In germany, by law, a Wind wheel has to be at least 1000 Meters away from a Residential area while a Coal powerplant only has to bee 400m away. you might see a small problem here
@PunkerTrottzEltern
2 жыл бұрын
best part is, we have a giant windpark in the north sea, not conectet to the grid, because we can't store electricety, so it makse "no" sense to conect it to the grid... Fucking politicians. to currupt to do anything right.
@ooldmka
2 жыл бұрын
That's not actually true everywhere. There's an even funnier thing. The 10h rule. The height multiplied by ten is the minimum distance to a nearby resided area(one person in a house is technically enough)
@Chris-8047
2 жыл бұрын
Because residents like the birds
@moreadrenalin7252
2 жыл бұрын
@@Chris-8047 im sure they like the forests more then the huge coal pits
@moreadrenalin7252
2 жыл бұрын
@@Chris-8047 and you can also paint the rotors wich drastically decreases bird deaths that are rare anyways
@MauriceM.
2 жыл бұрын
As a German I can only say: We also don‘t understand wtf our politicians are doing 🤷🏻♂️ Most are completely incompetent and don’t bring any experience or expertise to the table. You can be Minister for families and youth in the first year, become minister of defense the next. After that you get voted president of the European Commission even tho you’re not even one of the candidates… it‘s a sad joke.
@thomasgaertner
2 жыл бұрын
@Ludwigvan Definitely not worth any money.
@HauntedXXXPancake
2 жыл бұрын
They really should put Uschis' picture next to the phrase "Falling up the ladder" in the dictionary. I hope I'm not still be around when they make her Empress of Europe for accidentally flooding half of it or something equally "WHAAAT?!".
@erdbeersaft584
2 жыл бұрын
@@HauntedXXXPancake You missunderstand something. To a German politician any work related to the eu is more like you got taken out of german politics. If you look a bit back all politicians of bigger german partys who got "transfered" to eu dissappeard somewhat in our german political world.
@turtlecheese8
2 жыл бұрын
Well I’m glad clueless politicians isn’t just an American problem.
@ichigo8631
2 жыл бұрын
as a german i can confirm this is 100% true
@neon-kitty
2 жыл бұрын
The funny thing is that getting a wind park built in Germany requires you to jump through loads of bureacratic hoops, takes ages and there's a good chance it won't get built in the end because local residents will mobilise against it. But tearing down entire villages to mine brown coal is a-okay (partly thanks to corrupt politicians with ties to the coal industry). Brown coal was not the only alternative after we decided to abandon nuclear power. Sure, we wouldn't have been able to plug the entire hole in our energy mix with renewables right away but we could have a lot more renewable energy and a lot less coal in our mix today if our governments had chosen to properly subsidise and support renewable energy. They didn't and here we are.
@youxkio
2 жыл бұрын
Sounds weird how a democratic country that knows the pros and cons of nuclear and has no power against the coal lobby. German people can move against nuclear but not against coal. If they can win against nuclear they could move against coal. It is noticeable that they are clearly informed about the damage coal makes on people's health and the degradation of the environment. Hypocrites.
@horatiohornblower2412
2 жыл бұрын
@@youxkio Well after the Fukushima Incident there was a big Movement against Nuclear, wich they were totally right about. So Mutti Merkel Changes her Politic when she felt the wind of change what she was always doing to stay popular. The thing ist like the Main comment said the coal Lobby used corrupt CDU politicians swing the favor to them to replace the nuclear power plants when the public interest wasnt that high on this topic anymore... Now it is again and we have the problem again... Danke Merkel
@td9250
2 жыл бұрын
"corrupt politicians" Italians and Romanians are rolling in their corruption laughing at you.
@lonestarr1490
2 жыл бұрын
@@youxkio People _do_ move against coal.
@youxkio
2 жыл бұрын
@@lonestarr1490 I see. Another aspect is how is the evolution of renewables in Germany. I read the news that Portugal, one of the PIGS of the crisis 2010, just deactivated its last coal power plant last month. Why Germany can't do the same?
@bryanbarnard4094
2 жыл бұрын
In the magical fantasyland of Germany, lignite coal and biomass are cleaner then nuclear.
@JulianNagano
2 жыл бұрын
Wow! I live in this area of Germany and found this giant hole on the map recently. I had no clue, now I know, thanks to you.
@kentonbenoit9629
2 жыл бұрын
Your so cringe right now
@lithepear9129
2 жыл бұрын
@@kentonbenoit9629 huh?
@raunaklanjewar677
2 жыл бұрын
@@kentonbenoit9629 you a 10 yo or something?
@_ao101
2 жыл бұрын
@@kentonbenoit9629 is right, if you live in the Rhine Area, you definitely know the Holes. There are literally Kilometers of nothing between highways and dust blowing over it and stuff. So if the commenter isn't from the Moon than he's telling a cringe joke. (not that i don't like this Humour)
@ballsdeep9981
2 жыл бұрын
All cool. Better informed later than never. :) Just remember to vote Grüne or Linke so those get replaced quicker with renewable energy.
@qonra
2 жыл бұрын
A nuclear plant on a mountainous island with limited area for urban development, constant earthquakes, and freaking tsunami's is so insanely different from Germany's situation that I don't get how it was ever even under consideration to phase it out
@thatdude1435
2 жыл бұрын
This^ The germans are some of the very few people i would trust to build something like this.
@alfrredd
2 жыл бұрын
@@thatdude1435 I actually wouldn't, they aren't that good at making buildings. Most other things, yes.
@thatdude1435
2 жыл бұрын
@@alfrredd hell, call the norwegians then, they build stuff that last forever hehe
@kashmirha
2 жыл бұрын
Probably Russia worked very very hard on that nuclear reactor ban too, to be able to sell their gas to Germany... They helped the anti-nuke lobby, etc...
@alfrredd
2 жыл бұрын
@@kashmirha Yes, they don't want countries to be energy independent.
@PalmTheFirst
2 жыл бұрын
From what I recall, it were the climate activists whom were against nuclear power in germany, and also the reason why the government there abandon it. Which seems ironic in my mind.
@mpunktbphotography8515
2 жыл бұрын
It wasn’t even the activists alone, there were a lot of concerned citizens which weren’t entirely informed about how the Fukushima incident came to be. But yes, the people pressured the government
@NaughtyNovaroo69
2 жыл бұрын
look if Germany doesn't have natural disasters and people are scared, make them pay for a new nuclear reactor that needs 1 in a million chance of failing than a normal one,, tsunami volcano earthquake tornado-proof plant also, build a nuclear waste containment facility a few Km deep into the heart and have massive 100 250 m wide elevators that can easily transport 10k tons or whatever
@mpunktbphotography8515
2 жыл бұрын
@@NaughtyNovaroo69 as to be expected by the conservative nature of Germans, it involves spending money. That’s our peoples main flaw. We got taught about how safe those reactors were in Germany, they absolutely were, but in the past, our nuclear waste bin is also highly critical among the people, became yea, it just exists and media tells the people it’s bad.
@silianfrische696
2 жыл бұрын
Yes but no. They never wanted iz bo be replaced by coal, but by renewables.
@iamcurious9541
2 жыл бұрын
@@silianfrische696 Which it was. The power produced by lignite has stayed constant at around 20 gigawats. In fact all fossile fuels have stayed about constant. What did increase was the renewables. They have increased by about 60 gigawats, and today provide half of our electricity.
@medicfromtf2955
2 жыл бұрын
The first english youtuber, who doesnt completely fail in pronouncing german words
@myujokt733
2 жыл бұрын
He's Danish.
@Kal-Zakath
2 жыл бұрын
Just a small correction: French nuclear power plants produce 70% of the electricity and not energy, electricity only represents about 25% of the total energy consumption. French nuclear power plants provide about 18% of the energy in 2019
@rachelcookie321
2 жыл бұрын
What’s the difference between electricity and energy?
@Kal-Zakath
2 жыл бұрын
@@rachelcookie321 In physics energy is the quantity characterizing a physical system and expressing its capacity to modify the state of other systems with which it enters in interaction. Electricity is the set of physical phenomena associated with the presence and motion of matter that has a property of electric charge (electron for example) If you say electricity and energy are the same thing than you neglected the chemical energy (fossil fuel or natural gas) who are the main form of energy used by ours society
@TheFroschkind
2 жыл бұрын
@@rachelcookie321 Electricity in this context means just the electrical power consumed/produced in the country, while the total energy consumption/production also includes heating and cooling as well as the fuel consumed by vehicles.
@rachelcookie321
2 жыл бұрын
@@Kal-Zakath I mean I know the difference in physics but I couldn’t think of another energy so I was wondering what the difference was. Doesn’t fossil fuels and natural gas energy just turn into electricity too?
