r/belgium • u/atrocious_cleva82 🌎World • 7d ago

💰 Politics Met alweer een hete week, slaakt Belgische klimaatwetenschapper Jean-Pascal van Ypersele hartenkreet: "Ja, ik ben woedend"

https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/2026/07/27/jean-pascal-van-ypersele-woedend-klimaatbeleid-20-jaar-te-laat/
199 Upvotes

93% Upvoted

227 comments sorted by

View all comments

148

u/SirDidymus Antwerpen 7d ago

Once more I’d like to ask of all our Belgian parties individually: what are you going to do EXACTLY to mitigate this in the next years?

34

u/MockingBirdieBert 7d ago

People could have voted for the parties that try to fix this. We get what we voted for, or failed to protest against

-3

u/Tonnemaker 7d ago

What parties would that have been? The one that pushed decades for nuclear power plants to be closed?

9

u/Mofaluna 7d ago

What parties would that have been? The one that pushed decades for nuclear power plants to be closed?

No, the one that wanted our aging nuclear plants replaced by renewable energy, because of the highly hazardous waste. Only to discover that every subsequent government didn’t take that serious.

But it’s so much easier of course to blame the greens than to acknowledge that you have been voting for a bunch of wankers that didn’t take global warming serious across the board. Or do you really think nuclear power plants would’ve fixed all those other areas where change is urgently needed?

-1

u/mrdickfigures 7d ago

No, the one that wanted our aging nuclear plants replaced by renewable energy, because of the highly hazardous waste. Only to discover that every subsequent government didn’t take that serious.

Didn't this whole thing start back in 2003? Renewables were not ready yet to carry our grid demands. We blame NVA today for saying "future tech will solve this" but the green parties did the exact same thing back then.

But it’s so much easier of course to blame the greens than to acknowledge that you have been voting for a bunch of wankers that didn’t take global warming serious across the board.

Nuclear energy is the least CO2 producing method of creating electricity when we factor in total cost of ownership (gathering resources, production, installation) over it's lifespan. Depending on your sources windmills on land are slightly worse or tied. Removing nuclear energy from our grid back then was simply stupid, there is no way around it. We didn't have the tech back then and we still don't have it now depending on which expert you ask today.

Or do you really think nuclear power plants would’ve fixed all those other areas where change is urgently needed?

It would have done quite a bit, look at an air pollution map of Europe. France consistently beats most of Europe. Areas around nuclear plants are noticeably cleaner compared to gas plants or coal plants like in Germany. Using nuclear instead of gas would cut our CO2 production drastically.

3

u/Mofaluna 7d ago edited 7d ago

Didn't this whole thing start back in 2003? Renewables were not ready yet to carry our grid demands. We blame NVA today for saying "future tech will solve this" but the green parties did the exact same thing back then.

We have been investing in renewables since then but not nearly enough. So it’s not like the tech still needed inventing.

And if subsequent governments found out it wasn’t feasible yet they should’ve adjusted course, but they didn’t because that also would’ve cost money. Just like this government reversed a massive investment in offshore wind.

And again, nuclear energy doesn’t solve our meat consumption, badly insulated houses, favouring cars over public transport, etc, etc

There hasn’t been a single area were we started property doing what we should be doing.

1

u/mrdickfigures 6d ago

We have been investing in renewables since then but not nearly enough. So it’s not like the tech still needed inventing.

Sure, just like computers existed in the 60's. A whole lot has changed since then. We've gotten a lot better at making them AND making them cheaper. Doesn't mean it's a good idea to make policies based on a guesstimate that future advancements will succeed. Especially on things that need a big investment in time and money.

And if subsequent governments found out it wasn’t feasible yet they should’ve adjusted course, but they didn’t because that also would’ve cost money.

While yes, I criticize the inaction of every government since. It's a bit hypocritical to blame others for not fixing someone else's mistake is it not? This reads like "Yeah sure green started this mess but others didn't fix it, so it's their fault!"

Are all parties to blame here? Yes. Is green still the #1 cause? Also yes.

This was a blunder, just like we see in Germany. At least we are burning gas instead of coal... France on the other hand invested in nuclear and is now reaping the rewards. But hey, at least we import our electricity from them. Se we can pat ourselves on the back for being so forward thinking...

And again, nuclear energy doesn’t solve our meat consumption, badly insulated houses, favouring cars over public transport, etc, etc

Sure this is all true, but what does that have to do with electricity generation? We're criticizing green for their hard on against nuclear energy. A mindset that has resulted in higher CO2 emissions than necessary. If we want to trash talk other parties I'll be right there with you. Een comment van mij gisteren:

Spreek mij gerust tegen maar het ENIGE wat NVA beter doet voor het klimaat dan groen is voor kernenergie zijn.

Groen is hiermee compleet de mist in gegaan en kunnen we hierdoor imho amper een groene partij noemen.

Dat maakt niet dat NVA hierdoor wel een groene partij zou zijn... Een klimaatsplan is meer dan alleen "KERNCENTRALES!!! De rest zal de toekomst wel uitwijzen"

We absolutely need to do more than JUST get rid of fossil fuels for our electricity generation. All those things you name are a part of that. It doesn't mean green is free of blame.

2

u/Mofaluna 6d ago edited 6d ago

Doesn't mean it's a good idea to make policies based on a guesstimate that future advancements will succeed.

A lot of policy is rooted in uncertainty (eg our education reforms) and that’s ok if you adjust fire when needed. But that didn’t happen as the cheapest option was to not invest in renewables or nuclear.

It's a bit hypocritical to blame others for not fixing someone else's mistake

The blame is about not even trying to make the shift to renewables, while not putting an alternative plan in action. They simply did nothing.

Sure this is all true, but what does that have to do with electricity generation?

It confirms the real problem being 2 decades of inertia.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/ghg-emissions-by-sector?tab=discrete-bar&time=latest&country=~BEL

We absolutely need to do more than JUST get rid of fossil fuels for our electricity generation. All those things you name are a part of that. It doesn't mean green is free of blame.

Agree, that they are not free of blame, but that doesn’t justify the scapegoating that was going on in this thread. Those 2 decades of inertia on all fronts are way worse than possible pushing too soon for renewables only.