German Bundestag, Plenarprotokoll 21/65, pp. 7820-7821.
Right honorable Herr President. Dear colleagues.
The withdrawal from nuclear power was “a strategic mistake”, said Ursula von der Leyen as President of the European Commission. And Chancellor Friedrich Merz had previously on January 14 of this year designated the withdrawal from nuclear power a great mistake. Now he says, the withdrawal is irreversible. Yet that in fact is false, and we demonstrate that with our motion [Drucksache 21/4749].
We want that our nuclear power stations be examined, just as the CDU/CSU demanded in the Bundestag election campaign and in the coalition negotiations. The last three nuclear power plants disconnected in April 2023, Emsland, Isar 2 and Neckarwestheim II, we want in any case to again be put into operation, and also Brokdorf because there the dismantling has scarcely ensued. Measured by the branch association KernD, that is possible anytime within three years for one to three billion euros.
In regards other stations, there are for us two different categories: For one, those which in view of their restart of operation need to be examined, and for the others, those where the construction of a new nuclear power plant is sensible. Of the latter, in our view, are two nuclear power stations in the east, namely Greifswald/Lumin and Stendal/Arneburg, and in the west, Obrigheim, Philippsburg 1, Neckarwestheim I, Isar 1, Stade, Würgassen, Unterweser and Gundremmingen B and Mülheim-Kärlich.
Nuclear power plants which we want to newly build would be, for example, the European Evolutionary Pressurized-water Reactor EPR,
Harald Ebner
(Greens): Yes, exactly.
a German-French development which has already been built in many countries, as in Great Britain, France, Finland and also China, or the American reactor AP 1000, which will be built in Poland directly on the German border in three blocks and permitted according to German safety guidelines. Both of these types are of relatively simple availability. There are however additional which may come into question.
We need nuclear energy not
Harald Ebner
(Greens): “We need nuclear energy not”, that’s right!
only because it is advantageous, robust and reliable, and makes unnecessary the further completion of the energy transition, for which we are certainly not paid, but also because it makes us independent of foreign countries.
Alaa
Alhamwi (Greens): From Russia, yes!
– Now listen! – Uranium we receive from Canada, Africa, Australia and Kazachstan. Yet in case of emergency, we still have it available in our own country as raw material, for example, in the Erzgebirge or in Schwarzwald.
Following the oil crisis of 1973-1974, it was the government of Helmut Schmidt which quite decisively drove forward the build up of nuclear power in Germany: Nuclear power as freedom’s energy!
Harald Ebner
(Greens): The renewables are the energies of freedom!
You should reflect on that, on Helmut Schmidt and his political reason.
And please, Frau Scheer, do not come to me again with your “alternative facts”. You are the SPD’s energy policy spokesman, and with your “alternative facts” you have already two weeks ago in the debate in the professional world made a furor; that, I can say to you.
In fact, our nuclear power plants can be daily reduced in performance by a third, and again ramped up, and that for months. Worldwide, in fact 66 nuclear power works plants will be built. We have produced the electricity in our blocks for 2.5 to 3 cents per kilowatt-hour.
Harald Ebner
(Greens): 80 to 40 cents per kilowatt-hour!
And a basic load from nuclear power which is always available cannot be compared with photo-voltaic, which is available only 2,000 to 3,000 hours per year, and in autumn and winter as good as not. You can believe me. I myself have worked as plant physicist in steam reactors and pressurized-water reactors.
Dear SPD, finally give up your blockade stance, since it is you who are permanently blocking the re-entry into the nuclear power. Vote for our motion!
[trans: tem]