@magicweaponr072
2 жыл бұрын
@@rachelcookie321 Think about it, do cars turn gas into electricity for motion? Cars basically inject gas in their engines and ignite it, producing an explosion. With that energy, cars turn their wheels. (This explanation is oversimplified, but should give you the gist of it)
@Agrarvolution
2 жыл бұрын
Interesting video. One thing you didn’t mention in your video and is important for their decisions imo is that Germany has a decades long hot potato game with their nuclear waste, because they can‘t find a good long term solution for its storage place. (That‘s is contested by way too many reasons that find in this comment.)
@jeanyluisa8483
2 жыл бұрын
Did any country beside Finland find a long term storage for its nucelar waste? I dont think so. But it's correct that not having any proper final storage for the nuclear waste is one of the arguments many Germans have against nuclear energy.
@ketsuekikumori9145
2 жыл бұрын
@@jeanyluisa8483 I was going to say the same thing. Ironically, they are digging holes for coal when they could've dug holes for nuclear waste. Obviously, the coal holes aren't good enough as they are actively being dug and are too shallow for long term waste storage. Plus we don't know the geographical stability of the area to potentially use it as storage.
@Luredreier
2 жыл бұрын
@@ketsuekikumori9145 Yeah, nuclear just isn't a solution...
@phantomzpro250
2 жыл бұрын
They can use the dug out hole and build a large storage container for the waste. It's not going to be easy, but it's better than polluting the air.
@grantguy8933
2 жыл бұрын
How does the French able to solve their nuclear waste problem?
@Skyrimfan002
2 жыл бұрын
As a German, you got one thing slightly wring at the start. German politicians, especially of the CDU mostly don't see carbon emissions asbthat big of a problem. We have a serious lobbying problem in this country and the coal industry loves throwing cash at conservative politicians, so they can keep their business going. They just pretend like they care a lot, which is why they had the 2038 goal set. This appeases the population that cares about climate change a little while also keeping the coal industry as their backer. The only reason why the goal is 2030 now, is that the CDU was voted out and we now have a new more liberal coalition taking power (which you also didn't mention).
@gregbrunner599
2 жыл бұрын
Which will equate to more green wasteful spending. You think your energy cost are high now, wait when the real cost hit you for so called fake green energy. But China will love it, for they make billions and create thousands of job, meanwhile Germans have to live in the cold to afford it
@MarciWelli
2 жыл бұрын
And he forget to tell the fact that neighbour countries like france are buildong up new nuclear power plant and germany hasn't enough options to produce enough 'green'electricity by its own constantly. Ecspecially in the winter. And wind & water turbines are causing natural problems too. It's also difficult for the goverment to find a proper middleway for it's people and their economy while protecting the nature. Germany also closed their lignite mines near leipzig /dreseden years ago. It was a big step forward into the right way.
@tomvos5594
2 жыл бұрын
@@MarciWelli Not one country is able to sustain a large amount of energy with renewables. That's unfortunately the problem with renewables. That's why nuclear power, and especially the research to fusion power, is so big and important. It's the only way that can create large amounts of energy, can be kept in check by having extremely high safety standards when those plants are build. And when fusion power comes along, there won't be anymore waste either, but fusion is still a couple of years, if not decades away. I would agree with you that closing those mines is good, tho I highly doubt it would be because of "going green". But the reason I said "would agree", and don't fully agree, is because of the expansion of these rheinland mines. This shows they're not scaling down the mining, but - at least - maintaining the same amount of coal imput. And do you know what will happen when these coal patches run out? They'll try to find new coal, and tear down cities because of it. So I wouldn't say that they're improving anything.
@johnkramer8091
2 жыл бұрын
The NRW coal mine contracts with RWE that cause this disaster were made under the SPD/Green rule by former minister of the environment Johannes Remmel of the Green Party. Not the CDU.
@Silver_Prussian
2 жыл бұрын
Uhh conservatives bad havent seen in your country or any other country a soc dem or any politicly correct lef party or irganisation that is not corrupt or not hypocritic, if the soc dems and greens are so good and smart why havent they fixed the problem yet they are the new government now arent they yet they are all extremly backwards and anti-green, nucler energy is more clean, more productive and overall better than any orher source today, windmils and solar panals dont provide as much energy as needed and its not always windy or sunny and you cant build dams on every single river can you ? Nucler power should have been more than 70% of every countries energy source by now but we live in a world of corruption unfortunatly
@sammydemon666
2 жыл бұрын
Nomenclature note: a city is a specific type of very large settlement, and should not be used to describe the small villages that the mine has engulfed.
@fishinforfun8781
2 жыл бұрын
So much bias here.
@fazeobama8872
2 жыл бұрын
@@fishinforfun8781 especially the point about france using less coal... im mean sure but they have hilarious amount of nuclear and idk of they have any good plans for getting rid of spent fuel...
@fishinforfun8781
2 жыл бұрын
@@fazeobama8872 Right, like France is some picture of ecological protection. Also of course Germany uses more power, they have a bigger economy. 2.28Bil vs 3.33Bil.
@nealkandel4382
2 жыл бұрын
@@fazeobama8872 Whats bad about nuclear?
@robbieaulia6462
2 жыл бұрын
@@nealkandel4382 What's bad about nuclear you may ask? 1. Nuclear powerplant consumes a crap ton of water, like a crap ton. 2. Spent fuel needs to be dealt with somehow since those radioactivity isn't just going to go away for a long time. 3. Nuclear powerplant disasters are very difficult to control, though it is very rare compared to other powerplant disasters. 4. It's one of the least cost effective way of producing electricity which is the main reason why it's not being used in a larger scale. 5. Since it's basically the same technology as a nuclear bomb, countries can easily reverse engineer the technology to make nuclear bombs like Israel. But of course we can't overlook the good parts of nuclear with these downsides.
@ianwinkler6224
2 жыл бұрын
Me: "What's Lignite?" Germany: "Lignite Balls."
@twisted_void
2 жыл бұрын
I drove on the motorway few times past this mine. It’s mind boggling how big it is.
@jonathanberisha183
2 жыл бұрын
i want to see it what is the motorway name/number
@EhzyG
2 жыл бұрын
@@jonathanberisha183 Hi, its the A46 on the nothern end near the city of Jüchen and the A44 on the east end ot the heading to Jülich and later Aachen. Also the A4 leaving Cologne towards Aachen if you want to see the both big holes on the south of the brown coal area. I give the advice to check on a Map
@twisted_void
2 жыл бұрын
@@jonathanberisha183 there is even a view point where you can see it much better, called Tagebau Hambach.
@Freshbott2
2 жыл бұрын
It’s mine boggling
@katestewart100
2 жыл бұрын
I compared it to where I live and the hole is twice the size of central Birmingham (UK). If I could walk in a straight line across it, it would take 2-3 hours.
@kundbalint4091
2 жыл бұрын
So this is basically the difference between taking action and taking action. You can either do something, that is popular and on the surface, looks like something that makes a lot of sense in achieving your goal (in this case, becoming a green country), without second thought and make everything significantly worse, or you can maybe just think for a couple of minutes and conclude if an idea is rubbish. The irony is, that this whole coal mine, was nearly entirely caused by the greens themselves. Even if you want to remove nuclear (I can see quite a lot of logical arguments in that), maybe you should do it, when you've already phased out carbon completely and can be sure, that it will be replaced by renewables, and not lignite...
@Lichcrafter
2 жыл бұрын
facts
@danger4066
2 жыл бұрын
Also Germany has a large steel production which needs carbon. And can’t really get more carbon in iron by just electricity
@oldoneeye7516
2 жыл бұрын
According to estimates from multiple different organisations, including the German institute for Economic Research, the lignite is not even necessary - Germany could easily go without it. There are enough alternative power plants using gas for instance - which Germany buys from Russia. It is all about money for the right people. The biggest mining companies literally own politicians. THAT is the reason for the mining.
@danial1603
2 жыл бұрын
The mines probably produce lots of revenue for Germany so if it makes lots of money why not keep it
@xxXLonewolf87Xxx
2 жыл бұрын
@@danial1603 funfakt it came out later that the destruktion of those citys where wrongfuly done but there keept it down under wraps -.-
@MalawisLilleKanal
2 жыл бұрын
Must be why electricity is so cheap in Germany these days.
@joachimfrank4134
2 жыл бұрын
@@danial1603 Mining is highly subsidised in Germany, so I don't think they make much money.
@nextstopptop3963
2 жыл бұрын
@@MalawisLilleKanal it sadly is absolutely not
@kirill6850
2 жыл бұрын
The difference between German and Russian coal mines is basically just: russia has unpopulated areas bigger than Germany, where coal is very common. Germany is just a relatively small nation (at least in comparison to russia).
