SZwanglos – Following Feed

RT by @thinkBTO: Let's stick to the hard science. The Fukushima accident could not be transferred to the 🇩🇪 nuclear power plant. Why is explained here 👇🏼. The nuclear waste problem has been solved. Just not in 🇩🇪, where the solution was kidnapped. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1554029004461674502.html ➡️

R to @thinkBTO: Click here for a refresh with @tom_krebs_: https://think-beyondtheobvious.com/energie-ist-die-achillesferse-der-wirtschaft/

Today at BTO: Energy is prosperity! Suitable for Iran and the nuclear phase-out.

RT von @thinkBTO: Einen Erfolg kann Robert #Habeck demnächst feiern. Mission abgeschlossen.

RT by @thinkBTO: Oldest and most embarrassing and revealing trick in the world: presenting the production costs & ignoring integration costs into the system. What do you call that again? Disinformation?

R to @thinkBTO: 6. Nuclear power: that bit of garbage (football field) is solved by others (Finland, Sweden) - but not us, because we are inflating the problem. Furthermore: the “waste” could power the next generation of power plants.

R to @thinkBTO: 4. the EROEI is unbeatable at nuclear power plants:

R to @thinkBTO: 5. Let's summarize:

R to @thinkBTO: 2. And others show that you can always build them cheaper (as long as you don't make them ideologically more expensive):

R to @thinkBTO: 3. Because you shorten the construction time:

1. Nuclear power plants are cheaper:

It is so ethically imperative to rely on nuclear power:

Nuclear power is also often asked about as “right-wing”. Sure, because in terms of content the counterarguments are getting weaker and weaker.

Due to the current situation: Nuclear power is poorly calculated https://think-beyondtheobvious.com/stelter-in-den-medien/atomkraft-wird-besserrechner/

RT by @thinkBTO: Ursula von der Leyen always wanted to be greener than the Greens and has done more than anyone else to destroy the German and European economy. Now she suddenly declares that the nuclear phase-out was a mistake.  Nobody is stopping the CDU in the federal government and Europe from quickly building small nuclear reactors. Except for their own political style of blaséness and incompetence, which has not brought about a single sensible future reform in the last two decades. In this way we will save neither the climate nor prosperity. Friedrich Merz and Markus Söder can now show what they are really made of. WK

RT by @thinkBTO: I listened to the debate by (among others) Toni Hofreiter, @philipp__amthor and @ulfposh on Welt TV. And I can only draw one conclusion from this: Conservatives and liberals urgently need coaching to destroy green talking points in energy policy.

Back and forth makes pockets empty. https://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/video69afbf0d234864f234f0338d/privatanleger-hin-und-her-macht-taschen-leer-oekonom-stelter-raet-zur-ruhe.html

Clear. It's about profit, not the climate.

What do they have in Germany @_FriedrichMerz?

The EU, which wanted to become a “dynamic, innovative and competitive region”, reacted as expected: with protectionism (“buy European”) and, at France’s insistence, probably also with a state “industrial policy”. Both are likely to increase the gap.https://www.handelsblatt.com/100206127.html?utm_medium=sh&utm_campaign=sharing&utm_source=Twitter&utm_term=web

RT by @thinkBTO: 👇 You should listen to the conversation about fracking, because the geophysicist Prof. Hans-Joachim Kümpel explains in detail the prank of our fracking ban: 🇩🇪 despite the acute energy crisis, foregoes considerable of its own... 1/5

and then: no more help for us when it's dark again....

Today at BTO: The conflict with Iran is part of the major geopolitical conflict and the start of an Indo-Pacific century. The Iran question is about China https://think-beyondtheobvious.com/die-iran-frage-dreht-sich-um-china/ via @

R to @thinkBTO: Further topic: A current study by the think tank Bruegel clearly highlights the reasons for Europe's innovation lag: According to the experts, Europe achieves "fragmented excellence" - strong research in islands, but too little scaling and commercialization. China, on the other hand, bundles resources in clearly defined key technologies, links funding to industrial goals and thus creates growth sectors that have what it takes to dominate global markets.

