Germany formally decided to withdraw from nuclear power after decades of anti‑nuclear politics, setting April 15, 2023 as the withdrawal date.

A 2001 government agreement assigned operating timelines to all reactors and, after the Fukushima disaster, Chancellor Angela Merkel announced in 2011 that reactors would close by the end of 2022 and the Bundestag approved that decision.

In early 2023 Germany shut its last reactors and entered its first "nuclear‑free winter."

The final eight reactors produced roughly 8.1 gigawatts of capacity before closure.

Wind and solar replaced much of the lost capacity in favorable months, but reduced winter solar output and peak heating demand forced higher coal and gas generation to balance the grid.

That shift contributed to higher emissions, sharply higher electricity prices, and reduced industrial output in 2023.

Germany was heavily dependent on Russian fossil fuels before the war; one report states about half of its natural gas and coal and about a third of its oil came from Russia.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine created an energy crisis in Europe and prompted Germany and EU partners to seek alternative suppliers, increased LNG discussion, and measures to diversify and fill storage.

The war also reignited domestic debate about extending reactor lifetimes, with CDU, CSU and some FDP figures proposing extensions while the Green Party remained opposed.

The German government says it will keep climate goals, targeting at least 80% of electricity from renewables by 2030 and climate neutrality by 2045.

Summary: Phasing out nuclear reduced reliable baseload, increased dependence on variable renewables and fossil fuels, raised costs and emissions, exposed vulnerability to Russian gas, and triggered some political calls to extend reactors though a full return remains politically contested.

Germany formally decided to withdraw from nuclear power after decades of anti‑nuclear politics, setting April 15, 2023 as the withdrawal date.

Title:

Content: Read the history of the moment: why is Germany so entangled in nuclear power? | German News | DW | 14.04.2023
1.
Inhalt
2.
Navigation
3.
Weitere Inhalte
4.
Metanavigation
5.
Suche
6.
Choose from 30 Languages
Advertisement
German News
Read the history of the present: why is Germany so entangled in nuclear power?
Germany was proud of its nuclear power generation technology, but at the same time the technology has been so controversial that it has finally decided that April 15, 2023 is the date of withdrawal from nuclear power.
However, as the energy crisis caused by the Russian-Ukrainian war continues to intensify, the wisdom of the decision to say goodbye to nuclear energy has been widely discussed.
Germany ’ s nuclear policy is in dispute again
It all started with an "egg" - Germany's first nuclear reactor in Garching, near Munich, went into operation in October 1957.
Because the nuclear reactor, which belongs to the University of Munich, resembles an egg, it is nicknamed the "atomic egg".
It was a milestone in Germany's nuclear energy research and a symbol of Germany's resurgence after World War II.
The nuclear reactor, which was used for scientific purposes, remained in operation until 2000.
In 1957, Germany built its first nuclear reactor.
Three years later, in 1960, the first nuclear power plant for civilian use was built in the city of Kahl, on the banks of the Main River in Bavaria.
At that time, atomic energy was widely regarded as both safe and reliable. The 1973 oil crisis gave further impetus to the rapid development of nuclear energy in Germany.
The start of the anti-nuclear movement
Since it has been impossible to find a foolproof way to store nuclear waste, opponents have begun to question whether nuclear energy is really a clean energy source.
Thousands of protesters clashed with police during the construction of the Brockdorf nuclear power plant in the state of Shihe.
Since the 1970s, plans for the construction of the Brockdorf nuclear power plant have triggered numerous police and civil conflicts.
"Nuclear energy? No, thank you!" has become a rallying cry for environmentalists.
In the 1980s, a new political party, the Green Party, emerged in West Germany. Its members are mainly leftists, pacifists, environmentalists and anti-nuclear forces. In 1983, the Green Party entered the Bundestag.
In 1983, Green Party politicians Gert Bastian and Petra Kelly were elected to the Bundestag.
On March 28, 1979, a serious accident occurred at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania, United States. On April 26, 1986, a reactor at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine, Soviet Union, exploded, causing the worst nuclear disaster in history.
Radiation clouds spread throughout Europe.
The accident also marked a turning point in discussions about nuclear technology in Germany.
At the time, Germany was still divided.
In East Germany under the Communist Party, the public received almost no information about the nuclear accident and its effects.
West Germany, on the other hand, was in a state of confusion and politicians were helpless.
People were unprepared for a nuclear leak, and the government was unable to provide guidelines and response strategies for the time being.
A hastily formed crisis management team was also disbanded shortly afterwards.
The Chernobyl nuclear accident has caused widespread concern in Germany.
People are buying iodine.
A large quantity of fruit, vegetables and milk in the supermarket was ordered to be removed from the shelves because of concerns about nuclear radiation.
Children were banned from playing in the sand pools and citizens were warned not to go out in the rain.
Although the health effects of radiation were not detected in Germany, the accident led to the introduction of nationwide radiation monitoring in Germany, which eventually led to the establishment of the Federal Ministry of the Environment.
Plans to build a nuclear waste treatment plant in the Bavarian town of Wackersdorf have sparked serious riots.
The clashes left several protesters and civil servants dead and hundreds injured.
The project was finally halted in 1989, the first major victory of the German environmental movement.
And...
In 2011, protesters handcuffed themselves to the tracks in an attempt to block trains carrying nuclear waste.
Meanwhile, in northern Germany, Gorleben in Lower Saxony became a symbol of the struggle against nuclear waste, and the town was designated to temporarily store nuclear waste until a permanent storage site was identified.
The first shipment of nuclear waste arrived in the town on 24 April 1995.
A long farewell to nuclear power - Germany's nuclear withdrawal process after many setbacks
In 2001, Schroeder's center-left coalition government of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) and the Green Party reached an agreement with major energy companies to phase out nuclear power.
All 19 nuclear power plants in Germany have been given operating timelines and the last one is required to be shut down by 2021.
In 2001, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder announced that Germany would phase out nuclear power generation.
In 2010, the center-right government led by Chancellor Angela Merkel withdrew the nuclear withdrawal agreement.
It also decided to extend the operating time of nuclear power plants.
However, the third major nuclear accident in the world has caused a change in Germany's nuclear energy policy. On March 11, 2011, the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan caused by the earthquake and tsunami.
The impact of the accident on Germany is even greater than that of Japan.
As a veteran physicist, German Chancellor Angela Merkel unexpectedly changed her usual stance on nuclear energy policy.
Merkel suddenly announced that the era of nuclear power in Germany will end by the end of 2022. On July 30, 2011, the German Bundestag voted to approve the resolution.
After years of fierce fighting, the Brockdorf nuclear power plant in the state of Ishih will finally become history in 2021 after 35 years of operation.
In 2017, Germany decided to start a nationwide search for a safe place to store highly radioactive nuclear waste, with the mission to be completed by 2031.
At the end of 2021, anti-nuclear activists celebrated the closure of a nuclear power plant in North Germany.
Rethinking the nuclear policy.
The war in Ukraine has made Germany anxious to get rid of its energy dependence on Russia, which has also reignited the already ironclad policy of denuclearization.
The coalition leader has spearheaded a proposal to extend the operating time of nuclear power plants to replace natural gas from Russia with nuclear power.
In August 2022, CDU Chairman Meltz and CSU Chairman Soder both put forward the idea of extending the time limit for nuclear power operations.
Christian Lindner, finance minister of the business-oriented Liberal Democratic Party (FDP), immediately backed a return to nuclear power.
His party is junior partner in a centre-left coalition with the Social Democrats (SPD) and the Greens.
The latter will find it difficult to agree to an extension because opposition to nuclear power is one of their core issues.
But in the summer of 2022, no one in Germany completely ruled out that possibility.
LDP finance minister Lindner, who is focused on business interests, was also quick to join the pro-nuclear camp.
But for the Green Party, which is also part of the ruling coalition, the possibility of agreeing to extend the operating time of nuclear power plants is slim, because opposition to nuclear power is their basic principle.
Anything is possible in Germany in 2022.
Can nuclear power be a climate savior?
Editor: This article was originally published in August 2022
© 2022 Deutsche Welle Copyright Notice: All content in this article is protected by copyright law and may not be used without special permission from Deutsche Welle.
Any misconduct will lead to recovery and criminal prosecution.
DW.COM

A 2001 government agreement assigned operating timelines to all reactors and, after the Fukushima disaster, Chancellor Angela Merkel announced in 2011 that reactors would close by the end of 2022 and the Bundestag approved that decision.

In early 2023 Germany shut its last reactors and entered its first "nuclear‑free winter."