@AlexBeau9
2 жыл бұрын
And yet Russia uses less than half the amount of coal as Germany and has the good types like black coal and anthracite that are way more efficient. Also, Germany is small in size but is overall very densely populated.
@kirill6850
2 жыл бұрын
@@AlexBeau9 yeah, I mean that's the strangest part. I mean after cheenobyl all of europe was hesitant about nuclear power, but in Germany this would 100% make sense, as its cheap reliable... AND clean/ environmentally friendly.
@ottovonbismarck1898
2 жыл бұрын
@@kirill6850 Many germans know that, but more germans think nuclear=bad
@Gorbag100
2 жыл бұрын
@@kirill6850 to be honest, nuclear power is only clean and cheap if you ignore the fact that A) nobody knows where the nuclear waste should go and B) nuclear powerplants are basicly uninsured (in germany, the maximum a company has to pay for damages by a nuclear powerplant is 2.5billion €, while expected damages for the worst case scenary would be a over 250-500billion €)
@9kArdos3
2 жыл бұрын
@@Gorbag100 Where do you think uranium and plutonium comes from? Nuclear reactors create such materials? We do know what to do with uranium rods and such. These materials are, were and will be part of Earth's life for millions of years, depending on the isotopes, even beyond millions, humanity is a blip in that history. You think Australians or Kazakh people check the map for uranium before a walk? These and other similar materials are present in loads of spaces, some of them makes sense to mine, some make less, presence is eternally abundant, their half life is huge. We can store them even better than nature does, if better means less exposure to complex life. Do we actually? Is the only question. The only real problem is less exposure may not better, how nature does it is might be the best, we can't do that with purified nuclear fuel, but we haven't even thought about it.
@TBH_Inc
2 жыл бұрын
Good video, except it’s a bit misleading to say Germany is replacing nuclear with coal because, well, they aren’t. If you look at a graph of Germany emery production over time by type, you can see coal stays pretty constant, and it is the renewables, mainly solar and wind, that replace the nuclear as well as fill the increasing energy demand over time.
@XGD5layer
2 жыл бұрын
They increased energy imports from Poland, iirc
@ferkeap
2 жыл бұрын
You have to look at the 2001 start of the nuclear exit. This is why the coal plants got a date of 2038, now an unrealistic 2030. Those decades of wasted time to build off nuclear instead of coal. That's a political decision of not acting for the climate. Yes wind and sun grew, but that is a parallel structure, blooming the nuclear exit.!
@MrBrachti
2 жыл бұрын
Yeah and It'll stay this way because of the volitility of the power consumption - unless you want to throw away massive amounts of green energy
@ivanmihailovic421
2 жыл бұрын
Germany's energy policy currently is either very selfish or very unrealistic: they don't want nuclear because of paranoia developed in last century and they think wind and solar can replace everything. That's unrealistic part. Eventually, they are aware wind and solar cannot be sufficient and reliable sources of energy and they will import electricity when needed, leaving other sources of energy (dirty sources, according to them) outside their borders. Clean Germany will have electricity as long as they can pay for it. That part is selfish. This selfish way is very risky and puts them in high dependency which, in today's world, may slow down their technological progress and they want to lead it.
@MrBrachti
2 жыл бұрын
@@ivanmihailovic421 yes you are absolutely right! but as I said in another comment i made on this video: gotta have to appease the activists i guess :S
@napoleon123markus
2 жыл бұрын
7:40 Well first of all, the familys that had to leave their homes were paid really, really well. The Government paid them nearly 3x the worth of their homes, and they were offered newly build homes just a couple km away. Yeah it probably sucks to leave your home and move, but you get a much newer and bigger home and still live in the same area. 2nd the "totally destroyed" landscapes are destroyed for now, but the coal companie has to rebuild the area they were digging in. You can see their plans for the "holes" on their internet platform: what they will build there is 20x better then what was there before. They are building a freaking sea inside of them and a big nature reserve around it. Yeah we can discuss the hole coal burning thing till 2030, i dont appreciate that either.... but you are ignoring a couple of very important facts in this matter.
@helloworld7818
2 жыл бұрын
Building a sea there is not a really good idea
@xyetian3465
2 жыл бұрын
But... what about the cultural and historical value once held by the settlements that have been torn down? Like St. Lambertus Immerath?
@TheAyanamiRei
2 жыл бұрын
An where are you getting this information? Are you getting anything from anyone who is an expert on the damages like heavy metal poisoning and such? A filter doesn't remove all of the damages, UNLIKE what you can do from Modern Nuclear.
@cwilfried8040
Жыл бұрын
Cope
@daniell7524
2 жыл бұрын
Fun fact: Several autobahn sections (A61/A44) were changed over the years to get the coal.
@tobyk.4911
2 жыл бұрын
5:50 "renewable energy sources can't be installed overnight" - and continues by promoting nuclear power, which takes even longer to install. If Germany decided today to build new nuclear power plants, it would certainly take *at least* until 2030 to finish the first one of them - that's the year when the last coal power plant is supposed to shut down. Just look at the construction time and cost of the new nuclear power plant in England - that's neither cheap nor "installed overnight".
@jirislavicek9954
2 жыл бұрын
The problem is that Germany closed those plants prematurely. And burns dirty coal instead. Renewables are currently not yet ready to power the whole country (if they ever will be). You are basically destroying steam locomotives at the time when electric locomotive exists in few prototypes and infrastructure for them is not in place. Nothing to pull trains with.
@rickbude3866
2 жыл бұрын
The best time to start building a nuclear power plant was 10 years ago. The second best time is right now. Aside from that, building renewables means not only building windmills and solar panels, but also energy storage and upgrades to the transmission network. Those are long term projects as well. What is more disturbing, closing perfectly well functioning nuclear plants is about as stupid as it gets. If Germany had not done that, they could have been practically carbon neutral by now.
@nichtentgratet3605
2 жыл бұрын
@@rickbude3866 Well right now nuclear energy is generating only 3% of our primary energy. And if the current consumption stays constant, it will only last for around 50 years. So if you want to generate 30% with nuclear Power, our resources will only Last vor 5 years. GG And btw. nuclear power is so so expansive.
@rickbude3866
2 жыл бұрын
@@nichtentgratet3605 there are enormous amounts of uranium dissolved in ocean water, enough to supply the world with 100% nuclear energy for thousands of years. Not to mention that with breeder reactors, depleted uranium (and even spent nuclear fuel / "waste" ) can be turned into fuel. The expensive nuclear projects you are referring to are first-of-a-kind hyper-modern ultrasafe generation III+ reactors. Prototypes if you will. They WILL become cheaper when built on a larger scale.
@lolboi7434
2 жыл бұрын
@@nichtentgratet3605 it’s only expensive during its construction, not so much for O&M
@AlphaHorst
2 жыл бұрын
Germany is not expanding its coal mining operation... almost all coal mines in Germany have closed since 2013. This one is one of the few still operating. The region in East Germany, where I am from, used to house hundreds of coal mines called "Tagebau" (mines where you dig a hole an expand it above ground). It was the backbone of our small industrie. Now there are almost no mines left. Btw the holes are later allowed to fill up with water and are turned into lakes and many are connected by canals so they can be used for tourism. The rest of the area is used for reforestation and a very smal amount of land is used for settlements.
@ImpGaming
2 жыл бұрын
you have sadly been brainwashed lol. Germany just re-started all their closed coal mines because they sanctioned themselves (by sanctioning russia) and now they haave 60% less gas coming from siberia through nordstream 1. All because siemens wont send gazprom a few turbines that they sent to canada for repairs lol, because of sanctions. So russia cant send as much gas as they should (eventho germany agreed to pay in rubles for russian war funding gas) , now germany´s "green party" solution: re-start burning coal lol. Germany is funny how it says one thing but does the complete opposite. For exaample people seem to believe germany is a "green" country but its the most pollutting country in europe lmao.
@AlphaHorst
2 жыл бұрын
@@ImpGaming ok... so far. Germany has reopened zero coal mines. And plans on reopening zero... like wtf is your source? Germany reopened one coal powerplant and renewed licences for many more which where due to be closed. There is also a plan to open a new coal mine...which dates back to 2018 and was approved in 2020 and is now being executed on schedule. Also yes Germany is Europe's biggest CO2 producer. But only its eight or ninth biggest when looked at a per capita basis and if you include expert and import CO2 it is rank 3 behind France and the UK. Germany is also the biggest spender in Europe on renewables and pays the most into an EU found to help other members switch.
@nilsp9426
2 жыл бұрын
"It is cheap" - well it is made cheap by not holding those using it (large energy companies) responsible for the damage they do, and by offering special treatment by politicians. "There are no other options" - Germany is so far behind in building renewable energy sources, that this is just plain ridiculous. There are no other options with the CDU / CSU in charge of government would be more precise. The major driver behind these coal mines are greed and the fear of losing an industry that provides work for many people. But even the latter is misleading, because this industry has to be shut down anyways, so politicians and business people are just trying to delay that until after their career (it seems to me).
