If it were up to Union parliamentary group leader Jens Spahn, the three remaining nuclear reactors would have to run until the energy supply is stable again – if necessary for years. He has no safety concerns. The pending check is only a “paper check”.
The deputy chairman of the Union parliamentary group in the Bundestag, Jens Spahn, has spoken out in favor of allowing nuclear power plants to continue running until the end of the gas shortage. “We have a crisis. We need energy in winter, and we need all energy,” said the CDU politician to the editorial network Germany. It would be fatal for Germany and Europe to take six percent of German electricity production off the grid in the middle of this energy crisis.
“I would let the nuclear power plants run longer as long as the gas shortage lasts,” said Spahn. We’ll have to see how long that takes. “We can still argue about what will happen in three or five years.”
In view of rising prices and the threat of energy shortages, a debate has broken out about the further use of the three remaining German nuclear power plants, initiated by the CDU and FDP, among others. This is also controversial because nuclear power is mainly used to generate electricity, while the lack of Russian gas is used to produce heat. Proponents also argue with possible power shortages.
The plan is actually for the remaining Meiler Isar 2 in Lower Bavaria, Emsland in Lower Saxony and Neckarwestheim 2 in Baden-Württemberg to go out of service at the end of the year. Because of this date, the safety check that was actually required every ten years was dispensed with in 2019.
Spahn dismissed security concerns from opponents of nuclear power. The nuclear power plants are monitored every day, he told RND. “Surely no one believes that nuclear power plants can be operated in Germany without really checking everything there. What is safe on December 31st is still safe on January 1st.” When asked whether this also applies without a security check, Spahn said: “The check that should have been made since 2012 is a paper check.”
The Greens should make the same arrangements as with the extension of the term for the “climate killer coal”. In the case of coal-fired power plants, however, the Greens are more pragmatic than in the case of nuclear energy, because here they get tangled up in their “founding myth”.
