Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook

The economic, environmental, and energy sense to maintain the nuclear power plant 1 and 2

What would be the economic, environmental, and energy policy the common decision of the council to maintain the nuclear reactors Ringhals 1 and 2, which were al

- 34 reads.

The economic, environmental, and energy sense to maintain the nuclear power plant 1 and 2

What would be the economic, environmental, and energy policy the common decision of the council to maintain the nuclear reactors Ringhals 1 and 2, which were also the conservative party, the Christian democrats and the Liberals to sign on. So, when the Lorentz Tovatt (MP) is trying to portray The less knowledge and critical he is, at least one-half of the parliament, the elected members of the board, including the government's samarbetsparti the Liberal party.

Let's start by sorting out the Tovatts, the claim that nuclear energy should be heavily subsidised. It has a parliamentary research service, examined (No. of 2016:1203), and there are no direct subsidies, ”There are ... there are no direct subsidies in the form of the investment, or the like, to the expansion of nuclear power in Sweden.”

also , this has to do with the nuclear power plant of high economic value. No running cost for this does not exist, neither in the state budget on our electricity bills. And let us think about this. If there were such a subsidy, as would be the Greens in government have been abolished in the year 2014. Otherwise, well, Lorentz Tovatt make sure to do it right now.

on the other hand, the so-called " elcertifikaten, which has been used in order to push ahead with the installation of new wind power, a clear market intervention, which, over time, will cost consumers tens of billions.

in Spite of the massive investment the contribution of the humble, a little more than one-tenth of the electricity.

as you See it in a larger north european perspective, one can divide the sources of power in the use of renewable, fossil and nuclear energy sources. To drastically cut one of them, it increases the dependence of the other two.

And, precisely, in Germany, the Christian Azar to take up in a separate line, is a telling sign. Since 2011, the utlovande snabbavveckling of nuclear energy has lagged behind the rest of the EU of the emission reductions (in spite of a certain amount of the pick-up in 2018 and 2019). During the period 2010-2017 reduction of EU greenhouse gas emissions by 9 per cent, Germany 3 per cent. This is in spite of an extensive and costly deployment of wind energy, which is now encountering political opposition.

. On the days when it is not blowing, it's Sweden, as well as in Germany, depending on the other generation. The less nuclear power we have, the two countries are, the more of the fossil power we need. In the south of Sweden, it is of import from the continent, and in Germany's case, the use of its own brown coal as well as imported gas from the Russian federation. When it does not blow, then the emissions are, if they don't have nuclear power to fall back on.

Finally, we will give a credit to the moderate party, the Christian democratic party and the Liberal party to stand up for the american industry, and a steady supply of energy. The sadder it is, the industrivänliga part of the socialist and social democratic parties are forced to remain silent.

<
Avatar
Your Name
Post a Comment
Characters Left:
Your comment has been forwarded to the administrator for approval.×
Warning! Will constitute a criminal offense, illegal, threatening, offensive, insulting and swearing, derogatory, defamatory, vulgar, pornographic, indecent, personality rights, damaging or similar nature in the nature of all kinds of financial content, legal, criminal and administrative responsibility for the content of the sender member / members are belong.