@xxXLonewolf87Xxx
2 жыл бұрын
sad fakt germany is behind not just in renuweble energie also education goes down infrastrukte gets worse all cuz the politiks keep spending monney for evrything OUTSITE of germany sure helping others is good but not if u hurt ur own ppl in ur own country all cuz the ppl are to scared to say anything and the politicans are all corupt and i dont belive there is a true exeption to that cuz money rules the world
@arisusalumen8141
2 жыл бұрын
Welcome to German politics guys. Nothing much can be done that easy here. And curruption? Yes especially within the CDU, aswell as pure incompetence. They put lobbyists in too many important positions...
@schwarz8614
2 жыл бұрын
CDU is not in charge anymore
@joachimfrank4134
2 жыл бұрын
There were some calculations some year ago showing that paying every worker in coal related industry bis wages from tax money until retirement would be cheaper than the subsidies for this industry.
@frederikjrgensen252
2 жыл бұрын
@@xxXLonewolf87Xxx It really is not gonna change even when the cdu is no longer in charge.
@mindhavoc9668
2 жыл бұрын
Just one point to mention, because it's always misleading. Nuclear power is not emitting CO², but it's not CO² neutral. Building a nuclear power plant as well as mining, transportung and refining the material is actually really CO² intense, not to mention the costs of storing the material after being used...
@jnwms
2 жыл бұрын
have you got a link to a comparison?
@utterlyuselesscommentbelow8101
2 жыл бұрын
Much like wind or solar power which also has a high CO² cost in mining rare earth metals and transporting, despite not emitting any CO² in power production proper. The difference is nuclear power can provide a higher kilowatt per hour to ton of overall CO² emitted than wind or solar are able to offer, and is a far more feasible option to scale up to current energy grid needs. Especially if we want to start adding more load to the grid by switching current fossil fuel using systems to electric. Weather dependent power generation simply cannot compete. I'm not saying nuclear power is the end all, be all solution to the climate crisis. There's serious waste, and even more serious security concerns that make even ardent supporters like me balk. However the cost/benefit assessment still leans heavily in nuclear power's favor, in my mind.
@razorblade7108
2 жыл бұрын
Let's not talk about wind turbines and solar panels
@mindhavoc9668
2 жыл бұрын
@@utterlyuselesscommentbelow8101 I agree that using the existing nuclear power plants is better than continueing burning coal. In regards to CO² emissions, renewable energies are less CO² intensive than nuclear power per kwh. Renewable Energy sources consume much more space in regards to pure energy production, but less in regards to the whole material live cycle. Power plants for renewable power plants having a much higher recycling rate of it's used material than nuclear power plants. The costs/benefit only leans in favor for nuclear power in a short term perspective, not in an lang term perspective and without government funding it wouldn't be profitable...
@bryanbarnard4094
2 жыл бұрын
The vast majority of nuclears carbon footprint is steel and concrete. A) Nuclear uses literally hundreds of times less steel and concrete then W&S B) Nuclear power plants have a 3-10x higher capacity dlfactor then W&S C) Nuclesr power plants have 2-4x longer lifespans then W&S D) Nuclear doesn’t require storage
@Smurez
2 жыл бұрын
"Tear down cities" is somewhat overdramatized. 5 municipals were moved or are in prozess of being moved. One of it being one villa of a single family. Another almost completely destroyed during WWII shorty after bought by the company. The other 3 overall having about 3.500 inhabitants. What is being ment by "endangering the rights and freedom of the countries youth" is just the contribution to climate change - or the lack of contribution by keeping up the cole industry.
@vorpommerinaustralia5418
2 жыл бұрын
👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
@KordanorsReviews
2 жыл бұрын
Also the tearing down already has been reduced contradicting the proclaimed "expansions" in the video. Furthermore lots of people in that are also employed by that company or are directly dependent and everyone who is relocated receives a chunk of money. Sure, not everyone is happy about that, obviously. But it's not like they are hated in that area either...
@XGD5layer
2 жыл бұрын
Over 50k people seem to have been displaced due to the Garzweiler mines alone, so your numbers seem to make it smaller than it is.
@Kordanor
2 жыл бұрын
@@XGD5layer Should be much less. Just look up the different Towns on the German Wiki Page about Garzweiler (which is more complete than english one). Most towns are less than 1000 people. The 12 Towns "in progress" had 7600 in total, but the ones which are already gone, dont include any big towns either.
@XGD5layer
2 жыл бұрын
@@Kordanor The majority of this seems to have happened during the 1900s, so I doubt any current villager numbers will help. I bet the majority of those affected have moved out of the area. Why stay when all that tied you there is gone?
@dm9078
2 жыл бұрын
I drove by here. I had no idea what it was! I mean I knew it was a coal mine but didn’t know any of this! Oh yeah shutting down their nuclear power plants not a great idea was it!
@prussiaball8229
2 жыл бұрын
Yeah. People are quite reluctant with nuclear energy after all the incidents that have occurred, but it really isn’t that dangerous, and something quite necessary for change.
@mansupa6362
2 жыл бұрын
Germany has no place to store nuclear waste. This stuff has to be sealed up for over a million years until it is no longer harmful. So even if the power plants themselves are safe, how are you supposed to not entirely ruin your country with atomic waste?
@Skilan506
2 жыл бұрын
@@mansupa6362 put it in rockets and send it straight into the sun. I mean would a bit of atomic waste harm the sun?
@mansupa6362
2 жыл бұрын
@@Skilan506 I guess no but I think you could also just send it somewhere into space, theres a lot of void and no reason for us to dump that stuff into sun. And also currently it costs $10000 to ship one pound of load into space I doubt you find someone in their right mind who invests that much money just for disposal. And if ne now also consider the fact that space travel right now is only possible by using fossil fuel you would probably mess up the entire carbon footprint again sadly...
@mansupa6362
2 жыл бұрын
And one more thing to add that currently depending on the site you start the rocket from there is a 4-10% failure rate. Now imagine what happens when a Plutonium loaded roccket explodes while starting, I think I dnt have to add more. Technology will have to advance a bit before sending that stuff to space will be a viable option
@bigsmoke4592
2 жыл бұрын
i lived right next to it! the air is so dirty that wet towels will emit brown soup over time. (i put them over my radiator to humidify my room).
@donaldmcronald2331
2 жыл бұрын
For those who call out activists for pressuring the government to abandon nuclear power: you cannot abandon nuclear and coal power if you also block renewables. That's why Germany has the highest price for electricity and is failing horribly when it comes to sustainable power. Obviously there are some reasons to keep nuclear power plants, but the movement to abandon it has been a movement through the entire society.
@wolfgangpagel6989
2 жыл бұрын
Also if you promise to energy farmers to pay any price the prices scyrocket.
@michaelwallace8612
2 жыл бұрын
You really don't want acid rain. I grew up in the foothills of the Adirondack Mountains in New York State. The amount and thickness of trees that cover the range were adversely affected by acid rain that was a result of pollution from factories in the mid east. We used to have thick foliage in this area when I climbed my first mountain. Today most of these trees look terrible compared to what they were in my childhood. Most of these factories ate now closed but the degradation continues.
@vomm
2 жыл бұрын
There is no acid rain produced by German coal plants because they all use advanced filters.
@felixmustermann790
2 жыл бұрын
@@vomm they did back in the 70s and 90s, mainly czech and east german ones, modern day ones filter out a large amount of the sulfur and therefor no acid rain altho the farmers had to start fertilizing their fields with sulfur since the acid rain did that before, funnily enough
@LeOonBoon
2 жыл бұрын
I live practically next to this hole and its a pretty popular spot here (theres some nice viewpoints) :D. They actually plan to turn it into the largest bathing lake in Europe by 2050 and people really like that idea here.
@thorbenii565
2 жыл бұрын
They'll need decades just to flood it, This mine is 400m deep (Thats the same depth as lake superior, the deepest lake in the US) And according to Wikipedia this lake won't be filled before the year 2100. Most people dont realise the size of this hole
@justin2370
2 жыл бұрын
and dont forget the mercury! :)
@timonbubnic322
2 жыл бұрын
@@thorbenii565 idk if its even a good idea, filling a random hole like that which is full of toxic shit probably too wouldnt be nice, also a lake need self cleaning properties and unless they make a river flow in it, it wont work, there is a lot to think about there, but i guess it is a magnificent site to see, such a large hole
@flex_net
2 жыл бұрын
Think about the Geiseltalsee- Same coal type as this - filled - and now nature protection zone- and very famous for its rare species of birds
@thorbenii565
2 жыл бұрын
@@timonbubnic322 flooding is basically the only thing we can do. Otherwise we had to pump out the water till the end of all days.
