By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
crissindahouse said:

just one example about the green jobs here in germany and the costs. they subsidized solar energy here as example. it's very expensive. so many say "omg this is so expensive". yes, this is right and if you find a study like this talking about those costs, do they talk about the radwaste as well which we don't have anymore then? because this will cost germany billions over the years just to find reservoirs for the waste and the thousands of years you have to watch that nothing will happen there.

no, this is not in this stat. they just say "it costs 240k subsidy per new green job". they don't say "but therefore we have 3 billions less costs for the radwaste"

you can see it like you wantt, these fast internet searches to prove your point are useless.

btw. i'm not saying if it is good or bad, just that it makes no sense to type something in google and post a graph or two.

some people seem to think they know the world with their internet. just looking half an hour on some graphs and they know it... what are the reasons different countries use money for different green jobs? who cares, i have a graph!

Moving to Solar was all well and good, but Germany's knee-jerk reaction to Fukushima was unfounded. I do believe that we should move forward on renewable energy, but too fast too quickly will result in more economic damage than a more balanced approach (this is one of the realms where I am in agreement with the Obama Administration quite solidly: the "all of the above" energy policy). Germany does well to advance to solar, but has made a poor choice in choosing to dump nuclear all at once. Japan is even worse off, because they're going off nuclear due to Fukushima and they want to go back to oil, which is going to send sky-high energy prices in Japan even higher...



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.