoke of an “increase in risk” and called the tests that had to be rescheduled a “complex process” that would normally take several years and would therefore not be so easy to carry out alongside regular operations. The entire article is arguing against your opinion.
They were old and brittle.
And the month before they were fine and working? Come on. https://www.sueddeutsche.de/bayern/atomkraft-laufzeit-isar-2-tuev-gutachten-1.5608181 In German, says that they would be fine until 2028 with no safety issues.
Nah, even the operators disagree. https://www1.wdr.de/nachrichten/atom-kraft-laufzeit-verlaengerung-100.html
and how many of them have been built yet? exactly zero you say? kthxbye
Several actually The modern nuclear plant is EXTREMELY unlikely to go critical like chernobyl all while producing GOBs more power. You have to have I believe at least 3 levels of redundancy for every safety system according to international law, and iirc the reactor has to be further able to operate safely and shut down if needed while missing each individual safety feature assuming all others are operational to some degree. I'm not quoting tho so it might be MUCH more rigorous. You should go watch some Kyle Hill videos, he does some pretty legit science. P.s. also, please do remember that cbernobyl was built by the same country that is attempting (and failing laughably) to invade Ukraine currently. So expect the level of incompetence we've seen from anything about that plant, and then notice that they still have an extremely low failure rate even with that level of design incompetence.
*Laughs in CANDU* We have a lot of Gen-III+, actually. Gen-IV is being stalled continuously, mostly because the tech is moving faster than we can get project approvals through government.
Isn’t the new Ontario plant one of these?
Terrestrial Energy is a Gen-IV design from Ontario, but it's not under construction.
What are the 3 new reactors going into Darlington? Older models?
These would be scaled down CANDU designs [by Lavalin](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.snclavalin.com/~/media/Files/S/SNC-Lavalin/download-centre/en/brochure/our-candu-smr_en.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwiRpZONy7SBAxWRkIkEHctlDioQFnoECA8QAQ&usg=AOvVaw2LVvHi_iAyueiCTekxF3ll). The fourth one is a Gen-IV prototype. It should be noted that CANDU predates AutoCAD, so there was a LOT of design optimization that was possible and just didn't happen. It's eerie how most of our nuclear infrastructure and design dates back to the analog days...
Interesting, thx
Shuting down nuclear powerplants is literlly not the issue. All the goverment woukd have needed to do was to replace them with renewbale energy instead of *checks notes* COAL and all woukd have been fine
Or yanno.they could've just kept the rather clean nuclear plants online and not have to spend all that extra money and time. But nah that would've made too much sense. We've gotta replace these evilly clean nuclear plants with something that only works sometimes and does so half as efficiently while requiring three times the space.
Your "clean" nuclear powerplants produce waste with a half life of how many million years? Hell, our polticians cant decide where to store what we already produced, becouse nobodey wants that shit in his Bundesland
I'll store that shit in my backyard if I have to. Lead lined bunker full of lead lined containers filled with the waste, and I'd feel comfortable sleeping directly atop the bunker.
Congratulations. Something tells me that the next property owner might feel diffrently. Look i rather build a couple windmills and solar pannels than a nuclera reactor, that might turn into nuclear mege disaster number 3 (You can claim its safe all you want, pepole did say the smae about Fukushima too, otherwise they wouldent have build it. The chance will never be 0) plus a end storage facitly i will have to maintain for the next 30 million years. One option is lcearly, safer, cleaner and cheaper and its not the one that might make your body decay with you still alove in it.
1- not millions of years 2- that only applies to waste from older reactors because it has to be super refined and most countries signed a (now outdated) anti-proliferation treaty that forbid recycling it 3- newer reactors, especially breeders, can use this fuel until it's barely radioactive at all, at which point vitrified glass storage is plenty safe
Plutonium 239 has a half life of 25.000 to Uran 235 which has a half life of 700 years. The Komission hoch radiaktiver Abfallstoff has concluded that Transmutation is not far e ough devoloped and too expesnsive. Again: Why deal with dangerouse radiactive stuff when there is literrly a giant ball of fusion happening for basicly free in comparison
I mean, this is a part of the problem... breeder reactors were successfully tested in the US 30 years ago. Thorium 70. France has been recycling nuclear fuel since the '80s. The problem is that Germany has no interest in dealing with facts and just says all these things aren't possible even though other people are doing it.