@DarthObscurity
2 жыл бұрын
High level nuclear waste is melted down, mixed with glass and ceramics, and stored inside a cask that is considered _INDESTRUCTIBLE_ . They hit one with a full train as a test and outside of scratches on the surface, it was unscathed.
@Siniji
2 жыл бұрын
The video is really misleading. We didn't swapp out nuclear for coal. The shown mine was started in the 80s and a lot of other mines got opened in 1930-50. We swapped to green energy from nuclear. You praise nuclear but don't mention the mines that are needed to mine uranium and that we still don't have a solution for the nuclear waste.
@seneca983
2 жыл бұрын
"We swapped to green energy from nuclear." That doesn't seem to be the case based on looking at Germany's energy mix. If nuclear weren't phased out you could use the increase in renewables to replace coal instead of nuclear. "You praise nuclear but don't mention the mines that are needed to mine uranium" While they're not harmless they require far less of an area excavated per kWh produced. "and that we still don't have a solution for the nuclear waste." Temporary storage is fairly unproblematic. Climate change is a far more pressing issue.
@Siniji
2 жыл бұрын
@@seneca983 it is the case in Germany. If you look it up, you will see that brown coal stays around 23 to 26 percent since 2000. In his videos he suggested that it is rising and the mines are new. What isn't true. Yeah maybe but we do don't now still what to do with the waste. I am with you that we should phase out coal as soon as possible but not to build new nuclear power plants. who are super expensive and create waste that is dangerous.
@seneca983
2 жыл бұрын
@@Siniji At the very least the existing plants should not be closed.
@mrmatejator
2 жыл бұрын
@@Siniji The thing about Nuclear is that you build your reactor once and then you just support it with a little bit of material to keep it running. If you mine around 23 to 26 percent each year that means that you have to mine that share each year so yes, they are expanding.
@bigbuilder10
2 жыл бұрын
Slightly misleading when you talk about lignite containing mercury and sulfur and that then causing acid rain. Mercury doesn't produce an acid and all coal releases sulfur and mercury, just in varying amounts. Sulfur does produce acid rain though.
@felixmustermann790
2 жыл бұрын
and that is filtered out of the smokes in germany to prevent acid rain like it happened in between 70s and 90s in east germany and czech republic altho the farmers were kinda grumpy that they now had to use sulfur to fertilize their plots of lands since the acid rain did that before xd more work for em basically
@generalmisery
2 жыл бұрын
As far as I know, Germany has closed all Nuclear power plants in 2010, because of natural disaster concerns, like a tsunami or major earthquake. Something that is impossible in Central Europe. Germany's politics rely on satisfying and convincing of the Public. There is not a single thing actually being done, just stuff adjusted so that less people complain.
@xddstudiosbywr3cked845
2 жыл бұрын
Accurate
@julianb.2676
2 жыл бұрын
Not trying to argue for coal at all but I think it is relevant to take into account that the argument of large mines is only partially „solved“ by nuclear energy…uranium does not come out of nowhere and has giant surface mines in Africa which are dangerous for workers and polluting the environment due to the dirty mining process. It just shifts that problem to a different continent
@LuLu-ip4zb
2 жыл бұрын
Thats why you should use Thorium, wich is mined in Norway (wich has labour standarts) or you could even open mines in Germany, wich tho more expensive than african labour could be made significantly safer
@JJT3001
2 жыл бұрын
@@LuLu-ip4zb there is no thorium in germany btw. We would have to import it from either norway, russia or turkey
@KolyanKolyanitch
2 жыл бұрын
If people are Ok with digging cobalt in Africa they wouldn't be bothered with uranium mining.
@matthewcurmi8016
2 жыл бұрын
Two words - energy density. A single pellet of uranium 235 the size of pill gives an equivalent energy output of 1 tonne of coal.
@milimnava333
2 жыл бұрын
@@LuLu-ip4zb thorium reactors use uranium too, the fuel (usually) is 95% thorium 232 and 5% uranium 235.
@dankoch5357
2 жыл бұрын
Nuclear is the second safest form of power generation per Wh with only solar beating it.
@TheAnnoyingBoss
2 жыл бұрын
Until the tsunami hits. Or the famine comes. Or the worker shortage hits, or the money runs dry. Then you've got MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR PROBLEMS
@dankoch5357
2 жыл бұрын
@@TheAnnoyingBoss literally no idea how any of those are correlated, but k
@nh575
2 жыл бұрын
1:36 You didn‘t mention the fact that people get paid a lot for it. Even more than 2x the value of their houses. Also, they get new houses not far from there from the government. Of course many people don't want to leave their home because it keeps memories and such. However, they are not just kicked out of their houses like you say. Furthermore, the government obliges the mining companies that the mined areas must be renatured and cultivated accordingly. This has also happened with success. Take a look at the “Cospunder See” for example, which is a former mining area.
@paweluv
2 жыл бұрын
In Germany mainly the youger generation is for a more green future and energies, but for the most part the problem is the older generation who thinks ''Why should Germany be the country who makes the first step''... or '' These wind turbines destroy my beautiful view when i drive to work in my car''. Honestly i think money and a confortable lifestyle is more important to them, than the future from those who have to live with the consequences. Many german politicans acting in the interests of large companies like VW and RWE, who will not benefit from a green germany, so these poor politicans can't get pocket money from millions of euros if they don't help those companies. Hopefully that will change with the new government that has now been formed.
@pascalschembach5418
2 жыл бұрын
I totally agree that brown coal is a huge issue for Germany's climate goals but nuclear energy is no real option. In Germany we have an on going discussion about how to store the nuclear waste for more than ten years and we still don't have a long-term solution. So producing more nuclear waste would make the problem worse.
@killman369547
2 жыл бұрын
Has nobody ever heard of fuel reprocessing and fast reactors? The solution to nuclear waste was discovered in the 50's for gods sake.
@Adidas_der_schwanger_war
2 жыл бұрын
Nuclear waste is a non issue. Used nuclear fuel rods can be recycled and the really small amount of waste can be stored away underground. Because of the recycling the long-term radioactivity in high-level wastes is reduced massively. In comparison to the burning of coal nuclear energy is 100% clean and way more efficient. I don't get how German policy makers can't find a spot for some small containers that are completely radiation proof. Instead they place wind turbines everywhere and continue to burn coal.
@jeanyluisa8483
2 жыл бұрын
I dont want to do any "whataboutism" and I am against extending those German mining areas and burning coal. But all three of those holes together have a size of about 100 square kilometer. It's a shame, but its tiny compared to the size of many other international mining projects. In Canada they for example plan to and already do mine oils sand in an area of 140.000 square km.
@MettPitt
2 жыл бұрын
Well.. we don't let these holes there.. there is a quick renaturation of every hole.. as you can see in the video changing the digging area within the holes.. there are fields where was a hole 2-3 years ago .. in east Germany..where i am... Were many of these brown coal hols.. they are all lakes now.. with new villages..water sports and beaches.. yes we dig it out.. but we make it better afterwards 😂 ..look at the area of Leipzig.. every lake was a mine..
@jk-gb4et
2 жыл бұрын
Wellin Canada they make it in areas with a smaller population density than in this area in like east Alberta
@danial1603
2 жыл бұрын
Canada's large mines are fine since nobody lives there, plus it add a nice bit of revenue to fund our government so I fully support the mines.
@jeanyluisa8483
2 жыл бұрын
@@jk-gb4et So you want to say there are less people living on 140.000 sqkm in Alberta than on 100 sqkm in Germany? And as there is a lower population density in Canada you probably also think the oil they mine there on 140.000 sqkm has a lower impact on the climate change than the coal they mine on 100sqkm in Germany?
@wompo5628
2 жыл бұрын
@@jeanyluisa8483 Germany has like twice the population of Canada If you look at a map, you can see that Germany is indeed more dense than Canada
@wernerheenop
Жыл бұрын
Mining companies spend A LOT of money to compensate people for their property: They don't "throw" them out of their houses, as you mention. A strip mine like this is quite easy to rehabilitate as well: yes, the landscape is "completely destroyed" but returned to its previous state at the end of the mine's life. Afterwards you wont even know there was a mine.
@peterlustig6888
10 ай бұрын
They Are still thrown out.