Title:

Content: In early 2023, Germany shut down its last nuclear power plants, so this winter will be Germany ’ s first “nuclear-free winter ”. Despite the German government ’ s vow to modernize its energy system and develop renewable energy, Germany ’ s fossil fuel consumption is higher and its power system is dirtier.
Commenting on Germany ’ s electricity problem, Reuters columnist Gavin Maguire wrote that the country ’ s electricity problem began with a gradual decline in the share of nuclear power in Germany ’ s power generation structure. In 2014, the contribution of nuclear power to Germany ’ s total electricity supply fell by only 6% in 2022, and finally dropped to zero after the last eight reactor outages in 2023.
According to the think tank Ember, Germany's last eight nuclear reactors generated about 8.1 gigawatts (8,000 megawatts) of electricity, a gap that was filled by solar and wind capacity.
It seems to be okay.
However, as solar power (Germany ’ s second largest clean power after wind) suffers from reduced sunlight this year, power generation will fall sharply this winter, and the total amount of clean electricity in Germany will also decline, but winter has always been Europe ’ s peak electricity consumption (heating demand), so German power producers are forced to increase the amount of electricity generated from fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas. of emissions.
According to the data, in the first nine months of 2023, Germany ’ s total electricity generation fell compared to last year, including clean electricity and fossil energy power; clean electricity fell by 5.6% compared to the same period in 2022, and fossil fuel power generation fell by 21%.
In other words, this year has been the most electricity efficient year in Germany since 2017.
But don ’ t think that ’ s a good thing, because Germany ’ s industrial electricity demand has fallen this year, and the economy has certainly followed suit.
Why is that so?
Data from the London Stock Exchange shows that the high price of electricity in Germany is a key factor. Compared to 2019, the price of electricity in Germany is 160% higher this year, although it is much better than the highest price last year (electricity prices soared last year due to the Russian-Ukrainian war, this year has fallen), but the German industry is still unwilling to pay.
According to data from the London Stock Exchange (LSEG), German chemical and fertilizer production (previously produced using abundant and cheap natural gas) has fallen to its lowest level in more than a decade in 2023 as producers cut production.
Production of cars, steel, batteries and turbines has also been cut, causing Germany, Europe ’ s largest economy, to experience a rare export slump this year.
In order to support the German industrial recovery, the German government asked the power companies to suppress the cost of electricity, and actively increase the production of cheap renewable energy, did get some results, but after entering the autumn, the sunshine time reduced, Germany September to December's total solar power, must be more than 80% lower than the peak.
Since solar power has accounted for more than 20% of Germany ’ s total electricity generation each month in the past five months, such a serious decline in clean power production will inevitably lead to a tight overall electricity supply; in order to make up for the shortage of solar power, Germany can only maximize the use of wind power, wind power production in Germany will increase in winter.
In order to supplement the intermittent problem of wind power and ensure that the total generation of electricity rises as demand grows, power companies have to increase the generation of coal and gas, which can be controlled by power plants to balance the needs of the national electricity market.
Speaking of which, it is clear that Germany will have to rely more on fossil fuels to generate electricity, and its carbon emissions will inevitably increase.
In order to determine its ideal of a non-nuclear homeland, Germany has caused more pollution, and the cost of electricity is still high, which has hit the German industry.
In August of this year, economists criticized "Germany's economic recession is already the sick man of Europe", which is all related to the abandonment of nuclear power.
German power mix may get dirtier for 1st non-nuclear winter
# Germany # Electricity # Dirty # Carbon # Solar

The final eight reactors produced roughly 8.1 gigawatts of capacity before closure.

Wind and solar replaced much of the lost capacity in favorable months, but reduced winter solar output and peak heating demand forced higher coal and gas generation to balance the grid.

That shift contributed to higher emissions, sharply higher electricity prices, and reduced industrial output in 2023.

Germany was heavily dependent on Russian fossil fuels before the war; one report states about half of its natural gas and coal and about a third of its oil came from Russia.

Title:

Content: Germany seeks to end energy dependence on Russia
March 23, 2022 20: 47
Eastern Network Television
More News Clips
(Photo by Getty Images)
Germany is pushing to find alternative sources of Russian oil, gas and coal, and is ready to offer more assistance to consumers and businesses struggling to cope with high energy prices.
Russia ’ s war on Ukraine has exposed Germany ’ s heavy dependence on Russian energy sources, including about half of its natural gas and coal, and about a third of its oil, which comes from Russia.
As Germany is moving away from nuclear and coal power, while trying to accelerate the development of renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, the country ’ s energy dependence is even more exposed.
Germany ’ s prime minister said the country ’ s dependence on Russia for oil, coal and natural gas has been increasing over the past few decades and will end it as soon as possible.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine created an energy crisis in Europe and prompted Germany and EU partners to seek alternative suppliers, increased LNG discussion, and measures to diversify and fill storage.

Title:

Content: The Ukraine War Awakens Europe ’ s Energy Dream
The war in Ukraine has had a profound impact on the world economy.
It will, at least in terms of energy, food, strategic supply chains, finance and the world ’ s currency, international investment, and international big business, subvert the global imagination of the post-Cold War era for three decades.
The pendulum of the global historical process will inevitably swing back in the direction of “decoupling. ”
Limited to space, this is mainly about energy issues.
As the “post-Cold War era ” officially ends and traditional conflicts return to the center of the international stage, energy security is back in the spotlight.
In the Ukraine war, the warring side Russia is one of the most important energy supplies in the world, and the severity of the war of aggression has made it impossible for Russia and the European and American countries to maintain the post-Cold War era of “politics and economics ”.
The “weapon of mass destruction ” in Russia ’ s hands is energy.
Europe and the United States know that energy is Russia's most important export products, blocking energy exports can vigorously hit the Russian economy; but at the same time, it is obvious that reducing Russian energy imports will lead to a shortage of energy supply in Europe and the United States.
The United States, Canada and the United Kingdom can withstand this pain, the United States and Canada have announced that they will stop importing Russian energy, and the United Kingdom has announced that it will stop importing by the end of this year.
But Europe has become a soft spot for the Euro-American Asia-Pacific anti-Russian community, because Europe is too dependent on Russian energy.
Russia is the third largest oil exporter in the world and the second largest natural gas exporter, and Russia is far the first European energy supplier. In 2020, Europe imported a total of 185 billion cubic meters of natural gas from Russia, of which 168 billion were imported by pipeline and 1.7 billion by liquefied natural gas.
This accounts for 36% of total natural gas consumption in Europe.
In the European Union alone, natural gas imports from Russia account for 40% of its total consumption.
Such a massive dependence makes Europe ’ s energy sanctions against Russia seriously inadequate.
At the European Union meeting in Versailles on March 10, the EU announced that it would end its energy dependence on Russia by 2027 (five years later). On June 2, the EU announced the sixth round of sanctions, banning the import of Russian marine oil and reducing its oil imports by 92% by the end of the year.
But it is one thing to say, and whether it can be done is another.
Energy transition and energy crisis
In any case, the war in Ukraine has made the West suddenly aware of the importance of energy security.
Energy is the driving force behind the operation of society.
Energy security is a very important concept in the Cold War era when people were growing up. The oil crisis of the 1970s not only caused oil prices to rise, but even prices were not available, and the “spectacular ” scenarios of refueling such as long queues in front of gas stations can be found in pictures and videos.
Energy issues are so central to social issues, and even the anxiety about the “energy crisis ” in the literature and television works of the time is everywhere.
Remember the famous 1980s cartoon “Transformers ”, the core material of the battle between the Decepticons and the Boxers is the“ energy cube ”, and the two factions contended that “the one who gets the energy brick wins the world ”.
At that time, in order to stabilize the supply of energy, the United States changed its foreign policy and reached a so-called “petrodollar ” agreement with Saudi Arabia, the leader of the Arab world and one of the world ’ s largest oil reserves, to provide security and Saudi Arabia agreed to use the dollar as the only currency for oil.
The United States, with its strong naval power, provides escort for oil exports (shipping).
This system stabilizes the supply of oil from the Middle East and also provides “convenience ” for other countries.
After the end of the Cold War, under the globalization of free trade and global investment, energy production was internationalized, and many international energy companies held shares in each other.
The world rarely has a war that seriously affects the supply of energy, and even if there is a war, it is not to the point of death. The vast majority of energy-producing countries are focused on the economic and trade interests of global energy production, and they can usually guarantee the basic normal supply of energy in times of conflict.
Energy security issues have long been ignored.
In the post-Cold War era, energy issues were still very important on the international agenda, but “energy security ” fell back to the second line, and the focus quickly shifted to“ carbon reduction. ”
The rise of climatism in the face of the "crisis" brought about by global climate change.
Climatologists believe that: First, global climate change is the most important crisis of the earth, which will lead to the whole ecological deterioration, sea level rise, humanitarian disasters, and even human destruction and other tragedies; Second, the cause is mainly human carbon dioxide released when a large amount of fossil energy is used to cause global warming; Third, positive emission reduction can prevent the crisis.
Under this “three-paragraph theory ”, climatologists actively promote“ carbon reduction ” and dominate the post-Cold War energy agenda.
There are two ways to reduce emissions.
The first is to reduce energy consumption, which does not contradict the concept of energy security: less energy is used, and energy security is naturally easier to guarantee.
The second is the energy transition from “dirty ” traditional energy to“ clean ” energy.
It is this energy transition that has transformed the landscape of energy production and trade.
Countries that previously had abundant coal mines, such as Germany, had to import a large amount of natural gas because of the rush to phase out coal-fired power generation, renewable energy sources could not keep up, and there was a huge gap in energy supply; after the start of the electric vehicle revolution, the demand for electricity rose further, so the demand for natural gas was higher.
In this two-pronged way, the whole society is over-reliant on natural gas.
From the perspective of energy security, it is self-defeating.
Of course, Germany is even more amazing, even if it has not completely eliminated coal, but it has not dug up coal, and instead imported from Russia.
Another factor in Europe ’ s increased reliance on natural gas is the decline in the use of nuclear energy.
As mentioned earlier, nuclear energy is a clean energy source in the sense of carbon emissions.
After the Cold War, the share of nuclear power in Europe increased.
However, nuclear waste disposal and the safety of nuclear facilities have always been a concern.
But since 2005, nuclear power has been in decline: Europe ’ s old nuclear plant life cycle has gradually expired, and Europe (except the United Kingdom and France) has stopped building new plants.
On this issue, Germany is leading the European trend, because Germany ’ s anti-nuclear movement is the most powerful.
In particular, after the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan in 2011, there were massive anti-nuclear demonstrations in Germany, and Merkel announced that all 17 nuclear power plants in the country would be shut down by 2022.
It is with Germany that other countries in Europe have accelerated the nuclear abolition project.
Nord Stream 2 highlights Germany's lack of big power
Germany, as a bad example, relies too much on “hostile states ” (Russia) in addition to abandoning coal mines and nuclear weapons.
The dispute over the North Stream 2 pipeline is best known.
Nord Stream II was a natural gas pipeline from Russia to Germany via the Baltic Sea (alongside the original Nord Stream I).
Germany built this pipeline for two purposes.
The first is the energy gap, and the second can double the supply of natural gas from Russia to Germany.
Second, other natural gas pipelines from Russia to Germany have to pass through Poland and Ukraine, and every time Russia uses the "energy card" to threaten to "cut off" Ukraine, it will also cause Germany to "suffer", which affects Germany's natural gas supply, but also makes Russia's "energy card" scruples.
"North Stream 2" can greatly alleviate this problem.
International large-scale natural gas transmission generally has two methods.
The traditional way is through the pipeline of the gas pipeline, natural gas is continuously transported from the source of production to the destination.
The emerging method is liquefied natural gas (LNG), which is liquefied at the production site and then transported to the destination by giant specialized vessels to re-gasify the LNG at the receiving station.
The two are better than each other.
The early investment in the pipeline method is huge (construction of pipelines), but the operating costs are relatively cheap after construction.
LNG transportation costs are generally higher than gas pipelines, plus the conversion costs from gas to liquid to gas.
In terms of transportation costs alone, the shorter the distance, the greater the cost advantage of the gas pipe; the longer the distance, the closer the transportation cost of LNG will be to the gas pipe or even lower than the gas pipe.
It is estimated that at about 700 miles, LNG transportation costs will be lower than subsea pipelines, and at about 2,200 miles, LNG will be lower than terrestrial pipelines.
From the price point of view, Europe, especially Germany, is the most economical way to import from Russia.
However, this is only based on price considerations, and if you add the national security perspective of energy security, the consideration is completely different.
The gas pipeline model is a "binding mode", after the huge construction of the gas pipeline linking the two countries, it is difficult to abandon the gas pipeline, and can not use the pipeline to transport natural gas from other countries, so the energy will depend on the exporting country for a long time.
LPG is a "non-binding mode", as long as there is a receiving station, the purchase from any country is transported by ship.
For Germany and Europe, plus Russia, which supplies pipeline gas, is an enemy, and the United States, which supplies liquefied petroleum gas, is an ally.
During the Trump administration, Nord Stream II became the focus of the contradiction of virtue.
The United States believes that Russia is a hostile country, Germany should not further increase its dependence on Russia on the important issue of energy, Nord Stream 2 should be stopped, and the United States announced sanctions.
The United States also took the opportunity to sell liquefied natural gas to the United States.
The position of the Trump administration is completely correct. Unfortunately, the relationship between the United States and Europe is very poor during the Trump period, and the sanctions are too harsh.
In Germany under Merkel, there is also the argument that the United States is less reliable than Russia.
This enabled Germany to press ahead with the construction of Nord Stream II, knowing that Russia had annexed Crimea and threatened European security.
Under this trend of thinking, Europe has further increased its dependence on Russian energy.
In fact, since 2009, Europe has been aware of its deep and growing dependence on Russian energy.
Even after the Crimea incident in 2014, Europe continued to increase its natural gas imports from Russia, and began importing Russian liquefied natural gas in 2017.
The reason for this, in addition to economic costs, is also due to the continuous decline in natural gas production in Europe itself (the North Sea gas fields are beginning to dry up).
In fact, Europe has been anaesthetizing itself, dreaming that Russia, no matter how bad, can not prevent the normal supply of energy to Europe.
However, the Russian invasion has awakened Europe ’ s “energy dream. ”
(This article is excerpted from Li ’ s book “The Disintegration of Empire and the Fortress of Freedom: Historical Origins, Geopolitics, and Justice in Ukraine ’ s War Against Russia ”, provided by Eight Banners Culture)
Extended reading
Thematic book exhibition on the Russian-Ukrainian conflict
What do Chinese forces want to enter the United States in Beijing?
Cold and sad?
The link between climate and happiness
Bureaucratic zombie policies.

Title:

Content: 00: 00
Expo 2020 Dubai Today
The European dilemma.
Energy independence.
Alternatives and challenges
T + T - normal size
The current crisis in Ukraine and the geopolitical threats associated with it have reinforced the concerns of European countries about the energy file, in light of what it revealed about the wide challenges surrounding that file; in terms of relying heavily on gas supplies from Russia, and places the countries of the old continent hostage to these political developments in a volatile region where the pace of tensions is accelerating.
In light of the Ukrainian crisis and European concerns about the energy and gas supply file, especially with the old continent's dependence on Russian gas.
The issue of “energy independence ” is a top priority for the European side in the face of these repeated threats, and in light of the proposed alternatives, some of which are seen as“ temporary ” alternatives, limited by a number of obstacles such as high costs.
Alternatives include European gas reserves, alternative foreign supplies from Arab countries such as Qatar and Algeria, as well as the use of coal.
The United States has pledged to support Europe to secure gas supplies instead of Russia if supplies are halted, at a time of renewed debate over the reliability of liquefied gas carried by tankers to replace Russian gas, with doubts about the suitability of infrastructure and readiness to receive liquefied gas.
Europe ’ s gas reserves are at their lowest level, according to Commerzbank, which noted that inventories are well below the long-term average, making reliance on inventories only temporary.
American support
The United States recognizes that there are real concerns regarding energy independence for many European countries, and therefore discusses this file with its partners, which is confirmed by a US diplomatic source, who said that his country “attaches great importance to this file, and we will do everything we can to ensure energy supplies to European countries, ” stressing at the same time that“ the various possibilities are discussed with European countries. ”
“What we would like to emphasize is the importance of Europe ’ s energy independence, so we are continuing our discussions with European countries and other allies on how to strengthen European countries ’ energy sources so that they can avoid or overcome any Russian pressure, ” he said.
On the extent to which the effects of any US decisions on the Ukraine crisis on the interests of the European side are taken into account, he said: "Washington is working side by side with its partners in Europe and will not take any steps without its partners."
Over the past weeks and months, the United States has remained in close contact with its partners, mobilizing our allies in Europe and elsewhere.
“This is a very important issue for the international community as a whole, because beyond Ukraine ’ s borders with Russia, it is about respecting international principles. ”
Liquefied Gas
The United States is currently the largest exporter of liquefied gas in the world.
Analysts disagree on how well U.S. supplies can replace Russian gas.
Bernd Weidensteiner, chief economist at Commerzbank, said: “LNG will not be able to fully fill the Russian gas gap in the short term due to the lack of capacity to provide a gas surplus in the short term by exporters. ”
Prioritize
Energy security is one of the top priorities of European countries, especially in terms of the dependence of European countries on 40% of their gas needs.
Massimiliano Bocolini, an Italian analyst at Dicode 39, told Al-Bayan that "energy supply for the Italian government has become a very sensitive subject and a priority in foreign policy, especially now after the crisis in Ukraine, especially since 30% of the energy, especially from gas, used in Italy comes from Russia."
The Italian political analyst pointed out that his government is now moving in two parallel tracks; the first track is linked to pushing for diplomatic solutions to the crisis in Ukraine (to ensure that energy supplies to Europe from Russia are not affected).
He explained that the United States promised to support Europe with gas supplies via ships if supplies from Russia stopped, as well as looking for sources from other countries, explaining that "there is a strategic vision for Italy so that it does not suffer in the energy file if the war in Ukraine begins in practice."
Permanent sources
Tarek Rifai, chief executive of the Corum Center for Strategic Studies in London, told Al-Bayan that the United States has said it is ready to help Europe with energy supplies - in light of the current crisis (the Ukraine crisis) and its consequences associated with the supply of Russian gas, in addition to the talk of alternatives from other countries, including Arab countries to supply Europe with gas such as Qatar and Algeria.
At the same time, he points out that these alternatives are considered temporary rather than permanent solutions, especially in light of several factors, including the high cost compared to the natural gas that reaches Europe via pipelines.
Germany, which relies mainly on natural gas from Russia, had shut down nuclear power reactors there at the end of 2021, despite tensions and threats to the energy file at the moment, although nuclear energy is highly efficient, clean, non-polluting and reliable.
Nuclear energy
Nuclear power generation accounted for a quarter of all electricity generation in Europe (notably France, Germany, Spain and Sweden) in 2020, according to statistics from the European Union ’ s statistics agency Eurostat.
Despite this, Europe is divided over nuclear energy and radioactive waste, after a proposal by the European Commissioner to classify gas and nuclear energy investments as climate-friendly because they do not cause any greenhouse gases, a trend strongly opposed by Germany and rejected by Italy, while Austria threatened to resort to prosecution.
But the chief executive of the Corum Centre for Strategic Studies in London believes that “a sustainable solution lies in the direction of producing energy locally.
European countries, especially Germany, should move towards clean nuclear energy because of its high efficiency, relatively affordable cost, and other reasons.
“The Ukrainian crisis and geopolitical problems are driving Europe ’ s reliance on alternative sources and the trend towards relying on energy domestically by expanding the construction of reactors. ”
Print Email