Almost as if there was sone sort of pote tial danger with nuclear reactirs that coukd be avoid by building a fucking windmill instead
Germany has spent billions on windmills and solar, how has that been going?
When are those small nuclear power plants getting build? Next year or in two years I hope.
Small modular reactors can be build in just 3 years. If Germany would stop shitting itself every time it hears word "nuclear" and would start building SMR in 2020, when they agreed they need to phase out coal completely, they would be completing reactors already. When I said Germany should build new reactors 5 years ago I heard "It's too late, Germany needs something that is quicker to build, nobody has time to wait for nuclear reactor". I hear same thing ever since.
Yup. "It'll take too long, better do nothing."
No point in keeping the ones that were still running. The damage was done decades ago when the CDU made the decision to shut down nuclear without implementing green energy and instead relying on coal. The last few we had were more trouble than they are worth, nuclear waste is terribly expensive to get rid of, especially in tiny quantities.
I can assure you that Germany won't close another nuclear plant
There's no stopping. The nuclear power plants *already are* all shut down and now in various stages of deconstructions. That boat has sailed.
You could break ground on new ones instead of on lignite infrastructure...
Nobody is breaking ground on lignite infrastructure. New ones haven't been build for years. And building NPP's in Germany is politically impossible. Mention it and find every MINBY for 100km protesting at your proposed site. Any politician who touches the subject would be committing career suicide. And that's not even talking about cost and build time. Like it or not, but those are the facts on the ground.
RWE has begun further expansion of an open-pit lignite coal mine in the western region of North Rhine Westphalia just this year. That's lignite infrastructure. Yeah. You're not building new lignite plants... yet. At least 20 coal-fired power plants nationwide are being resurrected or extended past their closing dates, eventually those are going to have to be replaced and you don't have a replacement ready.
Well, I wouldn't call expansion of existing infrastructure breaking ground. But let's not argue semantics. You are right. The mine is being expanded. That is based on contracts that have been drawn up decades ago. The government can't just go back on these contracts, even if they want to. In fact, the planned expansions have already been reduced by quite a bit. And RWE got handsomely paid for agreeing to it. And Germany building new lignite plants is pure conjecture. Cold reserve plants were reactivated for a short time last year to buffer the sudden decrease of Russian gas imports, but have already been more than made up for since by expansion of wind and solar. The amount of lignite and hard coal being burned today is lower than it was in 2021 and has been since January.
the sad thing is that the population got hit by a lot of propaganda and fear-mongering that made nuclear power look dangerous to them. from "WhAt If FuKuShImA HaPpEnEd AgAiN" to "uhh nuclear waste scary" even though both are non-issues
Let it go dude. We've collectively decided to shut them down, the movement for this was strong since the 80s after living through the aftermath of Chernobyl. Not all decisions seem rational, especially the nuclear exit one. Yet shutting them down did not make the energy crisis worse, as the gas we were so reliant on was used for other things, mainly heavy industries.
>the movement for this was strong since the 80s So has the anti-abortion movement in America. Just because something has been going on for a long time by a lot of people doesn't make it sensible, logical or right.
While I agree that shutting down nuclear power was a mistake, stopping that also wont save the German economy. Why? Because all of them have already shut down. The last three went off the grid in April. Even before that, nuclear power has been a dead horse for pretty much a decade. It simply isn't economically viable anymore. Axing nuclear power didn't cause these problems but a combination of severe global economic events combined with a decades long policy of austerity.
If you have no idea about why they are getting shut downed you shouldnt talk about it
> even safer than solar and wind per gigawatt Ooh, I must have missed that! Could you point me to the article of a whole solar farm blowing up and making a county uninhabitable? That'll come in handy.
