Thanks for clarifying that. Here, too much fuss has been made about what was actually a side note. There were apparently already plans to modernize the facility anyway.

The costs of safely decommissioning and dismantling nuclear power plants are immense and are borne by taxpayers. In addition, there are high insurance premiums for operators. Renewable energies, on the other hand, are becoming increasingly affordable and make us less dependent on fossil fuels and their price fluctuations.

The future belongs to renewable energies. With them, we can ensure a safe, clean, and sustainable energy supply for generations to come. Nuclear power is a thing of the past.

Would you like me to combine these options into a single statement, or perhaps focus on a specific aspect of the arguments? For example, we could emphasize the economic benefits of renewable energy, or the environmental impact of nuclear power.

Porsche aus unbekannter Ursache von der Fahrbahn abkam. Jaja ... Unbekannt < 200 khm

Sprich

Kotz!

Wie schnell der Marke wohl regelt, wenn mit einer neuen Gesetzgebung der Vermieter mit in Haftung genommen werden kann?

Is the laptop connected to 2.4 or 5 GHz Wirth WiFi? In my setup I never get more than 80 Mbit with 2.4 GHz.

Because you're reading the wrong media.

Es sollte vor allem durchgesetzt werden

Wie jetzt? Ich dachte immer alle sind gleich... Also müssen auch alle die gleichen Chancen haben. Und es bedarf keiner individuellen Förderung. Stimmt das etwa nicht?

What are you even talking about?!?! There is so much uranium in the world. Even if we completely switched over to nuclear power and without improvements in Nuclear tech, our sun would have fizzled out and we still would have uranium left. Uranium is more abundant than silver and we don't need much to power a nuclear reactor.

And yet we would still be dependent on an industry, just as we are today on coal, gas and oil.

I like how people take Fukushima and Chernobyl as examples for disasters. Please go look up how many people have died from those disasters. Please go check. I'll wait.

As others have already answered: far more people died than you claim here! How much land was made uninhabitable for centuries? How many animals would have to die? How much food would have to be destroyed because it was contaminated? What happens if a tsunami hits an offshore wind farm? They collapse... And then? Do they have to be rebuilt?But you can do that because the land has not been contaminated

Nothing about nuclear energy production is good, sensible and safe! You are dependent on a finite resource, you have to put in an incredible amount of effort to keep it running. Not to mention the damage caused by a malfunction (see Fukushima and Chernobyl).