@willistoneheart5799
2 жыл бұрын
I have visited the mine several times. Even the ghost towns before they were demolished. What is never really said is that many of the power plants are only running because they have not yet become profitable. In fact, the share of renewable energies could be much higher. It is just easier to turn a solar cell out of the sun or a wind turbine out of the wind than to turn an entire coal-fired power station down and back up again. In addition, there is an argument that German industry likes to use: jobs. A wind turbine is maintained and kept running by a small group of technicians and engineers along with dozens of others. However, a power plant usually offers jobs to hundreds of people. Of course, a certain proportion would have to remain on the network at the moment, but that would be much less than is currently active
@gregbrunner599
2 жыл бұрын
Solar and wind is the most unreliable source. Plus the batteries for all this is even more environmentally hazards, not to mention all the pollution to make it. Nuclear is Germany's only ability to create energy at a lower price. Since they already dug up all this, great place to put the nuclear plant. Going green is a fallacy of the elite to make money off suckers
@StephanTrube
2 жыл бұрын
We had like 10 times more jobs in renewables than we have in coal, before politics decided to crash the renewable industry and to keep coal.
@gregbrunner599
2 жыл бұрын
@@StephanTrube Those 10 times more jobs were mostly fake jobs of appeasement to generate free government money and produce fast negative results for all those who invested in that garbage. The real jobs were just made in China. All your green energy is made by your so called dirty energy, just not in your country but in China. So while you pay high fee's for it, China made billions
@StephanTrube
2 жыл бұрын
Not sure what this narrative is about, or what a "fake job" should be. People spent time on work, earned money, payed taxes, produced and installed renewable things. There was a time we had more of those jobs in Germany than we currently have in coal. Now it's all done in China, yeah.
@rogalowski
2 жыл бұрын
honestly, nuclear energy is one of the best for the environment, and Chernobyl was just badly planned, from work to security. the example of france shows that nuclear energy is a good replacement for coal
@herticate8579
2 жыл бұрын
Germany doesn't make sense anymore. Their decisions are really confusing.
@akaMerilairon
2 жыл бұрын
As a german who lives 25mins away from this hole, I don't quite understand why this big corrupt shit show still gets funded by the government
@thatdude1435
2 жыл бұрын
@@akaMerilairon maybe because your government is one big shitshow? ;)
@thatdude1435
2 жыл бұрын
@@akaMerilairon and corrupt* i forgot that one
@alexanderlenssen5948
2 жыл бұрын
I grew up right next to the big hole(Garzweiler) and I must honestly say this video was really dismissive towards the German mindset and the general situation here and was instead just "uuuhh Germany bad" And in the end you said "You have to decide for yourself" after making it really obvious that the viewer is not supposed to do that.
@boio_
2 жыл бұрын
Yeah, it did seem pretty off... There wasn't really a perceptible attempt to take the viewpoint of those directly next to it
@pavelow235
2 жыл бұрын
Put up your own video than, seems pretty hypocritical of the Germans to say the least.....but every country WANTS to survive.....and energy independence is one important aspect of that.
@MegaHater93
2 жыл бұрын
Have to agree. The video was uninspired and not really informative, but at least it had a lot of opinion...
@MegaHater93
2 жыл бұрын
@@pavelow235The topic is discussed for decades now. Nobody really needs to do a video about it without current (2020/21) figures or current opinions/political views.
@rosshart9514
2 жыл бұрын
@Alexander Lenssen I presume you are right, but you should name at least one false claim in video and correct that.
@ravador
2 жыл бұрын
"Every EU country, even the poor ones MUST become green, even if it destroys their economies and plumments the standard of living of their people! But we don't have to." - Germany
@ElTatiMar
2 жыл бұрын
Ambition != Realism I think it's better to have a more solid long-term goal, than a half-baked short-term plan
@tobiwan001
2 жыл бұрын
The mines are not expanded and Germany is not increasing its coal operations. The remaining mines had operations licenses until 2038, this is mainly due to Germany's exit from nuclear power. They are now being shut down in 2030. Also Germany's carbon footprint is btw half that of the US per capita, because the US even more reliant on coal.
@gchecosse
2 жыл бұрын
It's also twice that of France and the UK.
@MagnificentlyHighAlien
2 жыл бұрын
Let's go green! 0 carbon emissions by 2050! But first let us pump more in the atmosphere as long as we can. I'm pretty sure that if the 0 carbon emission goal isn't reached by then, it's just 'oh well, let's try 2080'
@puirYorick
2 жыл бұрын
Decades ago when I told my classmates at uni that carbon pollution will kill far more people than nuclear power plant accidents they thought I was totally mad.
@fmr1998
2 жыл бұрын
Kinda odd that you portray it as if Germany was phasing out nuclear and replaced it with coal when in reality both coal and nuclear decreased simultaneously and got replaced with renewables
@KordanorsReviews
2 жыл бұрын
There are plenty of incorrect over overdramatized infos like that in this video. Like "entire cities" are being destroyed. Yeah...if you consider a town with a few thousand people a city.
@eeeeric1966
2 жыл бұрын
I live quite close to these lignite mines, and have driven past them many times! Interesting to learn more about these mines! Thank you for this video :)
@dressler666
2 жыл бұрын
What if you re doing acid in the rain? … that’s a good sentence
@honktm
2 жыл бұрын
To everyone wondering: The mining company's name is RWE
@holger_p
2 жыл бұрын
It's not a contradiction to reduce mining, and increase a specific mine. And some parts of Germany got conterminated by the Chernobyl catastrophe, it's a real experience, in some areas some mushrooms or game in forest is still conterminated. The final stop of nuclear, came weeks after Fukushima.
@NeidhardtDerBlitzschnelle
2 жыл бұрын
Yeah. Fukushima was pretty much the final nail in the coffin for nuclear power's reputation in Germany.
@teage12
2 жыл бұрын
Saying "if we don't do lignite, we have to do nuclear" is a little bit too easy. We have known all thrse problems for decades now. We could have just as easily gone for green energy, especially when saying "Energiewende". But instead they sold the former world-leading solar industry to china in 2012. Abd if you want to say "equality of generations", nuclear is just not the way to go. Giving our children nuclear waste as a present is no option. I have been to these parts where the, dug up the coal. I stood on these machines, hundreds of meters high. It is just utterly insane. And then you think germany is a highly developed country. But they steal the home of people away under their feet just for the profit of a few companies instead of creating a non-centralized grid.
@cupcakke1294
2 жыл бұрын
Nuclear storage has been possible for years and is actively being done. the fact that people are talking about it not being possible to store nuclear waste is because of politicians talking about the high costs. if Germany (and other countries) wanted to actually do something about climate change they would invest in nuclear storage and energy instead of fossil fuel subsidies and endorsements. I advise you to look up "deaths caused by nuclear vs fossil fuels" this will give you a clear indication as to why we NEED nuclear for the energy transition.
@CraftyF0X
2 жыл бұрын
Well your plan would not work, as the technology to go 100% renevables is still unfeasable let alone decades ago.
@teage12
2 жыл бұрын
@@CraftyF0X harald Lesch, a german physicist, has a few videos on that. Basically what he says is that nuclear is just not enough. We can't build enough plants in a short time to fight climate change.
@CraftyF0X
2 жыл бұрын
@@teage12 And he is probably right. No credible expert would say we need nuclear only. The consensus seems to be that we can only hit the goals if we use every possible option, in combination, including nuclear. Also worth to remember, nuclear is slow to build, and building the plant will actually have its carbon footprint, so its only beneficial after it is completed and operational.
@shasan2393
2 жыл бұрын
Just bury nuclear waste deep underground, like the Fins are doing. We have put ourselves in a corner. I would say that underground option is much preferable to “giving our children” climate catastrophe and its associated enormous societal upheaval, with continued hydrocarbon use. And of course, nuclear is not enough (and should not be the only goal), but developing nuclear is preferable to destroying the land polluting the air.
@maxwalker1159
2 жыл бұрын
Germany was so dumb removing nuclear
@barbarusbloodshed6347
2 жыл бұрын
Germany's contribution to the annual global CO2 emissions is 2%. And it has a population of 83 million people. While the United States have a population of 330 million people, so four times the population, and contribute 14% of annual global CO2 emissions. Seven times Germany's percentage. If you want to point a finger at someone, point it at the US.
@WasKeineAhnung
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks @OBF for shinig some light at that topic. Living a 10min drive away from that hole of shame, that thing is a topic nearly every day. Thats why i would like to add to some things you brought up in the video. Firstly, the new ruling coalition did not determine, that exiting coal is going to be 2030, they said "Der Kohleausstieg ist „idealerweise“ für das Jahr 2030 vorgesehen" which roughly translates to "Exiting coal will ideally be intended for 2030", which is sadly to loose of a promise and far away from meeting the demands of a large part of the population. You also pointed out, that coal is probably still getting digged up because it is way cheaper than renewable energys such as wind. I would like to add, that this price-difference is factious / artificially , probably for a large part by the coal-industry itself. They pay a lot of money to politians so they subsidize coal digging with tax money while simultaneously creating laws, taxes and other obstacles for the industry that tries to build renewable energys. In my opinion it looks like the Coal-industry now puts the money they earned (maybe rightfully, idk) in times of the industrialization of germany to maintain their position on the market. Tax money goes around a few corners back to the coal industry so they can put that into maintaining their position, bribing politicans and spreading false information trough media. Corruption is probably the biggest reason why germany is rapidly digging europe`s largest hole.