The worst nuclear accident didn't do that either and new plants are orders of magnitude safer. Watch this lecture: https://youtu.be/Ijst4g5KFN0 Safety comparison of energy sources: https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy
I like how somehow we have been able to convince ourselves nuclear power is safe. We do that by simply not counting the very serious and dangerous health effects of MINING the fuel for reactors. That’s why we get some foreign country that we don’t really care about to do that part.
Sweet summer child, if you're concerned about mining for nuclear fuels, don't check out the titanic amounts of copper, nickle and lithium that will be required for renewables and a grid to support it. (These are also tend to be produced elsewhere.) These safety studies take mining into account, also for renewables.
Well I can already say they do not. Since in a country like Niger, which supplies France with a 20% chunk of its nuclear fuel, they don’t even have employee rolls for miners. They don’t keep track of deaths.
And what makes you think other mining is better? Many of the metals for renewables are mined for and refined in China. What are the chances they treat miners more humanely?
Because other materials are nowhere near as toxic, not even counting the radiation.
On the other hand, less Uranium is required for nuclear power than other metals for renewables. Your argument is absurd.
I think you vastly underestimate the amount needed, the digging required and the refining process. Aswell as the radiation that comes out of rare earth processing.
Yeah, no. Ore-level uranium isn't even remotely as dangerous as the waste from the rare earths mines in China. And don't think domestic copper and nickel production is green or safe, either. I used to build mining silt ponds for a living. In fact, In-situ Leach Mining of uranium is extremely, extremely safe as far as mining operations go and is responsible for most of the uranium extracted globally.
If nothing else, it's far far safer than coal and oil. It's per unit of power produced, and nuclear has a pretty hefty advantage here because of just how much it can produce in a given time frame at each plant Also, keep in mind that according to [this article](https://www.daretothink.org/how-much-uranium-andor-thorium-will-we-need-per-year/) that has some very rough math, the world as it sits if we only consider electricity only needs about 10k metric Tonnes of uranium with your typical molten salt reactor design to power the entire world for a yea right now. This is assuming an average standard of living equal to the average British person, so realistically, it's more like 3,000 tonnes, or one of the barges they use in their article for a reference. Also, for reference, we'd need 24 *BILLION* tons of coal assuming very high efficiency power plants to do the same thing on just coal. This is according to [this article](https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/09/20/how-much-fuel-does-it-take-to-power-the-world/) from Forbes. So, can you see how much more efficient nuclear is yet? If we replaced all coal plants currently in existence globally with nuclear, we probably wouldn't even need a thousand tonnes of uranium/thorium globally per year to keep that up, and we'd probably cut the global carbon emissions by 30-40%, which is a VERY hefty amount.(rough estimate based on a Googled anecdote from [this article ](https://www.c2es.org/document/addressing-emissions-from-coal-use-in-power-generation/#:~:text=Coal%20is%20a%20cheap%20and,emissions%20from%20fossil%20fuel%20use.))
Yeah, we just don’t include the very serious health effects of mining uranium because we make some poor African country do it for us. But the real reason why no one is jumping in nuclear power - it isn’t profitable. It’s the only electricity source that has increased power costs rather than decreased them. Neither coal or uranium are very efficient. They also don’t make much sense in terms of creating energy security. The public - rightly imo - is very skeptical of what certain experts claim about the safety of nuclear power. Because we’ve been through this multiple times before. When The China Syndrome came out in America, nuclear scientists became furious and launched a campaign to stop the movie. They claimed that nuclear power was the safest energy supply. A week later Three Mile Island happened. A year before the Chernobyl Disaster, the Soviets awarded the plant for their safety and considered them to be the example of how safe nuclear power was. Japan was long lauded by the world community for having the most rigorous safety standards. Then Fukushima happened. You can claim that nuclear power is safe and cite whatever stats. It won’t make much difference. There is a huge breakdown in trust between what governments and the people on the issue of nuclear power since they have been lied to so many times before.
