The US Senate narrowly defeated a Republican-led plan to allow drilling for oil in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), prompting some German editorialists to wonder if this means President Bush has already achieved lame duck status so early in his second term. At the same time, several newspapers take a closer look at the world's energy needs and ask if it's time to reconsider nuclear power in Germany.

The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung looks at how best to manage the world's future energy requirements. Tying the energy bill to the defense budget in the US makes sense, says the paper, because "the availability of energy is decisive when it comes to power, wealth and poverty." Furthermore, the defense budget is so voluminous because oil reserves in far off regions have to be secured. The paper contrasts this with the situation in Russia. "In half-democratic, half-soviet Russia, it's the other way around. Its power is now based less on its military strength than on its valuable oil and gas reserves." It cautions that although fossil fuels should continue to meet most of the West's energy needs, as well as those of the booming economies of China and India, the burning of these fuels is contributing to climate change. "Nuclear power seems to be a way out of this quandary," says the SZ, noting that China seems particularly set upon this course. However, the paper argues, "the more undemocratic and undeveloped a country is, the more risks nuclear energy entails," and adds that the problem of radioactive waste is one that will be around for hundreds of thousands of years. 

The Süddeutsche believes there is no reason look to the US as a role model. "It is has developed its military and economic might in order to make others dependent upon it, so that it can compensate for its own dependence on oil." The European model is preferable, because its goal is to rely on renewable energy instead. "That brings with it costs and efforts that may be a disadvantage competitively. But the hope is that it will become an advantage when other countries are forced to catch up." 

"Germany has no Alaska up its sleeve," concludes the paper, adding, " Great Britain is taking less oil and gas out of the North Sea than it needs. Yes, energy sources do continue to pop up in other places, but one day, in the not too distant future, oil will be too precious to simply burn. It is irreplaceable when made into plastic for tens of thousands of products in hospitals, factories and homes."

The Financial Times Deutschland also warms up to the nuclear theme. Although the former governing coalition of Social Democrats and Greens had legislated the end of nuclear power generation in Germany, "the last word has not been spoken." Indeed, "internationally the technology has won a few new friends, even amongst ecologists," writes the FTD. The paper argues that nuclear power might be the only way to cap green house gas emissions while meeting the energy demands of the developing world. "The physicist Angela Merkel, a strong advocate of nuclear energy, is now sitting in the chancellery" and "even proponents of renewable energy are now arguing that nuclear power plants may be necessary while alternative technology is being developed."