The war also reignited domestic debate about extending reactor lifetimes, with CDU, CSU and some FDP figures proposing extensions while the Green Party remained opposed.

The German government says it will keep climate goals, targeting at least 80% of electricity from renewables by 2030 and climate neutrality by 2045.

Title:

Content: Private.
Germany: Saudi Arabia wants to build climate-friendly future
Germany is one of the countries most committed to climate protection
Posted in: Last Updated:
Reading mode
100% font size
The spokesman for the German Foreign Ministry in the Middle East and North Africa and the director of the German Media Center, Dr. Denis Komett, told Al-Arabiya that Saudi Arabia is a key country in the global energy transition, as an influential exporter of oil, and that Saudi Arabia wants to work on building a climate-friendly future, for example, through the Saudi Green Initiative and the Middle East Green Initiative, but also through its increased focus on producing. Hydrogen.
Germany supports this trend through the Hydrogen Office in Riyadh, at a time when the climate policy framework now needs all of us to come together and make substantive progress at the COP27 and beyond in order to stop human-caused global warming that is a threat to humanity ’ s survival.
Countries most committed to climate protection
“The climate crisis affects all of us, but it ’ s not entirely fair that people in countries that have done little to cause the climate crisis suffer the consequences of the climate crisis the most.
We also support, through energy and climate partnerships, other countries in decarbonising and scaling up the use of renewable energies, such as the Fair Energy Transition Partnership with South Africa, where we work with international partners to promote the energy transition and phase out coal dependence there. Germany has increased its climate finance by more than tenfold between 2005 and 2020, so Germany has been and will continue to be a climate leader and an important focus of international climate policy.
COP27 Conference
On the COP27 goals that Germany wants to achieve, Denis Kometat said: The COP27 is taking place at a crucial time, as we must all now work to reduce the catastrophic effects of the climate crisis, and the global community will come together to find solutions on how to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. A strong signal of solidarity with those most affected by the effects of the climate crisis, it ’ s time to act!
Russian war against Ukraine
For Europe, it means an energy crisis, especially in light of the coming winter, and Germany will face the crisis, so the question remains: will Germany abandon its climate promises because of this situation?
A spokesman for the German Foreign Ministry replied: No!
By doing so, we are not only committing to our goals, but also accelerating the steps of the energy transition, by 2030, at least 80% of electricity must come from renewable sources, and this shows that: despite the Russian war of aggression, we are not deviating an inch from our climate goals, we have set our goal. To be climate-neutral by 2045.
Energy and Winter
While the lack of production and energy scarcity this winter in Germany, Denis Komett said: For the German government, the security of energy supplies and ambitious climate protection are a top priority, we are well prepared for the winter, German gas storage facilities became on 31 October almost 99% full.
In addition, we have diversified our gas supply, and significantly reduced our gas consumption – both in industry and in households, as we know that rising gas prices at the local level is a challenge for some households, so the German government has taken measures to alleviate that situation.
As German Chancellor Schulz said, “We will not leave anyone to face the situation alone. ”
A global food crisis
Asked about the war in Ukraine that has led to a global food crisis, what is Germany doing to support those in need in poor countries?
We consider Russia ’ s recent announcement to suspend its participation in the Black Sea grain export agreement, negotiated in July, very problematic, and we call on Russia to return to its promises to the international community, and the ability of people around the world to pay for their next meal should not stop on Putin ’ s war plans. To UN Secretary-General Guterres, who immediately began mediation efforts.
Most Read Common Topics

Summary: Phasing out nuclear reduced reliable baseload, increased dependence on variable renewables and fossil fuels, raised costs and emissions, exposed vulnerability to Russian gas, and triggered some political calls to extend reactors though a full return remains politically contested.


Germany formally set an April 15, 2023 withdrawal date to leave nuclear power.

A 2001 agreement under Chancellor Gerhard Schröder began a nuclear phase-out that assigned operating timelines to plants and required the last to shut by 2021.

Chancellor Angela Merkel's government briefly extended reactor lifetimes in 2010 but reversed course after Fukushima in 2011, announcing the end of nuclear power by the end of 2022.

In early 2023 Germany shut its last reactors, producing its first 'nuclear-free winter'.

Ember estimated the last eight reactors produced about 8.1 gigawatts of capacity that had to be replaced.

That capacity was largely made up by additional solar and wind installations, but renewables' seasonal variability reduced output in winter.

Reduced solar generation and higher winter demand forced German utilities to increase generation from coal and natural gas, making the power mix temporarily dirtier and raising emissions.

German electricity prices rose sharply in recent years, contributing to reduced industrial output in sectors such as chemicals and fertilizers and to an export slowdown.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine exposed and intensified concerns about Germany's dependence on Russian energy supplies.

Context reports cited roughly half of Germany's natural gas and coal and about a third of its oil as coming from Russia prior to and during the crisis.

The war and sanctions prompted Germany to seek alternative supplies, diversify gas imports, fill storage and take measures to reduce consumption while affirming climate goals.

Europe imported about 36% of its natural gas from Russia in 2020 and the EU's share was about 40%, underscoring continental dependence on Russian gas.

Debate over Nord Stream II highlighted German tensions between pipeline dependence on Russia and alternative LNG supplies.

The combined effect of phasing out nuclear, reducing coal use, and growing renewables increased Germany's system reliance on natural gas for balancing.

The war reignited domestic political debate about nuclear energy, with CDU and CSU leaders and some FDP figures proposing extensions in 2022 while the Green Party remained opposed.

Finance Minister Christian Lindner and other pro-business politicians publicly backed a return to or extension of nuclear in summer 2022.

Public opposition to nuclear power in Germany has deep roots, including mass protests in the 1970s–1980s, the rise of the Green Party, and recurring demonstrations over waste sites.

Within the EU, proposals to classify gas and nuclear investments as 'green' provoked a clear split between pro‑nuclear France and anti‑nuclear Germany.

Some analysts and policy centers argued that keeping or expanding nuclear could aid energy security and decarbonisation, while Germany's political and societal opposition has limited those options.

Other European states reacted differently to the crisis; for example, Belgium extended some nuclear units until 2035 after the war to support supply security.

Germany has maintained ambitious renewable and climate targets, including a government-stated aim of at least 80% renewable electricity by 2030 and climate neutrality by 2045.

German gas storage reached almost 99% full on 31 October (reported in context) and the government reported measures to diversify supplies and reduce consumption ahead of winter.

In short, Germany's nuclear phase-out removed roughly 8.1 GW of steady low‑carbon capacity, increased seasonal reliance on variable renewables and in practice has led to higher fossil generation and energy prices; the Russian‑Ukrainian war exposed large Russian fuel dependence, prompted storage and diversification measures, and reignited political calls to extend reactors while strong domestic anti‑nuclear politics make a full reversal difficult.

Germany formally set an April 15, 2023 withdrawal date to leave nuclear power.