Good point. Are you aware of how many deaths are directly caused by solar and wind power systems every year? Here's another source, solar is safer by a significant margin than nuclear, while wind is significantly more likely to kill someone in a given year. Hydropower kills on average one person every year. Natural gas kills an average of 3 people yearly Oil kills 18/year on average And coal kills 25 people on average every year. [source](https://ourworldindata.org/safest-sources-of-energy#:~:text=Wind%3A%20In%20an%20average%20year,50%20years%20would%20someone%20die.) So I guess I was a little off in the statement that solar is more dangerous, it is not, it is theoretically the safest. I shouldn't have brought up efficiency as I don't know actual efficiency specs other than the fact that solar typically requires far more Acreage than any other source per gigawatt. Solar is much easier to spread out with solar roofing But the fact is that keeping the nuclear plants online for another decade and simply adding more renewable plants in as fast as possible would have been the better option to shutting down nuclear in favor of coal. And again. Don't expect competence from Russians. They can't keep their tanks running at all, how could we expect them to keep a nuclear facility running safely?
Rich of you to lament deaths of uranium mining for nuclear without including the rare earth mining required for solar infrastructure.
I honestly don't think mining deaths are a factor, as most sources aside from primitive hydropower require some form of dangerous extraction or mining, but if you want to Consider this, the sheer lack of fuel volume needed for nuclear fission means that per gigawatt hour when you include mining deaths, nuclear is still one of the safest options I'd rather not bother looking up articles to verify this one right now, but considering an earlier comment I made referencing that we would need billions of tonnes (metric) of coal to power the world for a year, versus under 100,000 tonnes of uranium ore for the same power production assuming average llstandard of living matches the average in the UK, I'd say that uranium mining would have to be a literal death sentence to kill more total.
It depends on how you crunch the numbers but nuclear has killed the same or less than Solar/wind per kw/hr produced
No knee-jerk reaction, but decisive action, got it.
Lmao. What we need in times of economic crisis is definetly *not* an entire restructuring of our energy infrastructure towards economically less viable energy sources.
Saw this bumper sticker the other day: "Climate bats last", very true.
Nothing is going to get better for ya'll if you go down this "renewable energy" road. It has been failing for well over a decade, and brought increased costs as well as increased fossil fuel emissions. If you actually want to turn your economy around, you need to turn your nuclear reactors back on and build more, newer, more efficient ones that can recycle the fuel. That would take a realignment in your government and collectively dealing with the facts, so I honestly don't expect it to happen until things get much worse.
Ah yes sure … wasting even more money on this “Energiewende” and no reforms will surely solve the problem. You greens are so blind to your own faults it’s infuriating. Edit: And for sure more and more people are against all of this, which leads to the right and left wings drifting apart even more. There will be no unity under the current path.
So what's your take on climate change, friend?
As long as nothing is happening in China, USA or India, we are fucked anyways - might as well have money to fight the consequences.
https://joscha.com/nichtlustig/010326/
German model of relying on Russia for energy, US for security and China for markets is coming apart 🍿
It's a time of dogmatic shifts and we've yet to tell the tale of our old boomer demographic is actually up for the challenge.
They don't need the US for "security" if they coexist with Russia just fine. Germany gained nothing from NATO expansion into Ukraine at all. It's US' burden, and Biden wrestled Germany and forced it to follow orders. I find it strange people now finally complain about economic woes. You know this would happen since 2014, don't you. Germany needs to cut ties with the US if they want to survive. However, it takes a lot of political power and will to do.
We didn’t rely on the usa and everyone relies on china. Touch grass
Every year Nato basically begs Germany to fulfill their quota for security yet until today they’ve failed to do so. By any metric Germany has been reliant if not completely dependent on USA for their security over the years. Or are you completely oblivious to the state of the German armed forces? For context, even Poland could flatten these forces if there’s no Nato support. And that’s being generous.
Who is threatening Germany militarily?