@randomobserver8168
2 жыл бұрын
I had been wondering just what exactly Germany was going to use for energy when all the nuclear plants were closed, all the oil stopped, and all the Russian [fossil fuel!!!] gas supplies were cut off. I had assumed magic pixie dust. I am strangely surprised they have adopted the at least practical strategy of once again burning DDR-grade lung tar.
@_yannis2707
2 жыл бұрын
Russian gas supplies are not at all cut of, at the moment at least.
@coall5002
Жыл бұрын
Yeah we do not get it either. What we wanted was the replacement of Nuclear and fossil energy to renewables what we got from our politicians was whatever this is.
@bapbapuh666
2 жыл бұрын
The plant in Bulgaria is called Marica Iztok, there's a C missed.
@s.s.productions
2 жыл бұрын
Or Maritsa Iztok, not Maria
@cherry8977
2 жыл бұрын
This isn't the first time German leadership doomed their country to stand in solidarity with Japan
@siegmundeurades5753
2 жыл бұрын
There's an attraction park in Germany called Wunderland Kalkar, it was meant to be a nuclear power plant but literally got taken out of service before it even had a chance to serve. Seems like a very stupid move in retrospect.
@tophan5146
2 жыл бұрын
It was a very stupid move at that very time as well, no need for future knowledge, the outcome was easily predictable.
@daanwillemsen223
2 жыл бұрын
It's a fun attraction park tbh. They got free French fries
@DeadlinePhil
2 жыл бұрын
In the 80s Germany also build a state of the art NPP in Mühlheim-kärlich wich went online on the first of August 1987 and was completely decommissioned in 9th of September 1988
@siegmundeurades5753
2 жыл бұрын
@@daanwillemsen223 Even better, free paprika fries.
@daanwillemsen223
2 жыл бұрын
@@siegmundeurades5753 they taste amazing 🤤
@ichmiel1316
2 жыл бұрын
I think your video is right. But i also think the insaine amount of Lobbying and the general influence of the ennergy companies controlkng the coal mine and power plants ale also part of the problem. (Looking at your RWE) Also Lobying in germany is more like corruption with extra steps
@dawid2091
2 жыл бұрын
So Germany blame Poland for using coal while doing this... hipocrisy
@CHR3S_1
2 жыл бұрын
Well if you take a look at the timelapse map. You can actually see that once they've finished digging they actually make the land habitable again. So it's not really a big deal.
@keithbond6052
2 жыл бұрын
Immediate after hearing “this is the biggest hole in Europe” my immature ass goes “nah your mom owns that title”
@pretationpictures6615
2 жыл бұрын
In comparison to France the German government even decided to leave atomic energy. That’s why there is a lot more time needed.
@oakoakoak2219
2 жыл бұрын
Burning the world isn’t new. But the things that irks me is that country like Germany loves to criticize the global south for not doing enough for climate change while here they are doing exactly the kind of thing they criticized. Not to mention that most of the global south simply does not have a feasible option both physically and financially to change their energy consumption method, while Germany do
@stanislavkanin3255
2 жыл бұрын
Lignite and brown coal are two separate types of coal, lignite being the one with lowest caloric content
@danielfrey2407
2 жыл бұрын
It might be sort of a cultural thing. Here in Germany most of the people (including me) think that nuclear is an evil and dangerous source and coal is shit bad not as bad as nuclear. Coal does not potentialy destroy your country (or at least in a different way) I wonder if france would have to pay for damages/pollution on germanys side if one of their nearby plants explodes.
@chrishieke1261
2 жыл бұрын
I think it is not that likely that France would pay for damages, but France itself would have to deal with the massive consequences of a nuclear disaster. If the nuclear plant in Fessenheim would have a catastrophic failure, the big cities of Mulhouse, Basel and Freiburg im Breisgau would be severly affected and may have to be abandoned.
@sigmamale1974
2 жыл бұрын
Because you have been propagandised by the foccil fuel industry.
@chrishieke1261
2 жыл бұрын
@@sigmamale1974 I'd rather have an explosion of the Boxberg coal power plant then the Neckarwestheim nuclear power plant. That's a conclusion I'm able to make even without the help of the fossil fuel lobby. See, I'm happy that fossil fuel power generation is on its way out. It's not sustainable (which is the fault of us all ... we are to plane for the excesive power consuption ... we have TVs, computers, kitchen and household gadgets, smart-everythings, air conditioning, etc.). But it poses the lesser risk then nuclear power plants.
@StephanTrube
2 жыл бұрын
Coal is worse than nuclear. Globally, we had like one major nuclear incident every 25 years or so. With huge regional impacts and measurable impacts on a wider scale, yes. But the climate crisis is global without exception, and has some other properties and differences which make it worse. It self-accelerates and spawns a multitude of other crises in all areas of life to none of which we have an appropriate answer. Also timescale: The climate crisis will spiral out of control in the next years or few decades, whereas the nuclear problem is less urgent, without downplaying it. Renewables are better than both, of course.
@azalur3589
2 жыл бұрын
Actually, Germans should pay France bc of all the particles wind brings to them.
@marksman6004
2 жыл бұрын
What surprises me as a german is that my fellow people dont resist getting kicked out of their homes and their towns demolished .
@sascharambeaud1609
2 жыл бұрын
Great video, up until the point where you brought up nuclear as a valid option. Which it isn't. Apart from the inherent threat of desaster, fission is just freakishly expensive. Most of that is made invisible by massive subsidizing, which is probably the main reason people still think it's an actual alternative for anything. Feel free to offer a contract for a nuclear plant, where the contractor is required to provide desaster insurance and waste deposit for the foreseeable future (let's be generous and say 100.000 years) up front and see how many offers you will find.
@relentless5723
2 жыл бұрын
And to add: Frances atomic powerplants hast lots of issues in the last years. Many of them where in maintenance for months which let to the strange situation that the imported electricity from Germany.
@carpediem5232
2 жыл бұрын
Well yes coal is the big problem in Germany when it comes to emissions, but for the place on the leader board population size is still the main reason. The country right after Germany is Poland which has a population 45% that of Germany. If you factor that in Poland is practically on par with Germany. The Netherlands have a population only 20% that of Germany. With their numbers multiplied by 5 they would have a hundred-thousand tons more output than Germany. For the Czech Republic and Portugal it is even worse, since they are only an 8th the size of Germany in terms of population. The only countries on the list shown that stay well below Germany's per capita output are France and Italy. So the framing is a bit misleading. But the general point that coal energy has to go is still correct.
@ssssaa2
2 жыл бұрын
EU is generally a very low CO2 per capita and especially per GDP region. Even China is now more CO2 intensive per capita despite far lower per capita GDP. The idea that these edge case sources of energy that just haven't been phased out yet for economic reasons is some sort of catastrophe is laughable. It is both of marginal scale and a temporary phenomenon, neither of which is the case in a lot of other regions where far larger extractions of coal occur and it is still ramping up with far fewer environmental regulations in place in lots of these areas. It's only disappointing in comparison to the mythical idealized world that people compared it to which has never and never will exist.
@carpediem5232
2 жыл бұрын
@@ssssaa2 They are not "edge case" sources of energy. You are only presenting Whataboutism arguments and the idea that too much CO2 is bad is scientific fact. The "idealized world" will never exist if people like you keep saying it will never exist.
@skeletonjam
2 жыл бұрын
acid rain is a scaremongering buzz word for any kind of water vapor with acidic content (spoiler alert, pretty much all rain)
@halguy5745
2 жыл бұрын
yes, rain is acidic, not basic, but what they call acid rain is much more acidic than average and is pouted with other elements that affect the local environment
@verro9153
2 жыл бұрын
if germany had invested in nuclear like France this wouldn't have happened.
@Donthaveacowbra
2 жыл бұрын
I mean if they literally just didn't shut down their reactors they'd have been good
@thatdude1435
2 жыл бұрын
@@Donthaveacowbra this^
@iamcurious9541
2 жыл бұрын
As a German who is firmly on the green side, I hate coal. But I hate hard coal just as much. Natural gas even more. Lignite does have the lowest energy content per mass. However the CO2 emission per energy is actually lower than that of anthrazit. Only the air pollution is higher, which is only really a problem near power plants. Also coal plants have way lower pollution limits than incinerators, which we also have quite a few of. In order to stop coal burning there has been an increase in natural gas infrastructure which is even worse. It still emits almost as much CO2 per energy, however it also emits methane, which is even worse for the climate. And the natural gas has to be imported from Russia (via Ukraine or Nordstream) or from the USA, from where it has to be shipped in. Natural gas from the USA is also mined by freaking, which emits giant amounts of methane.
