YOUR FRIENDS' ACTIVITY

    German nuclear shutdown sets global example: Merkel

    Chancellor Angela Merkel said Germany could serve as a global trailblazer with its decision Monday to phase out nuclear power by 2022 but France, Europe's biggest producer, said it will not follow suit.

    Merkel said the "fundamental" rethink of energy policy in the world's number four economy, prompted by the disaster in March at Japan's Fukushima plant, opened new opportunities for business and climate protection.

    "We believe we as a country can be a trailblazer for a new age of renewable energy sources," she told reporters.

    "We can be the first major industrialised country that achieves the transition to renewable energy with all the opportunities -- for exports, development, technology, jobs -- it carries with it."

    Yet neighbour France, while saying it "respected" the German position, insisted it was not ready to give up nuclear energy which Prime Minister Francois Fillon described as a "solution for the future".

    "We think that for some decades at least we will not be able to do without nuclear energy," added Foreign Minister Alain Juppe.

    The German plan, hammered out by Merkel's ruling coalition in marathon overnight negotiations, will see the country shutter all 17 of its nuclear reactors, eight of which are currently off the electricity grid, within 11 years.

    "We want the electricity of the future to be safer and at the same time reliable and affordable," Merkel told reporters as she accepted the findings of an expert commission on nuclear power she appointed in March.

    "We learned from Fukushima that we have to deal differently with risks," added the chancellor, whose popularity suffered over her earlier pro-nuclear stance.

    Seven of the eight reactors already offline are the country's oldest, which the government shut down for three months pending a safety probe after the Fukushima emergency.

    The eighth is the Kruemmel plant, in north Germany, which has been offline for years because of technical problems.]

    Six further reactors will shut down by 2021 and the three most modern will stop operating the following year 2022.

    Monday's decision, which could run into legal challenges from energy companies, means Germany will have to find the 22 percent of its electricity needs that were covered by nuclear power from other sources.

    A draft implementation plan to be debated next week would focus on hiking energy efficiency to reduce electricity use, building new power plants fired by greenhouse gas emitting natural gas and coal, expanding the production of wind energy, and improving the supply network from wind farms.

    Thorny questions remained unanswered, including finding a permanent storage site for the highly radioactive waste and slashing CO2 emissions.

    The decision represents a humbling U-turn for Merkel, who in late 2010 decided to extend the lifetime of the reactors by an average of 12 years. This would have kept them open until the mid-2030s.

    That decision was unpopular even before the earthquake and tsunami that severely damaged the Fukushima facility, sparking mass anti-nuclear protests in Germany.

    The Fukushima accident has ignited a renewed global debate about the safety of nuclear power, with opinions differing widely.

    Nuclear opponents slammed the deal Monday and said they would stage fresh demonstrations next month to demand a faster phase-out.

    France, meanwhile, said nuclear power allowed the country with its 58 reactors to provide electricity at prices about 40 percent cheaper than other European countries, on average.

    "German households, for example, pay twice as much for their electricity," claimed France's Industry Minister Eric Besson.

    Sweden said the German decision would lead to a disjointed energy policy that failed to adequately address climate change.

    Poland and nuclear-free Austria, however, welcomed the German move.

    "This decision by a highly industrialised country will have a very strong signal effect. It shows that scrapping nuclear power is both possible and feasible," said Austrian Environment Minister Nikolaus Berlakovich.

    And Poland, considering launching its first nuclear power station in 2020, said it would rethink its plans.

    The United States and Britain have announced plans to build new reactors as an alternative to producing harmful greenhouse gas emissions.

    Italy scrapped nuclear power in 1987, one year after the Chernobyl disaster, while Switzerland said last week it would phase out atomic energy by 2034.

    How do you feel about this article?

     

    43 comments

    • Joab  •  1 year 0 months ago
      For countries thinking of building one it is time to rethink whether is it worth it(cheap and clean) as any nuclear fallout can be very costly and vast area depending on seriousness will be useless for decades.
      We should tap the solar, wind and current in the ocean for natural ener----. It can be costly to build but in long run it is safer. Singapore is a tiny country that we cannot afford a nuclear fallout therefore have to use whatever we have to harvest the solar ener---- with solar panel build on top of out HDB, street lamp, bus stop etc that will provide lighting at night. The list goes on.......