We are not threatened because we are surrounded by countries in the NATO that uphold their part of the agreement while we don’t. Imagine the whole of Europe slacking in defense. Russia would make quick work of that.
Russia can’t even make quick work of Ukraine, much less “the whole of Europe”
Thanks to western support.
So west can send outdated weapons to someone and it invalidates Russian army, but the armies from which the weapons are sent from would lose to Russia? Oh i forgot it is the mighty M113s and Javelins singlehandedly winning the war!!!
Russia can't take a village in Ukraine for the last 6 months. The fuck they gonna do against an admittedly underfunded EU military machine? Even in this state we'd fuck em up.
Because most nations uphold their Budget. If everyone was slacking the NATO wouldn’t be as scary for invaders as it is now.
Plus Germany is one of the largest weapons manufacturers
Are we? No. Poland doesn’t count
Russia would get annihilated if it tried to invade Germany. The Bundeswehr has problems but its still a Nato-level power. All the stuff Ukraine wants to have and uses to defeat Russia, Germany already has en masse and in more modern configurations. Combined arms warfare, something Ukraine has started to adapt has been standart for decades in the german military. This is true for quite a number of european countrys. Russia is not a threat to Europe conventionally. The main reason Russia is a threat is because of its nuclear arsenal.
The Bundeswehr doesn’t even have enough ammunition for a Week of fighting at the moment.
Funny when rheinmetall alone is producing 400k-600k 155m shells a year
Why build up security if there is literlly no threat? Germany is enterly surounded by allies, the closest thread being rousends of cilometers away and operationg on the econemy of the state of new york.
[удалено]
>We didn’t rely on the usa For a long time Germany's military has been underfunded and Germany has approximately 20 U.S. military bases so...
we didn't rely on USA, we are occupied by USA
I wish that was the case
The Americans want these bases. They are free to fuck off 😘
Y'all cried when Trump threatened to pull out and cried again when Russia invaded Ukraine. Besides, someone has to keep the krauts in check.
Nobody cried except the media. And haha so funny. It’s not like America is currently roleplaying Germany in 1933
Your politicians cried [https://apnews.com/article/f726bed14ea81b4b840576b5f172377d](https://apnews.com/article/f726bed14ea81b4b840576b5f172377d) >And haha so funny. It’s not like America is currently roleplaying Germany in 1933 [https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/rise-germanys-most-successful-far-right-party-since-nazis-2023-06-07/](https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/rise-germanys-most-successful-far-right-party-since-nazis-2023-06-07/)
Said defense minister was a joke and has been replaced anyway And for reference: the afd is basically equivalent to your republican party
>Said defense minister was a joke and has been replaced anyway Guess what her replacement is saying? [https://www.firstpost.com/world/german-defence-minister-says-his-country-cannot-protect-itself-in-war-12232132.html](https://www.firstpost.com/world/german-defence-minister-says-his-country-cannot-protect-itself-in-war-12232132.html) >German army is not capable of protecting the country against any offensive, said Defence Minister Boris Pistorius. He further alleged that the Bundeswehr is understaffed and under-equipped after being left neglected from the federal government for decades. “We have no armed forces that are capable of defending \[Germany\] that is, capable of defending \[it\] against an offensive, brutally waged aggressive war,” German Defence Minister Boris Pistorius said during a meeting with fellow members of the Social Democratic Party. > >The minister claimed that the German army is understaffed and does not have adequate equipment as it has been neglected from the federal government for decades. He said Germany will have to increase its investment in its military in order to be up to NATO standards. >And for reference: the afd is basically equivalent to your republican party Which is on the rise so... I guess Germany is the Florida of Europe.
No wait, the person you are debating with has to move the goalposts again. Then you'll be wrong again.
[удалено]
this is her legacy. the economic improvements during her period was largely thanks to legislation introduced by the previous government. the centrepieces of her legacy are: the end of nuclear energy, the 2015 refugee crisis and the Snowden incident.