Title:

Content: Read the history of the moment: why is Germany so entangled in nuclear power? | German News | DW | 14.04.2023
1.
Inhalt
2.
Navigation
3.
Weitere Inhalte
4.
Metanavigation
5.
Suche
6.
Choose from 30 Languages
Advertisement
German News
Read the history of the present: why is Germany so entangled in nuclear power?
Germany was proud of its nuclear power generation technology, but at the same time the technology has been so controversial that it has finally decided that April 15, 2023 is the date of withdrawal from nuclear power.
However, as the energy crisis caused by the Russian-Ukrainian war continues to intensify, the wisdom of the decision to say goodbye to nuclear energy has been widely discussed.
Germany ’ s nuclear policy is in dispute again
It all started with an "egg" - Germany's first nuclear reactor in Garching, near Munich, went into operation in October 1957.
Because the nuclear reactor, which belongs to the University of Munich, resembles an egg, it is nicknamed the "atomic egg".
It was a milestone in Germany's nuclear energy research and a symbol of Germany's resurgence after World War II.
The nuclear reactor, which was used for scientific purposes, remained in operation until 2000.
In 1957, Germany built its first nuclear reactor.
Three years later, in 1960, the first nuclear power plant for civilian use was built in the city of Kahl, on the banks of the Main River in Bavaria.
At that time, atomic energy was widely regarded as both safe and reliable. The 1973 oil crisis gave further impetus to the rapid development of nuclear energy in Germany.
The start of the anti-nuclear movement
Since it has been impossible to find a foolproof way to store nuclear waste, opponents have begun to question whether nuclear energy is really a clean energy source.
Thousands of protesters clashed with police during the construction of the Brockdorf nuclear power plant in the state of Shihe.
Since the 1970s, plans for the construction of the Brockdorf nuclear power plant have triggered numerous police and civil conflicts.
"Nuclear energy? No, thank you!" has become a rallying cry for environmentalists.
In the 1980s, a new political party, the Green Party, emerged in West Germany. Its members are mainly leftists, pacifists, environmentalists and anti-nuclear forces. In 1983, the Green Party entered the Bundestag.
In 1983, Green Party politicians Gert Bastian and Petra Kelly were elected to the Bundestag.
On March 28, 1979, a serious accident occurred at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania, United States. On April 26, 1986, a reactor at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in Ukraine, Soviet Union, exploded, causing the worst nuclear disaster in history.
Radiation clouds spread throughout Europe.
The accident also marked a turning point in discussions about nuclear technology in Germany.
At the time, Germany was still divided.
In East Germany under the Communist Party, the public received almost no information about the nuclear accident and its effects.
West Germany, on the other hand, was in a state of confusion and politicians were helpless.
People were unprepared for a nuclear leak, and the government was unable to provide guidelines and response strategies for the time being.
A hastily formed crisis management team was also disbanded shortly afterwards.
The Chernobyl nuclear accident has caused widespread concern in Germany.
People are buying iodine.
A large quantity of fruit, vegetables and milk in the supermarket was ordered to be removed from the shelves because of concerns about nuclear radiation.
Children were banned from playing in the sand pools and citizens were warned not to go out in the rain.
Although the health effects of radiation were not detected in Germany, the accident led to the introduction of nationwide radiation monitoring in Germany, which eventually led to the establishment of the Federal Ministry of the Environment.
Plans to build a nuclear waste treatment plant in the Bavarian town of Wackersdorf have sparked serious riots.
The clashes left several protesters and civil servants dead and hundreds injured.
The project was finally halted in 1989, the first major victory of the German environmental movement.
And...
In 2011, protesters handcuffed themselves to the tracks in an attempt to block trains carrying nuclear waste.
Meanwhile, in northern Germany, Gorleben in Lower Saxony became a symbol of the struggle against nuclear waste, and the town was designated to temporarily store nuclear waste until a permanent storage site was identified.
The first shipment of nuclear waste arrived in the town on 24 April 1995.
A long farewell to nuclear power - Germany's nuclear withdrawal process after many setbacks
In 2001, Schroeder's center-left coalition government of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) and the Green Party reached an agreement with major energy companies to phase out nuclear power.
All 19 nuclear power plants in Germany have been given operating timelines and the last one is required to be shut down by 2021.
In 2001, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder announced that Germany would phase out nuclear power generation.
In 2010, the center-right government led by Chancellor Angela Merkel withdrew the nuclear withdrawal agreement.
It also decided to extend the operating time of nuclear power plants.
However, the third major nuclear accident in the world has caused a change in Germany's nuclear energy policy. On March 11, 2011, the accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan caused by the earthquake and tsunami.
The impact of the accident on Germany is even greater than that of Japan.
As a veteran physicist, German Chancellor Angela Merkel unexpectedly changed her usual stance on nuclear energy policy.
Merkel suddenly announced that the era of nuclear power in Germany will end by the end of 2022. On July 30, 2011, the German Bundestag voted to approve the resolution.
After years of fierce fighting, the Brockdorf nuclear power plant in the state of Ishih will finally become history in 2021 after 35 years of operation.
In 2017, Germany decided to start a nationwide search for a safe place to store highly radioactive nuclear waste, with the mission to be completed by 2031.
At the end of 2021, anti-nuclear activists celebrated the closure of a nuclear power plant in North Germany.
Rethinking the nuclear policy.
The war in Ukraine has made Germany anxious to get rid of its energy dependence on Russia, which has also reignited the already ironclad policy of denuclearization.
The coalition leader has spearheaded a proposal to extend the operating time of nuclear power plants to replace natural gas from Russia with nuclear power.
In August 2022, CDU Chairman Meltz and CSU Chairman Soder both put forward the idea of extending the time limit for nuclear power operations.
Christian Lindner, finance minister of the business-oriented Liberal Democratic Party (FDP), immediately backed a return to nuclear power.
His party is junior partner in a centre-left coalition with the Social Democrats (SPD) and the Greens.
The latter will find it difficult to agree to an extension because opposition to nuclear power is one of their core issues.
But in the summer of 2022, no one in Germany completely ruled out that possibility.
LDP finance minister Lindner, who is focused on business interests, was also quick to join the pro-nuclear camp.
But for the Green Party, which is also part of the ruling coalition, the possibility of agreeing to extend the operating time of nuclear power plants is slim, because opposition to nuclear power is their basic principle.
Anything is possible in Germany in 2022.
Can nuclear power be a climate savior?
Editor: This article was originally published in August 2022
© 2022 Deutsche Welle Copyright Notice: All content in this article is protected by copyright law and may not be used without special permission from Deutsche Welle.
Any misconduct will lead to recovery and criminal prosecution.
DW.COM

A 2001 agreement under Chancellor Gerhard Schröder began a nuclear phase-out that assigned operating timelines to plants and required the last to shut by 2021.

Chancellor Angela Merkel's government briefly extended reactor lifetimes in 2010 but reversed course after Fukushima in 2011, announcing the end of nuclear power by the end of 2022.

In early 2023 Germany shut its last reactors, producing its first 'nuclear-free winter'.

Title:

Content: In early 2023, Germany shut down its last nuclear power plants, so this winter will be Germany ’ s first “nuclear-free winter ”. Despite the German government ’ s vow to modernize its energy system and develop renewable energy, Germany ’ s fossil fuel consumption is higher and its power system is dirtier.
Commenting on Germany ’ s electricity problem, Reuters columnist Gavin Maguire wrote that the country ’ s electricity problem began with a gradual decline in the share of nuclear power in Germany ’ s power generation structure. In 2014, the contribution of nuclear power to Germany ’ s total electricity supply fell by only 6% in 2022, and finally dropped to zero after the last eight reactor outages in 2023.
According to the think tank Ember, Germany's last eight nuclear reactors generated about 8.1 gigawatts (8,000 megawatts) of electricity, a gap that was filled by solar and wind capacity.
It seems to be okay.
However, as solar power (Germany ’ s second largest clean power after wind) suffers from reduced sunlight this year, power generation will fall sharply this winter, and the total amount of clean electricity in Germany will also decline, but winter has always been Europe ’ s peak electricity consumption (heating demand), so German power producers are forced to increase the amount of electricity generated from fossil fuels such as coal and natural gas. of emissions.
According to the data, in the first nine months of 2023, Germany ’ s total electricity generation fell compared to last year, including clean electricity and fossil energy power; clean electricity fell by 5.6% compared to the same period in 2022, and fossil fuel power generation fell by 21%.
In other words, this year has been the most electricity efficient year in Germany since 2017.
But don ’ t think that ’ s a good thing, because Germany ’ s industrial electricity demand has fallen this year, and the economy has certainly followed suit.
Why is that so?
Data from the London Stock Exchange shows that the high price of electricity in Germany is a key factor. Compared to 2019, the price of electricity in Germany is 160% higher this year, although it is much better than the highest price last year (electricity prices soared last year due to the Russian-Ukrainian war, this year has fallen), but the German industry is still unwilling to pay.
According to data from the London Stock Exchange (LSEG), German chemical and fertilizer production (previously produced using abundant and cheap natural gas) has fallen to its lowest level in more than a decade in 2023 as producers cut production.
Production of cars, steel, batteries and turbines has also been cut, causing Germany, Europe ’ s largest economy, to experience a rare export slump this year.
In order to support the German industrial recovery, the German government asked the power companies to suppress the cost of electricity, and actively increase the production of cheap renewable energy, did get some results, but after entering the autumn, the sunshine time reduced, Germany September to December's total solar power, must be more than 80% lower than the peak.
Since solar power has accounted for more than 20% of Germany ’ s total electricity generation each month in the past five months, such a serious decline in clean power production will inevitably lead to a tight overall electricity supply; in order to make up for the shortage of solar power, Germany can only maximize the use of wind power, wind power production in Germany will increase in winter.
In order to supplement the intermittent problem of wind power and ensure that the total generation of electricity rises as demand grows, power companies have to increase the generation of coal and gas, which can be controlled by power plants to balance the needs of the national electricity market.
Speaking of which, it is clear that Germany will have to rely more on fossil fuels to generate electricity, and its carbon emissions will inevitably increase.
In order to determine its ideal of a non-nuclear homeland, Germany has caused more pollution, and the cost of electricity is still high, which has hit the German industry.
In August of this year, economists criticized "Germany's economic recession is already the sick man of Europe", which is all related to the abandonment of nuclear power.
German power mix may get dirtier for 1st non-nuclear winter
# Germany # Electricity # Dirty # Carbon # Solar

Ember estimated the last eight reactors produced about 8.1 gigawatts of capacity that had to be replaced.