@caav56
2 жыл бұрын
What do you think of nuclear power?
@seneca983
2 жыл бұрын
"In order to stop coal burning there has been an increase in natural gas infrastructure which is even worse. It still emits just as much CO2 per energy" That's not true. Natural gas is mostly methane which has 4 hydrogen atoms for every carbon atom which is the best ratio of all hydrocarbons.
@iamcurious9541
2 жыл бұрын
@@seneca983 But the energy output is not proportional to the number of molecules but to the amount of carbon
@seneca983
2 жыл бұрын
@@iamcurious9541 That's not true. When you burn hydrocarbons both the carbon *and* hydrogen atoms combine with oxygen and release energy. The more you have hydrogen relative to carbon the lower the CO₂ emissions are relative to energy produced. (Natural gas is still not great, though.)
@iamcurious9541
2 жыл бұрын
@@caav56 I think it is expensive (way more so than renewables with energy storage), and therefore not worth our time. Still I am a bit undecided if the shutdown was a good decision. We don't have even halfway decent storage for nuclear waste. Much of it is stored in salt mines which are woefully inadequate. However letting the existing plants run another five or ten years might have made transitions easier. However we never had much nuclear energy in the first place, as a percentage of todays electricity it would barely be a drop on a hot stone. Also, you can't just stop nuclear power plants during low consumption times the way you can fossile fuels, so you will have to build that energy storage either way. And Solar and Wind are just so much cheaper. They aren't even on the same chart.
@timaitken2277
2 жыл бұрын
I would like to point out that when politicians say they "must" use coal to meet energy demands, they are ignoring the option of letting prices rise to the point of supporting renewable alternatives. What they mean is that they must use coal to keep energy (unsustainably) cheap.
@ssssaa2
2 жыл бұрын
It's sustainable for long enough to ensure that more advanced reliable and cheaper alternatives will be utilized as they come about instead of having a catastrophic gap in between.
@crazeelazee7524
2 жыл бұрын
"Was it the right decision?" Short answer: No Long answer: Nooooooooooooooo
@vincentguttmann2231
2 жыл бұрын
I had no idea that this was going on, and to be honest I'm very embarassed about this.
@Hugh.G.Rectionx
2 жыл бұрын
wouldn't be the first time that Germans have turned a blind eye to disgusting atrocities
@vincentguttmann2231
2 жыл бұрын
@@Hugh.G.Rectionx Yeah, but we were taught about that in great length and very impactfully. Once you have seen the gas chambers and cremation ovens of the kill camps, you are very acutely aware of the fact that you should NEVER EVER happen something like this again. There is a resurgence in Nazi stuff, but that is probably due to the fact that up until millennials got into schools, that stuff was barely talked about. In comparison, this has simply never been brought up anywhere except here.
@planescaped
2 жыл бұрын
I'm glad I was born in the "golden age" before the fall. "There ain't no Star Trek future in store for us. More Mad Max... >__>
@thatdude1435
2 жыл бұрын
@RPTOR EMPP im afraid its up to normal people to fix that one
@djyppo
2 жыл бұрын
Germany on the outside: "guys, stop cutting down the trees or i'll embargo you!!!" Germany on the inside: "Yeaaah, I love some ligmaballs"
@ottovonbismarck1898
2 жыл бұрын
And the sad part is its because of our corrupt politicians and not our citizens...
@kasetoast8354
2 жыл бұрын
@@ottovonbismarck1898 "its because of our corrupt politicians and not our citizens" It was about he corrupt CDU
@trailonfire8581
2 жыл бұрын
I by myself never understand, why we shut down nuclear energy, and replace it with Cole, it ist completely senseless!
@tokesalotta1521
2 жыл бұрын
This nonsense about France -- in the past France made these claims, but failed to mention they imported a lot of electricity from Germany
@Garage90s
2 жыл бұрын
Germany : "countries in S.E.A. with palm oil industry damaging the environment, forest, and wildlife. We have to make regulations as tight as possible. No expansion area!" Also Germany :
@FAKETV96
2 жыл бұрын
You make such high quality videos you should have more subs lol
@lars9084
2 жыл бұрын
Nuclear energy was forbidden here in the panic after tschernobyl, if you try to argue with someone who is against it you'd rather talk to a wall instead, the wall would definitely have better arguments that's the reason why we can't get back to it
@deusexaethera
2 жыл бұрын
This is how Germany can afford to subsidize the rest of the EU without significantly degrading their own standard of living in the process.
@sagichdirdochnicht4653
2 жыл бұрын
You know what absolutely fucking pisses me off as German? WE DONT EVEN FUCKING NEED THAT GOD DAMN FUCKING COAL. Seriously. No, seriously, we could immediatly shut down most Coal Power Plants. In 2-3 years time, if someone would finally do something (yes. They basically did nothing all those years.), we'd be rid off those Power Plants and the sadest part is, we would even save Money by doing so. And know what pisses me off even more? Corruption. The CDU/CSU was the ruling Party of Germany for the last 16 fucking Years. And it just happens to be the Case, that this Party is so fucking Corrupted, you'd believe they are ruling some poor 3d world country in the middle of nowhere. Many of those Assholes are on the Payroll of Energy Companies. They've also actively lied decieved the Population. For Example, the last Villages were destroyed illegaly. You can, according to the Law, only take someones Stuff (including Land), if it is neccessary and benefitial for the Rest of Society, if it serves a greater Good. We "need" Coal for Energy Production, allright. Unfortunately, Studies and a Court Case had shown: Shit, we actually don't fucking need that Coal. Therefore destroying those Villages for Coal doesn't serve a greater Good, therefore it's illegal. A Man called Armin Laschet, he was the Chancellor Candidate for the CDU of Course and gets Millions from RWE, he simply kept this Study a Secret. Yes, you heard that right. We know, that all of that is Illegal and all, and that Piece of Shit just keeps it a Secret, so he could get another few Million Euros from Energy Companies. I swear to God, I'm fucking DONE with our Politics. I'm so fucking done. And then those Idiots seriously wonder why the fuck the AfD (basically the Nazi Party, they are just not fond of calling them Nazis) is rising. Well they wouldn't do things any better, quite the opposite even, but you can't act suprised, that if show your voters the Middle Finger, they'll show it back. Fuck this Country. And fuck this World. Could we just please have a Nuclear War and be done with humanity please? It's about fucking time.
@Skykbo11
2 жыл бұрын
@@sagichdirdochnicht4653 I wholeheartedly agree with the last sentences.
@FGXJK4500
2 жыл бұрын
"a green country like Germany" 😂😂😂
@dougwedel9484
2 жыл бұрын
I like your Freudian slip at 7:25. German canceller. They keep cancelling their green initiatives. Oh yes btw, they can switch to SWB "overnight." They chose and choose not to.
@jhgeorg
2 жыл бұрын
That was not a Freudian slip. He said Kanzler, which is German for Chancellor.
@schwarz8614
2 жыл бұрын
@@jhgeorg he said canceller not Kanzler
@wendigothedrunk9038
2 жыл бұрын
Last time Germany was building holes this big 40,000,000 people vanished from this world 💀
@Skullair313
2 жыл бұрын
I had the opportunity to stand at the edge of such a mine. It is difficult to grasp how large they are. These pits will also spill greasy dust all over the place. There are wind power plants next to the edge and they are smeared with this stuff.
@sanespace1480
2 жыл бұрын
Germany 🇩🇪 has rich history of politicians extremely bad at their job. You know, that H-guy, Merkel,... usw...
@ray_99
2 жыл бұрын
Notification Squad!
@julesgro8526
2 жыл бұрын
Actually standing on a platform at this hole is something else. It is hard to comprehend just HOW friggin huge this mine is. It dwarfes everything.
@d.josephvirnig764
2 жыл бұрын
Good information delivered with so much bias and opinion it is easy to throw it all away.
@ssssaa2
2 жыл бұрын
Yeah it's pretty silly how he made it seem like these coal companies were just plowing peoples homes over and the government was ignoring it.
@crestfallenwarrior5719
2 жыл бұрын
"Shady Pit of Germany" sounds like a dark souls location.
@lardstehbread
2 жыл бұрын
As a German im embarrased that I have had no idea that cologne Was Köln for so long
@sebimon4971
2 жыл бұрын
The fact you can see it on Google Maps when zoomed to include almost all of Europe is insane.
@vladcozma524
2 жыл бұрын
This is germany in a nutshell...they are closing nuclear powerplants that do not pollute and now they have to reopen coal mines that are legit toxic for the environment. If thats not bad enough, they literally have the world's most expensive kwh. Good job Germany.
Пікірлер: 4,4 М.