Go!  Team Germany!  Go!  

 Many of todays  nations are energy starved,and in order to sustain our present standard of living governments are  perplexed as to what  should be the correct course of action. Hopefully those handling this portfolio shall not cave into special interest groups  and do what sounds economically viable  factoring in our enviromental concerns most seriously. Looking toward Germany to hone in on better technological advances so that everyone can enjoy a most prosperous living bridled by a greener planet. Go home team Germany Go.

I dislike "expertise" that has politics written all over it.   Why pick on Germany?  Does not Germany have a right to make decisions on the basis of what its population wants?  Germany need not sacrifice for anyone, not to bail anyone out, or provide them with cheap energy. Nuclear energy can ONLY succeed if there is ACCOUNTABILITY for every aspect of its existence.  From FUNDING, that is always from TAXPAYER'S pocket, to INSURANCE, likewise taxpayers obligation only,  to accountabilty for the construction, operations and disposal.  But here is the problem in France and elsewhere. &nbs p; Once taxpayer pays for construction, and insures against damages,  private sector "magically" gets to build and operate the plants and rake in profits!  The result?  Construction often well bellow safety,  operations cut backs to maximize profits, and God only knows what really happens to depleted uranium.  On the other hand, SOLAR is expensive because UTILITY companies are fighting tooth and nail to keep it expensive.  The panels should not be expensive, but they are, and are built to "expire" its usefull life before you even repay the high cost.  And even "cheaper" Chinese panels are really inordinately expensive.  Electric companies want us to plug our solar into their grid, to "get credit" for using our surplus --- that is, running meter backwards.  If you believe it, there are many bridged you can buy as well.  The problem is,  the individuals are not allowed to get benefits.&n bsp; Nuclear power has many merits, but is potentially the most devastating energy for the environment and can threaten the existence of life on earth.   If Japanese crisis showed anything, human beings with their crass profit motives are still too primitive to handle such technology. &nb sp;

Our current energy technology has taken the current direction to vast centralized production because that is the most profitable for a few, with the finances, to get ten times and more from the people who ultimately must not only bear the cost i rates, but also the cost in taxes and pollution.  Coal has radioactivity in it, but not the fission products of nuclear and they both produce particles of such a small size as to cause serious respiratory problems besides the mutagen effects of the chemicals and radiation.   Both need to go, and all people will eventually be energy self-sufficient. that technology has remained undeveloped as it does not fit the mold of an easily controlled populace.  IN the future only through agreement will people allow their surplus to be used for agreed upon ends.  We will not be building bombs, and energy weapons, nort transportation systems that contribute to centralizing power unless it is an open and transparent choice.  I am not a dreamer only see what doing as we have done will lead us, and that is not an option to continue to let states and corporations use us to amass power over us.  As we have learned the hard way, they take what they want and then refuse to give us what we need when we have become expendable to them.  No point in ever giving anyone that kind of power and it starts with our addiction to using more than what we have.  There is only so much light falling on earth, best we use it and save our fossil and nuclear reserves for the dark ages.

I think one of primary purposes was to keep Germany down. Simple as that. France, US, GB are still scared of unified Germany.

I don´t think so as natural gas is on the midterm less expensive than nuclear power. In my opinion German companies will get a competitive advantage thanks to lower electricity power costs while French companies will have to pay for year the expensive subsidies to build nuclear power plants and to keep the deposit of nuclear waste for centuries. But nuclear power is less expensive than renowable energy (solar and wind), above all solar energy which is the most expensive. So. 1. Oil. 2. Gas. 3. Hyrdo. 4. Nuclear. 5. Wind. 6. Solar.
The Russian Federation is a leading nation in four of them, and with good conditions to develop wind power, and even solar power in the Caucasus. There is space for every kind of energy development in the Russian Federation. As there are so many isolated communities where it is very difficult to take a pipeline, wind or solar power can allow a better quality of life on those isolated villages.

If Germany is successful in phasing out nuclear power and remaining one of the world's largest economies without it, then they will be setting an example for the rest of the world. The fact that competing in a global economy without nuclear power is obviously a huge challenge, in my opinion, makes it all the worthier as a realistic goal.

Germany is completely insane to make such a move in the 21st Century.

Even the dumb Saudis plan to build 15 reactors, for friggins sake!!