RT von @thinkBTO: Dieses Diagramm ist einfach unwirklich, ein Vergleich der Stromerzeugung und der CO₂-Intensität. Frankreich (blau) verursacht kaum Emissionen, aber schauen Sie sich Deutschland (braun) an. Die deutsche „grüne Energiewende“ hat der Industrie, den Arbeitsplätzen und der Umwelt geschadet. Warum sollte jemand das tun?

RT by @thinkBTO: Another taboo in German energy policy. The campaign against fracking also served to push through NordStream 2. A quarter of our needs could be met from domestic sources - safer and more environmentally friendly than LNG from the USA and Qatar. Substituting natural gas with renewable energy remains the right thing to do, but it will still take a while. https://open.substack.com/pub/axelbojanowski/p/fracking-in-deutschland-kritik-an-ban-grosse-projekte-erdgas?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

„Die Entscheidung Deutschlands, Kernkraftwerke abzuschalten, scheint weniger eine ökologische Entscheidung zu sein, sondern eher eine strategische Schwachstelle, die aktiv manipuliert wurde. Die Kernenergie bot Europa eine seltene Kombination aus kohlenstoffarmer Energie, Netzstabilität und Energieunabhängigkeit. Ihre Beseitigung schuf eine Lücke, die erneuerbare Energien allein nicht schließen konnten, und drängte die Länder dazu, sich russischem Gas zuzuwenden. Diese Abhängigkeit stimmte genau mit den Interessen zweier mächtiger Gruppen überein: des russischen Staates und der Industrie für fossile Brennstoffe. In mehreren dokumentierten Fällen waren diese Interessen dasselbe.“

RT by @thinkBTO: Electricity production with #nuclear power⚛️ before #Fukushima was 150 TWh/year. With moderate effort, they could have largely been preserved to this day, completely replaced coal with renewables and saved the increased gas-fired power generation? https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/daten/umweltstaat-trends/energie/erneuerbare-konventionelle-stromproduktion#bruttostromproduktion-aus-nicht-erneuerbaren-energietrgern-

RT by @thinkBTO: And no electricity is as cheap as from nuclear power plants whose running times have been extended. Well.

RT by @thinkBTO: Especially when you consider full costs

RT von @thinkBTO: Keine Energie hat so einen hohen EROEI

RT by @thinkBTO: China shows how new construction works. We can too, if it weren't ideologically prevented.

RT by @thinkBTO: Synonymous with our time. Hobby writer who constantly spreads fake stuff.

RT by @thinkBTO: Sure, who doesn't know all of our government's laws that provide subsidies for combustion engines and gas heaters 🤡

RT by @thinkBTO: The closely managed German energy transition has failed, and the Greens not only accepted this with full eyes, they forced it by also shutting down the last six nuclear power plants against all resistance.

RT by @thinkBTO: The @Die_Gruenen are back in full #election campaign mode. This means that distortions, omissions and outright #lies 🤥 about energy are once again being spread on all social media channels as if there was no tomorrow. Therefore, as a reminder: Natural gas has been a central pillar of the red-green energy transition from the start. Hydrogen has never been more than a PR smokescreen used to try to calm down supporters who are genuinely concerned about the climate. The gas power plants planned by @roberthabeck would have burned exactly the same natural gas as those now planned by Minister Reiche and the @BMWE_. You would only have received an expensive, but in practice irrelevant, H2-ready sticker. In a country like Germany, anyone who abandons nuclear energy inevitably needs a fossil backbone. This was always clear to Schröder and Trittin. The shameless incitement of the “Greens” against the minister is pure hypocrisy. It wasn't long ago that the “Greens” and all sorts of institutions in the renewable energy business circle peddled the claim that “renewables” were the cheapest way to generate electricity. That was already misleading for Germany back then, but the combined lobby clamor for reducing subsidies for the most inefficient systems is still surprising. In fact, “renewables” such as solar & wind are permanently unmarketable if the costs of volatility cannot be passed on to the general public. There is an election in Baden-Würrtemberg and a lot is at stake for the “Greens”. The Ministry of the Environment, the Landesbank and EnBW became part of the “green” disinformation machine early on. I can understand people who find Cem Özdemir likeable and can live well with his real political orientation. But the party is up for election. There are no “Greens” without the renewable energy lobby, without the rampant nepotism in which the milieu in authorities and NGOs is shamelessly supplied with money and jobs. Combined with destructive economic policies that destroy the opportunities of future generations. This policy achieves nothing for the climate. Disclaimer: Of course I know that much of what makes the “Greens” unelectable also exists in other parties. The renewable energy lobby is also firmly in the saddle in the SPD. In the Union, the business interests of the renewable energy business have organized themselves under the guise of the “climate union”. In this pure form, so professionally orchestrated, so far from reality, so inaccessible to rational discourse, this can only be found with the “Greens”. Thanks to @JanRuttmann for these clear words! #EnergyTransitionEnd!

