EU energy politics
8 Mar 2007 03:47 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Finland kind of uses a fuckton of nuclear power and it would totally make sense to use windpower, because it's... really windy here, and there's a lot of rugged hilly landscape. But rich assholes, including many Swedish-speaking ones (but while that might be a larger proportion among Swedish- than among Finnish-speakers it's still mostly Finnish ones because there just aren't that many Swedish-speakers to go around), who own vacation property in the archipelago don't want their view "spoiled" because windmills are apparently view-spoilingly fugly. Yeah, oh, okay. We wouldn't want your summer home experience to be spoiled by consciousness of plebeian things like conscientious energy usage! You're right, let's just build a sixth nuclear power plant!
Fact: Norway and Iceland use basically 100% renewable energy. Finland uses 21% renewable and 27% nuclear. Britain uses 2% renewable and 9% nuclear. France uses 6% renewable and 40% (!) nuclear. Germany uses 4% renewable and 12% nuclear.
Fact: Norway and Iceland use basically 100% renewable energy. Finland uses 21% renewable and 27% nuclear. Britain uses 2% renewable and 9% nuclear. France uses 6% renewable and 40% (!) nuclear. Germany uses 4% renewable and 12% nuclear.
(no subject)
Date: 8 Mar 2007 02:05 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9 Mar 2007 09:34 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8 Mar 2007 02:12 pm (UTC)Also, if the alternative to having a sixth nuclear power plant is doing what we do now, that is, buying nuclear power from Russia, where the plants are old and unsafe and who knows how the radioactive waste is handled? Not that I'm happy to have it in Finnish bedrock, either; I just prefer that, because should anything disastrous happen, Russia is still so close as not to make a difference.
And, I do worry about the message building more nuclear power plants would send. "Oh, they're high-tech and score well in education level surveys in Finland, and they do it, so why shouldn't we?"
(no subject)
Date: 8 Mar 2007 03:10 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8 Mar 2007 11:46 pm (UTC)Personally I think planning to reduce CO2 emissions slowly over fifty years is a joke since I think we'll be seeing the catastrophic climate changes within the next decade.
(no subject)
Date: 9 Mar 2007 09:35 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8 Mar 2007 02:46 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9 Mar 2007 09:38 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 8 Mar 2007 03:48 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 9 Mar 2007 09:37 am (UTC)