Escalating Russian sanctions and crippling climate regulations lead European leaders to embrace Nuclear power – and those who don’t may have to resort to ‘dirtiest’ coal.

On one hand, the European nations, under the yoke of the ‘climate change’ cultists, needlessly restricted their power matrices in search of the mythical ‘zero emissions’; on the other hand, geopolitical turmoil caused by the war in Ukraine disrupted the cheap Russian gas deliveries that kept these economies afloat.

Currently, in the troubled European energy landscape, a big role is set to be played by Nuclear energy – believe it or not.

In the strict sense, for the people who pray to the Church of the Holy Global Warming, Nuclear energy is ‘clean’, since it generates no carbon emissions.

Other people see it as the most inadmissible, and they’d wave the Chernobyl and Fukuyama Nuclear Accidents at your face at the mere mention of it.

In the middle of all this, badly failing European Globalist leaders try to find their way as best they can.

In the UK, the government has announced plans to build a new large-scale nuclear plant, even though existing projects are badly delayed and plagued with controversy.

This would mean the biggest expansion of the sector in 70 years, and the new plant could quadruple energy supplies by 2050.

BBC reported:

“The government’s Civil Nuclear Roadmap is intended to bolster the UK’s energy independence by exploring a new site for another nuclear power station of the size and scale of the £30bn plants under construction at Hinkley Point in Somerset and committed to Sizewell in Suffolk.”

Recent UK nuclear projects have been plagued by delays, cost overruns and continuing local opposition.

“Nuclear power currently provides around 15% of the UK’s electricity but many of the country’s ageing reactors are due to be decommissioned over the next decade. Progress can be slow – to get from planning to “power on” can take nearly 20 years. Consultations for Sizewell [plant] took 10 years alone.”

[…] Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said nuclear was the ‘perfect antidote to the energy challenges facing Britain’. Of the two consultations being published on Thursday one will focus on ‘a new approach’ to [choosing the sites of] future nuclear power stations, empowering developers to find suitable locations. The other will lead on encouraging private investment.

‘Community engagement will remain critical to any decisions, alongside maintaining robust criteria such as nearby population densities’, the government said.”

Across the English channel, things look every bit as dire as France announced that it will need more than the six new nuclear plants currently planned.

The Energy Minister went as far as stating that the country will need to build more than 14 new plants.

Reuters reported:

“Speaking to weekly newspaper La Tribune Dimanche, Energy Transition Minister Agnes Pannier-Runacher said it was vital to build more nuclear reactors and increase France’s renewable energy mix to reduce the country’s dependence on fossil fuels to 40% from 60% by 2035.

‘We need nuclear power beyond the first six EPRs (European Pressurized Reactors) since the existing (nuclear) park will not be eternal’, Pannier-Runacher said, adding that post-2026 additional needs would be equivalent to 13 gigawatts corresponding to eight EPRs.

President Emmanuel Macron in 2022 placed nuclear power at the heart of his country’s drive for carbon neutrality by 2050, announcing the construction of six new European Pressurized Reactor reactors and studies for a further eight reactors.”

The new plants would be built and operated by state-controlled energy provider EDF.

The new energy strategy must be codified into law, set to be debated in parliament this month.

“Pannier-Runacher said going beyond 14 EPRs would be a ‘good subject for discussion with lawmakers’, while repeating that renewable energy capacity also needed to be ramped up massively.

Macron’s decision to extend the lifespan of existing nuclear plants to more than 50 years from 40 years for certain reactors marked a U-turn on an earlier pledge to close more than a dozen of EDF’s 56 reactors by 2035.”

Unlike the British and French, Germans under the dysfunctional coalition led by Chancellor Olaf Scholz have completely rejected nuclear power, which leads them to resort to… coal. Yes, you read it right.

The most deranged approach to ‘zero carbon emissions’ led them to the arms of the dirtiest, most carbon-intensive technology. Go figure.

BNN reported:

“In an unexpected turn, Germany’s Green Economy Minister, Robert Habeck, is reportedly contemplating a shift in the country’s energy policy. This change would involve leaning on coal, a fossil fuel often dubbed ‘dirty’ due to its high carbon emissions, as a source of energy. This development starkly contrasts the actions taken last year by Germany’s left-green-liberal government, which shuttered the nation’s remaining nuclear power plants.

The closure of nuclear facilities was an integral part of Germany’s long-standing plan to phase out nuclear power, a decision spurred by the Fukushima disaster in 2011. The potential pivot to coal is considered a response to the prevailing energy crisis, amplified by geopolitical tensions and the demand for energy security.

[…] Germany’s most influential business and green lobbying groups have rallied to urge Berlin to swiftly adopt a carbon management strategy to jumpstart the country’s industrial transformation.”

All this scrambling for energy need not have happened, if these countries had not sworn off the carbon-based energy sources that have served us well for so long and that will continue to serve the many places on Earth where the Church of the Holy Global Warming is not yet predominant.

The post CLIMATE LUNACY, ENERGY CHAOS: UK and France Bet Big on Nuclear Power, as Germany Shut All Its Plants and Now to Rely on… COAL! appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.