Well her flip-floping is a major issue. We speaking about literally billions of Euros that must be invested on a replacement or not. And her stance was not a change on the nuclear stance but on the deadlines for the current reactors. So what she did was to push the deadlines far into the future, which of course changed the whole situation for investors in the energy sector. And then after Fukushima she suddenly changed her mind again, and shut down some of the reactors that she wanted to run longer.
In Swirterland nothing has been decided yet, but there are plans from a group of politans from different parties. So far the FDP,CVP and SVP were always pro NE, but now most of the CVP switched and many politicans in the FDP too. But the SVP is still pro. Italy has (thankfully) never got any nuclear power plants, I really don't wanne see the Mafie to handle that waste too.
Yeah it's their decition in the end, I don't think it will have such a impact on the economy either but Germany doesn't need a boost anyway, they have a solid growth, not sky-rocking booming, but solid.The article says only 15% of global electricity comes from nuclear. Germany's is 22% nuclear currently. But it's still Germany's choice on how they want to make their national energy policy moving forward. It's not like they've ignored economic impacts, availability, rationing, imports, costs, science and technology, or environmental damage/risk.





Reply With Quote