Thread by @VeroWendland

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps 1 | Look, Jörg, we are grown-up people & professionals, so we do not need to play these games. Let’s see how our so far non-discusson began. 1) no one said that the JRC report is a „holy grail“.➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps 2 | what @MLiebreich and me did was informing you that the JRC report contains a state of the art survey, providing you with answers on your questions on nuclear. ➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps 3| However, your „questions“ were rather statements than questions, so before I engage into a time-consuming quarrel instead of a discussion, I have to receive a signal from you that you are principally open for arguments (Q 1 in the figure).➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps 4 | You stated - without evidence - that the JRC survey was „interest driven“ and so you would not need to read it (breach of rule 4 in the figure), this being a rather clear signal that you are not willing to engage into an evidence-based discussion. ➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps 5.1 | Although receiving this discouraging signal, I provided you with further evidence, this time from an own publication with @amardeo oekomoderne.de/zehn-jahre-fuk… that, anong other issues, discusses the applicability of the Fukushima accident sequence & its causes to German NPP.➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps @amardeo 5.2| This was my evidence-based answer on your statement that nuclear accidents will again happen, and that this a sufficient legitimation for abolitionism. But now ask why a zero-radiation-due-casualty Japanese accident under apocalyptic natural disaster circumstances➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps @amardeo 5.3| ...served as legitimation for a German nuclear phaseout? That “accidents happen“ Germans knew even before Fukushima. So, I invited you to verify the Merkelian hypothesis that nuclear accidents that happen in Japan can happen in Germany, too, by reading my article. ➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps @amardeo 6 | In this article I prove that the GER gvt decision was based on 1) lack of data, 2) wrong assumptions on JAP nuclear tech & regulation, 3) flawed analysis that led to wrong conclusions on applicability. ➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps @amardeo 7.1| As an aviation professional, safety culture is a commonplace for you, and accident experience, unfortunately, too. As an industrial anthropologist with an 8 year comparative research record at NPPs in Germany & Eastern Europe, I can add that ➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps @amardeo 7.2| ...nuclear & aviation safety cultures co-emerged in constant learning processes, informed each other, developing similar instruments & safeguards. As a result, both nuclear & aviation are the safest high-reliability systems we have on our planet. ➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps @amardeo 7.3 | Air transport, accidents included, has the lowest casualties per mile; nuclear, accidents included, has the lowest casualties per MWh, approx. the same as wind and solar PV have.➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps @amardeo 7.4 | Additionally, nuclear is way more reliable than wind & solar, thus providing added value for other safety concerns, e.g. grid stability, and all this at a minimum of land consumption & a minimum impact on biodiversity.➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps @amardeo 8 | So you can easily conclude what a flawed decision process on the very fate of an industry means for overall grid safety, climate safety & ecology. ➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps @amardeo 9.1 | Apply the same decision process to aviation: If Merkel drew a Fukushima conclusion, i.e. a flawed conclusion without database, from, say, the B-737Max failures, for any aircraft in Germany, the outcome would be: ➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps @amardeo 9.2 | Prohibition of any form of aviation unless the technically impossible proof of zero risk is given. As you probably know, welt.de/wirtschaft/art… an 38% share of people never board an aircraft or experience negative emotions when boarding due to fear of accidents. ➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps @amardeo 10.1 | Now imagine Flugangst people would have organized anti-aviation NGOs & parties, would have campaigned throughout 30 yrs against air transport as a “technology of death“, monopolizing the media coverage on aviation as a high-risk industry with hecatombs of victims, ➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps @amardeo 10.2 | ...eventually informing governmental policy. Then the B-737Max accidents had been resulted in an overall prohibition of aviation in Germany. This is precisely what happened to nuclear energy in Germany, despite the excellent safety record of German nuclear engineering.➡️

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps @amardeo 11 | Conclusion: if these arguments and this analogy do not encourage an airman to reconsider his position on nuclear, I will not further disturb him with arguments.

@JHandwerg @MLiebreich @s04paps @amardeo @threadreaderapp pls unroll