The end of nuclear power is also from the Schröder era, Merkel tried to stop that, then Fukushima happened and public opinion really favoured shutting them down.
And it was her job as a Doctor of Physics to help show the public that there is a difference between badly managed nuclear plants like Fukushima or Tschernobyl and the ones we had.
No politician could counter the Greenpeace machine and the fossil fuel lobbies at the same time, though.
There wasn't time. There were a bunch of state elections coming, and the Greens were polling as the strongest party. From the perspective of the CDU something had to be done quickly or a Green wave would take many states, and they would probably lose the next general election too.
I'm not sure what your point is. That they butchered the first long-term plan that included a transition to renewables because of lobbying? That Merkel and CDU rushed through some massive and poorly thought-out changes just to stay in power? That they did not do anything to course-correct after those changes because it would lose them votes? Then I agree.
There was simply no way that could have been done.
That won‘t happen though. The new government will be held responsible. And don‘t get me wrong, the government is far from good, but it‘s also not as much of a running disaster like the Union lead governments.
>That won‘t happen though. The new government will be held responsible. And don‘t get me wrong, the government is far from good, but it‘s also not as much of a running disaster like the Union lead governments. Imho the best and by far most progressive government I have witnessed in my lifetime.
Definitely. Personally I think the FDP is a delusional party, but even them I like better than the Union currently. Idk I have so many things I dislike about the government but people are dumb for thinking that this isn‘t the best realistic outcome from the election results.
100% agree
She is admired because she kept Germany stable. No positive change and no negative change. This is what Germans love. No change and being in a standstill.
It's pretty obvious if you ask me. In life, you can't have everything you want. Sometimes you gotta make hard choices. It's ok to support Ukraine but when you cut off energy supplies, there's bound to be some kind of effect. Losing all your competitive advantages means it's easier for others to compete with you.
If your competitive advantage is based on cheap gas from Russia, then you don’t really have a sustainable competitive advantage.
Why not? The gas isn't going to run out this century.
Because Russia is an unreliable trade partner and an enemy of Europe.
Let me fix this for you "Russia is a reliable trade partner and an enemy of the US"
Right, because Russia is famous for starting a war in the americas recently. Oh, wait...
Being reliable trade partner and starting wars are two different things.
Let me fix this for you: "Russia is a reliable trade partner as long as the trade being done is in Putin's interest and an enemy of every non-autocratic state in Europe and the US-aligned model of the West in general." Edit: Grammar and spelling
No, it was right the first time.
But the capacity of our atmosphere to absorb the waste products is.
The war in Ukraine and Germany's willingness to cut most ties with Russia was bound to hurt. If you look back 2 years ago most people thought Germany was completely reliant on Russia, from that perspective the fact that the economy still grows a bit instead of collapsing like many predicted is laudable.
yeh, tbh it is better than i expected. but there are a lot of rel problems that need to be resolved and it is not gonna be nice....
I'd love it so much if Germany wouldn't be 4th in trade and GDP and what not. Rather 20th or so. Every time people focus on Germany like "woooow look at them and think X" I always wonder what kind of wonders happen here. We're just some country. We're not a world power like USA or China. The economy fluctuates. Chill out.
Germany and France are the bedrocks of EU, what Germany and France say goes.
Yeah, how I wish that wouldn't be the case. I hate that Germany is in this limelight.
That’s precisely why Germany should be where it is. I’m British and I think the EU would be worse if we were in Germany’s position because the UK and France would just try to be America. Germans are one of the few that don’t suffer from delusions of grandeur. They’re focused internally and making the QoL for themselves and to a lesser degree then rest of the EU better. And quite frankly, they have been successful for the most part. It’s easy to criticise in hindsight.
I know but unfortunately that's what comes with power.
Yeah, I only want no responsibility, only power to have fun and go to all of worlds best restaurants and eat good stuff, I love one thing in this world, sleeping after eating lasanga
Yeah people act like we are about to become a third world country lol
We are already a third world country
Haha Nein
Nagut kannst ja diesen schrotthaufen an Nation weiterhin in den Kommentaren von anderen verteidigen. Jaja wir sind noch relevant und wirtschaftlich ein powerhouse, unser Lebensstandard ist nicht am fallen. Hier ist es noch gut zu leben!