That capacity was largely made up by additional solar and wind installations, but renewables' seasonal variability reduced output in winter.

Reduced solar generation and higher winter demand forced German utilities to increase generation from coal and natural gas, making the power mix temporarily dirtier and raising emissions.

German electricity prices rose sharply in recent years, contributing to reduced industrial output in sectors such as chemicals and fertilizers and to an export slowdown.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine exposed and intensified concerns about Germany's dependence on Russian energy supplies.

Title:

Content: The Ukraine War Awakens Europe ’ s Energy Dream
The war in Ukraine has had a profound impact on the world economy.
It will, at least in terms of energy, food, strategic supply chains, finance and the world ’ s currency, international investment, and international big business, subvert the global imagination of the post-Cold War era for three decades.
The pendulum of the global historical process will inevitably swing back in the direction of “decoupling. ”
Limited to space, this is mainly about energy issues.
As the “post-Cold War era ” officially ends and traditional conflicts return to the center of the international stage, energy security is back in the spotlight.
In the Ukraine war, the warring side Russia is one of the most important energy supplies in the world, and the severity of the war of aggression has made it impossible for Russia and the European and American countries to maintain the post-Cold War era of “politics and economics ”.
The “weapon of mass destruction ” in Russia ’ s hands is energy.
Europe and the United States know that energy is Russia's most important export products, blocking energy exports can vigorously hit the Russian economy; but at the same time, it is obvious that reducing Russian energy imports will lead to a shortage of energy supply in Europe and the United States.
The United States, Canada and the United Kingdom can withstand this pain, the United States and Canada have announced that they will stop importing Russian energy, and the United Kingdom has announced that it will stop importing by the end of this year.
But Europe has become a soft spot for the Euro-American Asia-Pacific anti-Russian community, because Europe is too dependent on Russian energy.
Russia is the third largest oil exporter in the world and the second largest natural gas exporter, and Russia is far the first European energy supplier. In 2020, Europe imported a total of 185 billion cubic meters of natural gas from Russia, of which 168 billion were imported by pipeline and 1.7 billion by liquefied natural gas.
This accounts for 36% of total natural gas consumption in Europe.
In the European Union alone, natural gas imports from Russia account for 40% of its total consumption.
Such a massive dependence makes Europe ’ s energy sanctions against Russia seriously inadequate.
At the European Union meeting in Versailles on March 10, the EU announced that it would end its energy dependence on Russia by 2027 (five years later). On June 2, the EU announced the sixth round of sanctions, banning the import of Russian marine oil and reducing its oil imports by 92% by the end of the year.
But it is one thing to say, and whether it can be done is another.
Energy transition and energy crisis
In any case, the war in Ukraine has made the West suddenly aware of the importance of energy security.
Energy is the driving force behind the operation of society.
Energy security is a very important concept in the Cold War era when people were growing up. The oil crisis of the 1970s not only caused oil prices to rise, but even prices were not available, and the “spectacular ” scenarios of refueling such as long queues in front of gas stations can be found in pictures and videos.
Energy issues are so central to social issues, and even the anxiety about the “energy crisis ” in the literature and television works of the time is everywhere.
Remember the famous 1980s cartoon “Transformers ”, the core material of the battle between the Decepticons and the Boxers is the“ energy cube ”, and the two factions contended that “the one who gets the energy brick wins the world ”.
At that time, in order to stabilize the supply of energy, the United States changed its foreign policy and reached a so-called “petrodollar ” agreement with Saudi Arabia, the leader of the Arab world and one of the world ’ s largest oil reserves, to provide security and Saudi Arabia agreed to use the dollar as the only currency for oil.
The United States, with its strong naval power, provides escort for oil exports (shipping).
This system stabilizes the supply of oil from the Middle East and also provides “convenience ” for other countries.
After the end of the Cold War, under the globalization of free trade and global investment, energy production was internationalized, and many international energy companies held shares in each other.
The world rarely has a war that seriously affects the supply of energy, and even if there is a war, it is not to the point of death. The vast majority of energy-producing countries are focused on the economic and trade interests of global energy production, and they can usually guarantee the basic normal supply of energy in times of conflict.
Energy security issues have long been ignored.
In the post-Cold War era, energy issues were still very important on the international agenda, but “energy security ” fell back to the second line, and the focus quickly shifted to“ carbon reduction. ”
The rise of climatism in the face of the "crisis" brought about by global climate change.
Climatologists believe that: First, global climate change is the most important crisis of the earth, which will lead to the whole ecological deterioration, sea level rise, humanitarian disasters, and even human destruction and other tragedies; Second, the cause is mainly human carbon dioxide released when a large amount of fossil energy is used to cause global warming; Third, positive emission reduction can prevent the crisis.
Under this “three-paragraph theory ”, climatologists actively promote“ carbon reduction ” and dominate the post-Cold War energy agenda.
There are two ways to reduce emissions.
The first is to reduce energy consumption, which does not contradict the concept of energy security: less energy is used, and energy security is naturally easier to guarantee.
The second is the energy transition from “dirty ” traditional energy to“ clean ” energy.
It is this energy transition that has transformed the landscape of energy production and trade.
Countries that previously had abundant coal mines, such as Germany, had to import a large amount of natural gas because of the rush to phase out coal-fired power generation, renewable energy sources could not keep up, and there was a huge gap in energy supply; after the start of the electric vehicle revolution, the demand for electricity rose further, so the demand for natural gas was higher.
In this two-pronged way, the whole society is over-reliant on natural gas.
From the perspective of energy security, it is self-defeating.
Of course, Germany is even more amazing, even if it has not completely eliminated coal, but it has not dug up coal, and instead imported from Russia.
Another factor in Europe ’ s increased reliance on natural gas is the decline in the use of nuclear energy.
As mentioned earlier, nuclear energy is a clean energy source in the sense of carbon emissions.
After the Cold War, the share of nuclear power in Europe increased.
However, nuclear waste disposal and the safety of nuclear facilities have always been a concern.
But since 2005, nuclear power has been in decline: Europe ’ s old nuclear plant life cycle has gradually expired, and Europe (except the United Kingdom and France) has stopped building new plants.
On this issue, Germany is leading the European trend, because Germany ’ s anti-nuclear movement is the most powerful.
In particular, after the Fukushima nuclear accident in Japan in 2011, there were massive anti-nuclear demonstrations in Germany, and Merkel announced that all 17 nuclear power plants in the country would be shut down by 2022.
It is with Germany that other countries in Europe have accelerated the nuclear abolition project.
Nord Stream 2 highlights Germany's lack of big power
Germany, as a bad example, relies too much on “hostile states ” (Russia) in addition to abandoning coal mines and nuclear weapons.
The dispute over the North Stream 2 pipeline is best known.
Nord Stream II was a natural gas pipeline from Russia to Germany via the Baltic Sea (alongside the original Nord Stream I).
Germany built this pipeline for two purposes.
The first is the energy gap, and the second can double the supply of natural gas from Russia to Germany.
Second, other natural gas pipelines from Russia to Germany have to pass through Poland and Ukraine, and every time Russia uses the "energy card" to threaten to "cut off" Ukraine, it will also cause Germany to "suffer", which affects Germany's natural gas supply, but also makes Russia's "energy card" scruples.
"North Stream 2" can greatly alleviate this problem.
International large-scale natural gas transmission generally has two methods.
The traditional way is through the pipeline of the gas pipeline, natural gas is continuously transported from the source of production to the destination.
The emerging method is liquefied natural gas (LNG), which is liquefied at the production site and then transported to the destination by giant specialized vessels to re-gasify the LNG at the receiving station.
The two are better than each other.
The early investment in the pipeline method is huge (construction of pipelines), but the operating costs are relatively cheap after construction.
LNG transportation costs are generally higher than gas pipelines, plus the conversion costs from gas to liquid to gas.
In terms of transportation costs alone, the shorter the distance, the greater the cost advantage of the gas pipe; the longer the distance, the closer the transportation cost of LNG will be to the gas pipe or even lower than the gas pipe.
It is estimated that at about 700 miles, LNG transportation costs will be lower than subsea pipelines, and at about 2,200 miles, LNG will be lower than terrestrial pipelines.
From the price point of view, Europe, especially Germany, is the most economical way to import from Russia.
However, this is only based on price considerations, and if you add the national security perspective of energy security, the consideration is completely different.
The gas pipeline model is a "binding mode", after the huge construction of the gas pipeline linking the two countries, it is difficult to abandon the gas pipeline, and can not use the pipeline to transport natural gas from other countries, so the energy will depend on the exporting country for a long time.
LPG is a "non-binding mode", as long as there is a receiving station, the purchase from any country is transported by ship.
For Germany and Europe, plus Russia, which supplies pipeline gas, is an enemy, and the United States, which supplies liquefied petroleum gas, is an ally.
During the Trump administration, Nord Stream II became the focus of the contradiction of virtue.
The United States believes that Russia is a hostile country, Germany should not further increase its dependence on Russia on the important issue of energy, Nord Stream 2 should be stopped, and the United States announced sanctions.
The United States also took the opportunity to sell liquefied natural gas to the United States.
The position of the Trump administration is completely correct. Unfortunately, the relationship between the United States and Europe is very poor during the Trump period, and the sanctions are too harsh.
In Germany under Merkel, there is also the argument that the United States is less reliable than Russia.
This enabled Germany to press ahead with the construction of Nord Stream II, knowing that Russia had annexed Crimea and threatened European security.
Under this trend of thinking, Europe has further increased its dependence on Russian energy.
In fact, since 2009, Europe has been aware of its deep and growing dependence on Russian energy.
Even after the Crimea incident in 2014, Europe continued to increase its natural gas imports from Russia, and began importing Russian liquefied natural gas in 2017.
The reason for this, in addition to economic costs, is also due to the continuous decline in natural gas production in Europe itself (the North Sea gas fields are beginning to dry up).
In fact, Europe has been anaesthetizing itself, dreaming that Russia, no matter how bad, can not prevent the normal supply of energy to Europe.
However, the Russian invasion has awakened Europe ’ s “energy dream. ”
(This article is excerpted from Li ’ s book “The Disintegration of Empire and the Fortress of Freedom: Historical Origins, Geopolitics, and Justice in Ukraine ’ s War Against Russia ”, provided by Eight Banners Culture)
Extended reading
Thematic book exhibition on the Russian-Ukrainian conflict
What do Chinese forces want to enter the United States in Beijing?
Cold and sad?
The link between climate and happiness
Bureaucratic zombie policies.

