this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2025
461 points (96.6% liked)

World News

45416 readers
4166 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

A new Innofact poll shows 55% of Germans support returning to nuclear power, a divisive issue influencing coalition talks between the CDU/CSU and SPD.

While 36% oppose the shift, support is strongest among men and in southern and eastern Germany.

About 22% favor restarting recently closed reactors; 32% support building new ones.

Despite nuclear support, 57% still back investment in renewables. The CDU/CSU is exploring feasibility, but the SPD and Greens remain firmly against reversing the nuclear phase-out, citing stability and past policy shifts.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Three Mile Island was a partial meltdown, which may sound close to an actual meltdown, it's not even close in terms of danger.

Fukushima failed because the plants were old and not properly upkept. Had they followed the guidelines for keeping the plant maintained, it would not have happened.

That's not really the fault of nuclear power.

Chernobyl was also partially caused by lack of adherence to safety measures, but also faulty plant design.

I'd say, being generous, only one of those three events says anything about the safety of nuclear power, and even then, we have come a very long way.

So one event... Ever.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Chernobyl shouldn't have happened due to safety measures, yet it did. Fukushima shouldn't have happened, yet it did. The common denominator is human error, but guess who'll be running any other nuclear power plants? Not beavers.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (2 children)

Fukushima's reactors were extremely old, even at the time. We're not even talking about the same technology. Shit has come a very long way.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Sure, and the next catastrophe will have some good reason too, yet it will happen due to human error and greed.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Unlike the complete safety of fossil fuels.

[–] FooBarrington@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Because everyone knows there's literally only fossil fuels and nuclear energy, nothing else.

[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

That must be why you people are suggesting to turn the extremely old German reactors back on that have had limited maintenance under the assumption that they would be turned off for decades now.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 2 hours ago

That must be why you people are suggesting to turn the extremely old German reactors back on

Is that what I did? Well that's news to me!

[–] saimen@feddit.org 0 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

How is a nuclear meltdown not the fault of nuclear power? Of course you can prevent it by being super careful and stuff, but it is inherent to nuclear power that it is super dangerous. What is the worst that can happen with a wind turbine? It falls, that's it.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone -1 points 2 hours ago

Because the shit they were using in the Fukushima plants was so old that it might as well be completely different technology. Same with Chernobyl.

People are referencing shit that does not even apply to modern nuclear power.

[–] luce@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

if we were to either replace all power on earth with nuclear, or replace all power on earth with wind, more people would die from- idk, falling out of wind turbines- then from deaths due to nuclear.

Fukushima had a fucking earthquake and a tsunami theiwn at it, AND the company which made it cut corners. It was still, much, much less bad than it could have been and the reactor still partially withstood a lot of damage.

In the United States at least (and i assume the rest of the world) nuclear energy is so overegulated that many reactors can have meltdowns without spelling disaster for the nearby area. Nuclear caskets (used to transport and store wastes) can withstand fucking missle strikes.

Im not going to pretend that there arent genuine issues with nuclear, such as cost and construction time(*partially caused by the overegulation), but genuine nuclear disaster has only ever resulted from the worst of human decisions combined with the worst of circumstances. Do i trust humans not to make shitty mistakes? No, not with all this overegulation, but still, even counting Fukushima and Chernobyl, more people die from wind (and especially fossil fuels) then nuclear per terawatt of electricity production.

[–] lumony@lemmings.world 1 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Thank you for bringing some light to these people living in the dark.

I swear, some people see an influencer say "nuclear is actually really bad!" and then just take it and run.

Really puts into perspective how smart the average person in these days. They're just trying to look good in front of their peers.