Gaslobby pusht EU naar miljardeninvesteringen in gasinfrastructuur

6 comments
  1. Hey Greenpeace, I know you people don’t like to hear it but we will need fossil fuels at least for several decades, and thus investments need to be made to keep their prices reasonable.

  2. if only we had some sort of clean energy with virtually zero greenhouse gas emissions, abundant fuel supply, and proven safety record, that would be fantastic!

    But I guess we’ll just have to keep burning fossil fuels and pretending that nuclear energy doesn’t exist.

  3. tl;dr

    The problem that the article is about is about the investment in liquid gas terminals, not about gas plants.

    It’s a problem because the capacity of the planned terminals exceeds the amount of gas we imported from Russia, so it’s more than we need. In addition, most of them won’t be ready soon, so they will not help solving the current gas supply crisis.

  4. Nuclear works but is expansive to build, finland has a new one and the time and costs were higher then estimated. Also nuclear cant be shut down like a gas plant.So you would provide way too much energy at night. The best way is to diversify all of your energy a bit coal, a bit gas, a bit nuclear, a bit solar. 🙂

Leave a Reply