Title:

Content: Germany seeks to end energy dependence on Russia
March 23, 2022 20: 47
Eastern Network Television
More News Clips
(Photo by Getty Images)
Germany is pushing to find alternative sources of Russian oil, gas and coal, and is ready to offer more assistance to consumers and businesses struggling to cope with high energy prices.
Russia ’ s war on Ukraine has exposed Germany ’ s heavy dependence on Russian energy sources, including about half of its natural gas and coal, and about a third of its oil, which comes from Russia.
As Germany is moving away from nuclear and coal power, while trying to accelerate the development of renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, the country ’ s energy dependence is even more exposed.
Germany ’ s prime minister said the country ’ s dependence on Russia for oil, coal and natural gas has been increasing over the past few decades and will end it as soon as possible.

Context reports cited roughly half of Germany's natural gas and coal and about a third of its oil as coming from Russia prior to and during the crisis.

The war and sanctions prompted Germany to seek alternative supplies, diversify gas imports, fill storage and take measures to reduce consumption while affirming climate goals.

Title:

Content: Private.
Germany: Saudi Arabia wants to build climate-friendly future
Germany is one of the countries most committed to climate protection
Posted in: Last Updated:
Reading mode
100% font size
The spokesman for the German Foreign Ministry in the Middle East and North Africa and the director of the German Media Center, Dr. Denis Komett, told Al-Arabiya that Saudi Arabia is a key country in the global energy transition, as an influential exporter of oil, and that Saudi Arabia wants to work on building a climate-friendly future, for example, through the Saudi Green Initiative and the Middle East Green Initiative, but also through its increased focus on producing. Hydrogen.
Germany supports this trend through the Hydrogen Office in Riyadh, at a time when the climate policy framework now needs all of us to come together and make substantive progress at the COP27 and beyond in order to stop human-caused global warming that is a threat to humanity ’ s survival.
Countries most committed to climate protection
“The climate crisis affects all of us, but it ’ s not entirely fair that people in countries that have done little to cause the climate crisis suffer the consequences of the climate crisis the most.
We also support, through energy and climate partnerships, other countries in decarbonising and scaling up the use of renewable energies, such as the Fair Energy Transition Partnership with South Africa, where we work with international partners to promote the energy transition and phase out coal dependence there. Germany has increased its climate finance by more than tenfold between 2005 and 2020, so Germany has been and will continue to be a climate leader and an important focus of international climate policy.
COP27 Conference
On the COP27 goals that Germany wants to achieve, Denis Kometat said: The COP27 is taking place at a crucial time, as we must all now work to reduce the catastrophic effects of the climate crisis, and the global community will come together to find solutions on how to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. A strong signal of solidarity with those most affected by the effects of the climate crisis, it ’ s time to act!
Russian war against Ukraine
For Europe, it means an energy crisis, especially in light of the coming winter, and Germany will face the crisis, so the question remains: will Germany abandon its climate promises because of this situation?
A spokesman for the German Foreign Ministry replied: No!
By doing so, we are not only committing to our goals, but also accelerating the steps of the energy transition, by 2030, at least 80% of electricity must come from renewable sources, and this shows that: despite the Russian war of aggression, we are not deviating an inch from our climate goals, we have set our goal. To be climate-neutral by 2045.
Energy and Winter
While the lack of production and energy scarcity this winter in Germany, Denis Komett said: For the German government, the security of energy supplies and ambitious climate protection are a top priority, we are well prepared for the winter, German gas storage facilities became on 31 October almost 99% full.
In addition, we have diversified our gas supply, and significantly reduced our gas consumption – both in industry and in households, as we know that rising gas prices at the local level is a challenge for some households, so the German government has taken measures to alleviate that situation.
As German Chancellor Schulz said, “We will not leave anyone to face the situation alone. ”
A global food crisis
Asked about the war in Ukraine that has led to a global food crisis, what is Germany doing to support those in need in poor countries?
We consider Russia ’ s recent announcement to suspend its participation in the Black Sea grain export agreement, negotiated in July, very problematic, and we call on Russia to return to its promises to the international community, and the ability of people around the world to pay for their next meal should not stop on Putin ’ s war plans. To UN Secretary-General Guterres, who immediately began mediation efforts.
Most Read Common Topics

Europe imported about 36% of its natural gas from Russia in 2020 and the EU's share was about 40%, underscoring continental dependence on Russian gas.

Debate over Nord Stream II highlighted German tensions between pipeline dependence on Russia and alternative LNG supplies.

The combined effect of phasing out nuclear, reducing coal use, and growing renewables increased Germany's system reliance on natural gas for balancing.

The war reignited domestic political debate about nuclear energy, with CDU and CSU leaders and some FDP figures proposing extensions in 2022 while the Green Party remained opposed.

Finance Minister Christian Lindner and other pro-business politicians publicly backed a return to or extension of nuclear in summer 2022.

Public opposition to nuclear power in Germany has deep roots, including mass protests in the 1970s–1980s, the rise of the Green Party, and recurring demonstrations over waste sites.

Within the EU, proposals to classify gas and nuclear investments as 'green' provoked a clear split between pro‑nuclear France and anti‑nuclear Germany.

Title:

Content: Since the beginning of the Russian-Ukrainian war on February 24, the US sanctions on Russia have become wider and stronger.
European countries have responded differently to near-“ unlimited ” economic and financial sanctions.
However, there are dissenting expressions of resistance to Russian oil and gas, Germany and the former Soviet Union ’ s Middle Eastern and European countries.
In August 2021, the United Nations Committee on Climate Change released a report by 234 scientists, revealing that the inescapable and increasingly serious climate crisis is a common historical undertaking that humanity must face together.
This is an important warning to EU authorities who proposed the “European Green Agreement ” in 2019, which aims to reduce carbon emissions by 55% by 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, based on 1990 carbon emissions.
As a result, the European Commission proposed on December 31 last year and hoped to list nuclear power as a so-called "green energy".
However, EU member states are clearly aligned on the ultimate goal of carbon neutrality based on their respective energy mix and sources of supply, but they are quite divided on how to achieve it within the EU ’ s planned timeline.
As this proposal creates a conflict between nuclear France and anti-nuclear Germany, the European Union ’ s rotating presidency (January to June this year), French President Emmanuel Macron ’ s assertion that “nuclear energy = green energy ” has exacerbated the differences between the two countries.
For the German government, "nuclear energy is not a clean green energy, let alone renewable energy", this view directly collides with President Macron's "to reduce carbon emissions, but also reduce natural gas imports, we must take the road to nuclear energy".
"Carbon emission reduction" and "carbon neutrality", two different paths of thinking, originally just the EU "storm in the teapot", after the outbreak of the war between Russia and Ukraine, US President Joe Biden publicly asked European allies to boycott Russian imports of oil and gas, the EU's energy policy has become an important issue for economic development after the epidemic.
After the Russian-Ukrainian war, the United States hopes that the world will jointly sanction Russia's oil and gas exports. This call, in addition to the United Kingdom's decision to no longer import Russian oil and gas by the end of this year, the European Union and NATO's European countries "excluding energy sanctions" show three meanings: First, the war may affect the safety of nuclear power plants.
Second, the different energy supplies and ratios of various countries directly affect the ability to cooperate with the United States to sanction Russia.
Third, the nuclear abolition of Germany and nuclear France, after the Russian-Ukrainian war, will make the European Union's energy policy, into a new stage.
First of all, there are many nuclear power plants in Europe; before the war, no one thought that the incident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in 1986 could happen again.
4 nuclear power plants with 15 nuclear reactors supplying half of all electricity in Ukraine.
Whether the escalation of war affects the safety of nuclear power plants is of great concern to European countries.
The situation is different in Switzerland and Belgium; five nuclear power plants have been decommissioned in Switzerland after the 2017 nuclear referendum, and one has been decommissioned in 2019.
However, in Belgium, where half of its electricity comes from nuclear power, the government of Belgium decided on March 18 to retain some of its power generation units and extend them until 2035 after the Russo-Ukrainian War.
Second, 30% of Europe ’ s crude oil and 40% of its natural gas come from Russia, and it will be difficult for renewable energy to replace it in a short period of one year, or even three or five years.
In Germany, for example, 35% of oil and 40% of natural gas come from Russia. Even if it comes from the United States (Texas) on the other side of the Atlantic, it also involves the construction of LNG (liquefied natural gas) receiving stations and the arrival of ships, and even a large number of super tankers above 320,000 tons, it is bound to not be the current Rotterdam (Netherlands), Hamburg (Germany), Anteppt (Belgium, etc. All major ports in Europe can handle the load.
And thousands of miles away from the oil tankers and LNG fleet, itself requires a large amount of fuel costs, the arrival of the transmission line of the laying, also can not be completed overnight.
After the completion of the price of oil and gas, the cost of fuel transportation must be added, and for Germany, which is the first high electricity price in Europe, the burden of the people and the operation of enterprises will be seriously affected.
Finally, Germany, which insists on eliminating nuclear weapons this year and hopes to achieve 100% green power by 2035, is a complicated situation.
After the Russo-Ukrainian War, Germany stopped reviewing Nord Stream II, which had already been built.
However, there is no political feasibility without Russia ’ s “Eastern Gas Delivery ”, as the Green Party has a joint government with the deputy prime minister and foreign minister, forced to re-use the policy option of coal burning.
Compared with the energy policy of France with nuclear energy as the main body, for Germany with a GDP of 3.8 trillion US dollars, even natural gas is only a part of the energy transformation, the pursuit of 100% renewable energy policy goals, in the year of total nuclear abolition, if it also boycotts Russian oil and gas, it will be unbearable for the economy.
The delay of the Russian-Ukrainian war, on the one hand, some countries began to think about the safety of nuclear power plants at the same time, on the other hand, due to the boycott of Russian oil and gas, will hinder the achievement of the EU's energy transformation policy goals.
And for Germany, which pursues "100% renewable energy (green power)" in 2035 and is Europe's largest economy, it is a short-term solution and may not be able to do so in the medium term, and the achievement of long-term goals still has a long way to go.
# Nuclear # Energy # Natural Gas # Russo-Ukrainian War # EU

Some analysts and policy centers argued that keeping or expanding nuclear could aid energy security and decarbonisation, while Germany's political and societal opposition has limited those options.

Title:

Content: 00: 00
Expo 2020 Dubai Today
The European dilemma.
Energy independence.
Alternatives and challenges
T + T - normal size
The current crisis in Ukraine and the geopolitical threats associated with it have reinforced the concerns of European countries about the energy file, in light of what it revealed about the wide challenges surrounding that file; in terms of relying heavily on gas supplies from Russia, and places the countries of the old continent hostage to these political developments in a volatile region where the pace of tensions is accelerating.
In light of the Ukrainian crisis and European concerns about the energy and gas supply file, especially with the old continent's dependence on Russian gas.
The issue of “energy independence ” is a top priority for the European side in the face of these repeated threats, and in light of the proposed alternatives, some of which are seen as“ temporary ” alternatives, limited by a number of obstacles such as high costs.
Alternatives include European gas reserves, alternative foreign supplies from Arab countries such as Qatar and Algeria, as well as the use of coal.
The United States has pledged to support Europe to secure gas supplies instead of Russia if supplies are halted, at a time of renewed debate over the reliability of liquefied gas carried by tankers to replace Russian gas, with doubts about the suitability of infrastructure and readiness to receive liquefied gas.
Europe ’ s gas reserves are at their lowest level, according to Commerzbank, which noted that inventories are well below the long-term average, making reliance on inventories only temporary.
American support
The United States recognizes that there are real concerns regarding energy independence for many European countries, and therefore discusses this file with its partners, which is confirmed by a US diplomatic source, who said that his country “attaches great importance to this file, and we will do everything we can to ensure energy supplies to European countries, ” stressing at the same time that“ the various possibilities are discussed with European countries. ”
“What we would like to emphasize is the importance of Europe ’ s energy independence, so we are continuing our discussions with European countries and other allies on how to strengthen European countries ’ energy sources so that they can avoid or overcome any Russian pressure, ” he said.
On the extent to which the effects of any US decisions on the Ukraine crisis on the interests of the European side are taken into account, he said: "Washington is working side by side with its partners in Europe and will not take any steps without its partners."
Over the past weeks and months, the United States has remained in close contact with its partners, mobilizing our allies in Europe and elsewhere.
“This is a very important issue for the international community as a whole, because beyond Ukraine ’ s borders with Russia, it is about respecting international principles. ”
Liquefied Gas
The United States is currently the largest exporter of liquefied gas in the world.
Analysts disagree on how well U.S. supplies can replace Russian gas.
Bernd Weidensteiner, chief economist at Commerzbank, said: “LNG will not be able to fully fill the Russian gas gap in the short term due to the lack of capacity to provide a gas surplus in the short term by exporters. ”
Prioritize
Energy security is one of the top priorities of European countries, especially in terms of the dependence of European countries on 40% of their gas needs.
Massimiliano Bocolini, an Italian analyst at Dicode 39, told Al-Bayan that "energy supply for the Italian government has become a very sensitive subject and a priority in foreign policy, especially now after the crisis in Ukraine, especially since 30% of the energy, especially from gas, used in Italy comes from Russia."
The Italian political analyst pointed out that his government is now moving in two parallel tracks; the first track is linked to pushing for diplomatic solutions to the crisis in Ukraine (to ensure that energy supplies to Europe from Russia are not affected).
He explained that the United States promised to support Europe with gas supplies via ships if supplies from Russia stopped, as well as looking for sources from other countries, explaining that "there is a strategic vision for Italy so that it does not suffer in the energy file if the war in Ukraine begins in practice."
Permanent sources
Tarek Rifai, chief executive of the Corum Center for Strategic Studies in London, told Al-Bayan that the United States has said it is ready to help Europe with energy supplies - in light of the current crisis (the Ukraine crisis) and its consequences associated with the supply of Russian gas, in addition to the talk of alternatives from other countries, including Arab countries to supply Europe with gas such as Qatar and Algeria.
At the same time, he points out that these alternatives are considered temporary rather than permanent solutions, especially in light of several factors, including the high cost compared to the natural gas that reaches Europe via pipelines.
Germany, which relies mainly on natural gas from Russia, had shut down nuclear power reactors there at the end of 2021, despite tensions and threats to the energy file at the moment, although nuclear energy is highly efficient, clean, non-polluting and reliable.
Nuclear energy
Nuclear power generation accounted for a quarter of all electricity generation in Europe (notably France, Germany, Spain and Sweden) in 2020, according to statistics from the European Union ’ s statistics agency Eurostat.
Despite this, Europe is divided over nuclear energy and radioactive waste, after a proposal by the European Commissioner to classify gas and nuclear energy investments as climate-friendly because they do not cause any greenhouse gases, a trend strongly opposed by Germany and rejected by Italy, while Austria threatened to resort to prosecution.
But the chief executive of the Corum Centre for Strategic Studies in London believes that “a sustainable solution lies in the direction of producing energy locally.
European countries, especially Germany, should move towards clean nuclear energy because of its high efficiency, relatively affordable cost, and other reasons.
“The Ukrainian crisis and geopolitical problems are driving Europe ’ s reliance on alternative sources and the trend towards relying on energy domestically by expanding the construction of reactors. ”
Print Email

Other European states reacted differently to the crisis; for example, Belgium extended some nuclear units until 2035 after the war to support supply security.

Germany has maintained ambitious renewable and climate targets, including a government-stated aim of at least 80% renewable electricity by 2030 and climate neutrality by 2045.

German gas storage reached almost 99% full on 31 October (reported in context) and the government reported measures to diversify supplies and reduce consumption ahead of winter.

In short, Germany's nuclear phase-out removed roughly 8.1 GW of steady low‑carbon capacity, increased seasonal reliance on variable renewables and in practice has led to higher fossil generation and energy prices; the Russian‑Ukrainian war exposed large Russian fuel dependence, prompted storage and diversification measures, and reignited political calls to extend reactors while strong domestic anti‑nuclear politics make a full reversal difficult.