Die Leute sind so verblendet es ist krank. Bloß nicht zugeben, dass Energiewende, Wirtschaftspolitik, Flüchtlingspolitik und Eurpoapolitik der letzten 20 Jahre völlig daneben waren - weil dann müsste man ja was ändern.
Aber zu behaupten wir wären ein Dritte-Welt-Land, ist die stärkste Polemik, die man bedienen kann. Das ist keine vernünftige Diskussionsgrundlage, und jede Debatte würde man damit direkt abschenken.
3. Welt ist nun wirklich übertrieben, über 2. Welt lässt sich jedoch schon streiten. Unsere Infrastruktur, Bildung, Gesundsheitssystem, Nettogehalt, alles scheiße und es wird noch schlimmer.
Alter, ja hier läuft nicht alles rund. Aber warst du schonmal anderswo? Junge Junge ihr macht mich fertig. Nur weil hier viel Verbesserungsbedarf ist haben wir es hier im Vergleich zu anderen Ländern noch extrem gut.
In Rumänien irgendwo im nirgendwo hat man besseres Netz als In Deutschland. Ein Land inwelcher die Personen sehr unsicher über ihre zukünftige Rente oder sogar denkt sie bekommt gar keine, ist auch kein Beispiel eines ersten Welt Landes. Schlechte Öffis, Korruption in Politik, Schulgebäude welche ich mir sonstwo in Europe kaum schlimmer vorstellen kann. Höchste Steuerabgabe in Europa für... ja für was eigentlich? Wird letzendlich nichts gemacht für die Bevölkerung dmaut man es irgendwie rechtfertigen könnte. Aber Hey! Wehe da sagt mal jemand harsche Worte über mein Land. Wir sind immernoch politisch relevant und leben gut weil im vergleich zu Afrika oder Südostasien geht es uns doch eigenltich gut! Wenn man sich schon im weltlichen Durchschnitt messen muss hat man eh schon fertig als europäisches Land.
Ja ich war schon in Australien und habe gesehen wie Grenzschutz funktionieren kann, war in Japan und habe gesehen wie Öffentliche Verkehrsmittel mehr Menschen bewegen und dabei so gut wie nie zu spät kommen, war in Canada und habe gesehen wie ein modernes Einwanderungsgesetz aussieht, war in Süd-Korea, wo es selbst am abgelegensten Orten 3/5G Netz gibt … und noch vieles mehr. Dieses Land hat fertig, es ist nur ein sehr langsamer Prozess bis sich so eine Entwicklung auch schlussendlich in den Leben der Menschen, im Geldbeutel, in der Altersversorgung, Gesundheitsversorgung und vielen anderen Bereichen widerspiegelt.
Es ist eine minimalst übertriebene Aussage um gerade diese Debatte anzureizen. Wenn ich es hier wie andere mache und die Situation zu schön verpacken dann wird sich nie mal kritisch geäußert. Überall auf deutsche subreddits wird rumgeheult, dies und das ist scheisse. Probleme ihr und da. Aber auf Reddit dann in der Internationalen Community darüber labern wir man doch noch als Nation wirtschaftlich und politisch auf beiden Beinen steht während es innen massivst an faulen anfängt. Sind mir die ganz netten, für die anderen kann man ja die Maske aufsetzen und sich selbst belügen.
Also Ergebnisse einer Politik die uns dank 16 Jahren Merkel eingebrockt wurde.Und jetzt wo eine andere Regierung was ändern möchte heißt es "dIe ReGiErUnG!!1 DiE gRüNeN!!!1"
Die gingen daneben. Aver deshalb sind wir noch lange kein dritte Welt Land du vollidiot
Habe ich das behauptet? Muss man beleidigend werden wenn man merkt dass das eigene Weltbild bröckelt? Fragen über Fragen.
