If I Wanted America to Fail....

[crissindahouse]

Mr Khan said:

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...

yeah like i said it was just an example that you can't search for random numbers on the internet to prove that something is wrong or right and that you can't simple say "a job costs 240k" because they don't calculate as example the costs of the radwaste (which is only one of thousands of numbers you should have to calculate) which will  get reduced with it. i don't even have the numbers on my mind what they caculated as costs for that some years ago but you would have to put all numbers in a calculation and not what new york times or whatever newspaper are doing with their stupid graphs. hell we would even have to calculate what green energy would mean for the air we breath and if it would reduce cancer and so on with less coal power station pushing dirty emissions in the air (but i say this isn't possible). if i just think about where i live, a region which lived from coal mining and coal power stations. the air was so dirty in the past you won't believe it^^.

personally i have no problem with nuclear power if it comes to the dangers and our efforts for solar were huge even before fukushima, we started with it much earlier and our government cut the subsidies this year. solar companies have a hard time now without those. 

but we didn't bump nuclear energy at once, we decided to bump it in 2002 or so  which was way before fukushima and over some decades. what we did was that we did close the oldest facilities with the worst safety standards earlier because of fukushima (which i was against it but the green party had a lot of success here with scaremongering) and we forced the full nuclear phase-out which will happen in 2023 or so.  at least it means less radioactive waste which will reduce the costs for thousands of years^^

but i hope they will find other ways the next years to produce enough as replacement and won't just use more coal to produce energy because this would be really stupid. but 1/5 of germanies energy was atomic energy in 2011 i believe we can do it without using other shit the next years.