      Save OUR earth for the next generation.....
      • jayesh 1 year 0 months ago
        solar panels are horribly inefficient right now. Short term solutions is for countries to stop their bickering and pool their resources to RnD better nuclear and renewable measures to provide clean fuel. all the fear mongering gets us nowhere!
      • A Poster 1 year 0 months ago
        They've been RnDing nuclear ener g y for decades now. Face it, nuclear ener g y just isn't safe.
      • cheah 1 year 0 months ago
        Solar panel can be further develop for better efficiency .... at least better than nuclear
    • ME  •  1 year 0 months ago
      I admire Merkel for rethinking her stand regarding Nuclear Power. It is truly admirable how humbling she is, at first she was PRO Nuclear power then after review of the Fukushima Japan Nuclear Power Plan, she has decided against Nuclear Ener----. I remember there was also a debate regarding Nuclear Power Plant in the Philippines. Universities, Catholic Schools, Catholic Church, and Wise Politicians were Against Nuclear Power... and now we see its benefits. The same way, Catholic Church is still against RH Bill... Smart People will always stand and fight for what is WISE and SAFE.
      • Vic 1 year 0 months ago
        I don't admire you, however, for having such multiple posts!
      • Vic 1 year 0 months ago
        Stop using semantics when obviously there is no factor of comparisson between the two. Socio-political or religious beliefs CANNOT be used as a common derivative when talking about Nuclear Ener---- and the RH Bill. Simply put, and for your own understanding, the RH Bill and Nuclear Ener---- are two VERY different beasts!
      • ME 1 year 0 months ago
        I agree RH BILL and nuclear power are beasts - UNSAFE.
    • Ella  •  1 year 0 months ago
      France actually built their nuclear plants at their German border so the French aren't bothered by a nuclear fallout since Germany will actually be worst hit.
    • Eric Vadivale  •  1 year 0 months ago
      So they got 10 years to find a new source of non-polluting ener---- and figure out how they want to dispose of the nuclear waste... lets hope the world doesn't end before that.
    • Kangen Man  •  1 year 0 months ago
      Well, the must have learnt some lesson. Good on them. While others still gives priority on money and not health. Those politicians who disagree with closing it should stay near the nuclear power plant. See if they walk the talk?
    • Koon KIng  •  1 year 0 months ago
      Way to go Germans as it is commendable that they are tapping on alternative source of ener----. However lets hope that the alternative source of ener---- is not using petroleum. Country like Singapore where there is vast amount of sunlight should consider using solar power instead of nuclear option as the cost spent on nuclear is more costly. Shame on the govt if they decide to embark on the nuclear path when they have other ways to generate electricity. I just hope that we pay and pay to have a more level head govt and not those who risk our lives for so called nuclear trend to show off that we can afford it
    • gml  •  1 year 0 months ago
      Bravo! Germany for your decision. For your country and your leaders have seen that the potential for mass damage to the Human Being far outweighs any short term or long term profits from Nuclear Power.
      With your your passion and excellence in technolo----, you would succeed.
      All the best!
    • .  •  1 year 0 months ago
      "We can be the first major industrialised country that achieves the transition to renewable ener---- with all the opportunities -- for exports, development, technolo----, jobs -- it carries with it."

      When that happens, Germany will have the advantage of exporting the technolo---- and technical know-how on how to accomplish a renewable-ener---- economy.
    • Gabriel 777  •  1 year 0 months ago
      very good scrap it as early as you can
    • the street cleaner  •  1 year 0 months ago
      NUCLEAR was never a solution for ener----
      evil humans had other agenda and purpose for nuclear
      this nuclear reactor plant will be self destruct which no one will know
      yes nuclear ener---- shorten the life span of earth
      and remember that by using nuclear power for ener---- means we will be breathing in the polluted air!
      Germany # 1
      • Just Me 1 year 0 months ago
        Nonsense...
    • GodHasSpoken  •  1 year 0 months ago
      1 mistake/accident is enough to wipe out the whole city.
    • Susanablum  •  1 year 0 months ago
      good decision............
    • HikoTory  •  1 year 0 months ago
      Its a good idea tho. at current tech and the rate of nuclear waste, its not a feasible ener---- solution in the long run.
      The cons would be looking into alt ener---- sources...which would be spurred on by this announcement.
    • Joker  •  1 year 0 months ago
      Well done! Btw, NEA or ENV can advise where to dispose our waste/used Lithium Ion HP batteries? Into the Semcorp Waste Bags?
    • Tan  •  1 year 0 months ago
      If there is a life span for all things, I believe neuclear ener---- will shorten the life span of the Earth.
      • jayesh 1 year 0 months ago
        your shortsightedness and that of the masses will doom us all, without nuclear power we are either going to deplete fossil fuels or kill ourselves with global warming before they get depleted.
    • Wee Lee  •  1 year 0 months ago
      way to go Germany!!! Japan and Germany are the 2 countries I admire most in terms of technolo----. I believe they will show us the way to a nuclear-free world. the other way to nuclear-free world is to go back to pre-industrialisation period. eg. use horse-carriages/rickshaws instead of cars. this way doesn't go down well with modern people used to the good/easy life of using machines.
    • Jose  •  1 year 0 months ago
      The solution to the problem on use of nuclear in prower production is reduce our electric consumption. People are free to use electricity as long as they can afford it but that would mean need to produce more power to the extent of using nuclear. Probably if we limit the use of electricity and at the same time develop renewable sources we may reduce the threat of nulear radiation and greenhouse effect.
      • Hahaha 1 year 0 months ago
        Just like you @Jose, you're wasting your time using computer to post your comment.
      • julius 1 year 0 months ago
        demenco..if your going to use your computer to post crappy statement then YOU are one who's wasting your time here... this news is very informative for you to ruin it..

        ps im at work and im at lunch...
    • Jimmy Yap  •  1 year 0 months ago
      If all the major industralised countries adopt Germany's position, they can collectively pour more money into research and development to urgently find a cheaper and safer alternative source(s) of ener----; and this will be beneficial to mankind. For the sake of humanity, thererore, the phasing out of necleur power should be an agenda for discussion and subsequent action by the United Nation.

      Save the world!
    • Joseph  •  1 year 0 months ago
      Way To Go.......Good on ya
    • Marlon  •  1 year 0 months ago
      I agree with you Jose, but on the other side we have to consider that our population is rapidly increasing therefore the demand of electrical use will follow. If there is no other source of electricity aside from nuclear power plants then they have to develop a more safer plant base from what happened to Japan's nuclear power plant because that may be the worst case scenario that may possibly happen.

    Featured Blog Posts