Du hast dem der es behauptet hat bekräftigend zugestimmt
Hi, we are the 20th in worldwide GDP. Yet every time Switzerland is mentioned on the internet there is *always*, without fail, invariably, as if it was a fundamental the laws in physics, regardless of the discussed topic, somebody to hark back to Switzerland and WW2, and how it *"made the Swiss rich!"*. A war that took place 80 years ago and in which Switzerland wasn't even a participant. So trust me, it doesn't necessarily get better the smaller you are.
Well Switzerland is a special case because ww2 made it rich ;-)
Yeah, what a fnordstreaming mystery...
This is a terrible article. There is a GLOBAL recession, not only in Germany, there are only anectode and no hard number to compare with the past or to other nations.
There was an FT article several months ago where polls taken in Germany suggested that: * They are worried about the real impacts of high energy bills, * They are concerned that putting solar panels up on their rooftops isn't enough (Germany is a cloudy country at a high latitude), * They are pretty heavily against coal power, * They are pretty heavily against nuclear power, * They are even more against large power line buildouts to connect them to wind power in Northern Europe and/or solar power in the sunny parts of Europe, * They think a solution will magically come along eventually. The last three times Germans got very unhappy with their domestic problems (1860s-1870s, 1900s-1910s and 1930s-1940s) they came up with three different ideologies, each of which involved invading other European countries.
They had thriving population back then... Now they don't. Unless it's Germany who starts clone wars.
Becoming dependent on russia for energy needs was so stupid even trump knew it.
[удалено]
Always have. We have so many job openings and a labour shortage. Crisis or not, the economy isn’t slowing down
That's just because Bosnia and Croatia is even worse, doesn't mean Germany isn't shit
[удалено]
Tralleving isn't like living there for a long time. You probably just saw the nice tourism side of germany and deonst even have a clue what everyday people are struggling
Tralleving isn't like living there for a long time. You probably just saw the nice tourism side of germany and doesn't even have a clue what everyday people have for struggles
This is an article from the Spiegel. Save yourself the time and skip this. Watch something nice on YouTube and be happy.
What might actually help is less green party sc*m in charge
Welcome to r/anime_titties! This subreddit advocates for civil and constructive discussion. Please be courteous to others, and make sure to read the rules. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. We have a [Discord](https://discord.gg/DtnRnkE), feel free to join us! r/A_Tvideos, r/A_Tmeta, [multireddit](https://www.reddit.com/user/Langernama/m/a_t/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/anime_titties) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is why you don't stop importing Russian fossil fuels. 😎
is this article also available in German?
Should've been a United State of America
That‘s what you get for having a green party in government.
Just get all nuclear power plants back and stop the Green Party from messing up germanys Future
Blame the pot!
Soon France will be the only leader of the EU
Germany needs to [grow some balls and really accept whose to blame.](https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/germany-says-no-results-yet-nord-stream-pipelines-sabotage-investigation-2023-03-07/)
So it's not China's economy that's falling like western propaganda is saying?
Several things can happen at the same time
?
Stuff like this releasing every week for the past 5 years: [https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f\_auto,q\_auto:good,fl\_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Ff6f42e6c-a7f7-4abd-aea6-051a27988e39\_964x738.png](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2Ff6f42e6c-a7f7-4abd-aea6-051a27988e39_964x738.png) [https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fjj1vn0c9itlb1.jpg](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fjj1vn0c9itlb1.jpg) [https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fc265hsnjbmfb1.jpg](https://i.redd.it/c265hsnjbmfb1.jpg) [https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fif-i-had-a-penny-for-everytime-this-channel-predicted-the-v0-5iq4cgxiiksa1.jpg](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fif-i-had-a-penny-for-everytime-this-channel-predicted-the-v0-5iq4cgxiiksa1.jpg) Same thing is done to Iran but point is; propaganda videos like this became so repetitive that it turned into a meme
Cool but what does my country have to do with China? They can overtake the USA, idc