RT by @thinkBTO: And groundhog greets you every day... The argument for a ("one-off"?) excess profits tax becomes weaker with each repetition. In my first report for the scientific advisory board at the BMF, we explained in detail why an excess profits tax is not a good idea. Link 👇

RT by @thinkBTO: "That's why it annoys me when people constantly say that wind and solar power will save us. Many people still believe that you can run an industrial nation with them. No, you can't - especially not cheaply."#InconvenientTruth by @thinkBTO https://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/plus69a9626ecd44b1ca5e1b91af/make-economy-great-again-deutschland-hat-kein-integrationsproblem-wir-haben-einfach-die-falschen-leute.html?source=puerto-reco-2_ABC-V49.5.A_control

RT von @thinkBTO: Ich denke, dass es im folgenden Sinne direkt damit zusammenhängt. Was die Eurozone braucht, ist ein Anleihenmarkt, der den Grenz-Euro, den die belgische oder französische Regierung auf den Kapitalmärkten leiht, so bewertet, dass er das zugrunde liegende Kreditrisiko Belgiens oder Frankreichs genau widerspiegelt, ohne implizite Garantien oder bedingte Transfers einzupreisen. Marktteilnehmer sollten verstehen, dass ein Zahlungsausfall eine echte Option ist. Auf diese Weise erhalten die belgische und die französische Regierung die richtigen Anreize, wenn sie unterschiedliche Steueroptionen abwägen. Oliviers Vorschlag hilft in dieser Hinsicht nicht weiter. Selbst wenn die französische Regierung den marginalen Euro auf dem nationalen französischen Anleihenmarkt (sogenannte rote Anleihen) und nicht auf dem blauen Anleihenmarkt (den Euro-Anleihen) leiht, verschaffen die blauen Anleihen Frankreich mehr Einfluss. Wenn Frankreich in ernsthafte Haushaltsschwierigkeiten gerät, könnte der französische Premierminister den anderen Europäern mitteilen, dass Frankreich die Mehrwertsteuereinnahmen, die für französische Zahlungen auf die blauen Anleihen vorgesehen sind, auf die Zahlungen auf ihre roten Anleihen umleiten wird (diese Option lässt sich den Franzosen per Gesetz nur schwer entziehen; sie können das Gesetz jederzeit im Nachhinein ändern). Für Frankreich ist das vernünftig, denn seine Maßnahmen haben mittlerweile einen viel größeren Einfluss auf die Renditen der roten Anleihen als auf die Renditen der blauen Anleihen. Das gibt dem französischen Premierminister dann auch mehr Einfluss, um eine Rettungsaktion von den anderen europäischen Ländern im Blue-Bond-Pool zu erhalten, die auf jeden Fall alles vermeiden wollen, was zu einem Anstieg der Blue-Bond-Renditen führt. Die Blue-Bond-Rendite wirkt sich direkt auf alle diese Länder aus. Außerdem wären die Blue Bonds der sichere Vermögenswert der Eurozone. Es ist so, als würden Haushalte zwei Hypotheken aufnehmen: eine über eine MBS, bei der jeder Haushalt im Pool den gleichen Zinssatz zahlt wie alle anderen Haushalte; eine andere, bei der jeder Haushalt einen Zinssatz zahlt, der sein eigenes Kreditrisiko widerspiegelt.

RT von @thinkBTO: „Die Vermögenskonzentration in Dänemark nimmt zu.“ Eigentlich nein. Link: https://t.ly/Xm_J7