In 2009, Germany’s new government briefly considered nuclear energy as a bridging technology to aid the transition to renewable energy.

However, former Chancellor Angela Merkel accelerated the plan to phase out nuclear power in Germany following the Fukushima disaster in Japan in 2011.

Germany closed three nuclear reactors in 2021 and planned to shut its remaining three at the end of 2022 as part of its commitment to end atomic power entirely.

The German government has argued that nuclear power is neither an entirely clean energy source nor risk-free, emphasizing safety concerns and labeling it as risky and expensive.

Berlin rejected proposals to reclassify nuclear energy as “clean” in the EU’s taxonomy for sustainable investments and voiced concerns over insufficient nuclear safety requirements.

France, in contrast, plans to build at least six new nuclear reactors by 2050 and currently generates around 77.6% of its electricity from nuclear sources, while Germany focuses increasingly on renewables.

The Spanish government also opposed the European Commission’s attempt to include nuclear and natural gas in the EU’s green taxonomy, and Austria threatened legal action if the proposal moved forward.

The closure of nuclear plants in Germany was supported by all major parties, marking a victory for the Greens but contributing to Germany’s reliance on Russian gas.

With the outbreak of war in Ukraine, Russia turned off gas supplies in response to European opposition to the invasion, which caused energy supply and price shocks in Germany.

This energy crisis led to soaring food prices and fears among Germans about affording heating and basic needs, raising the risk of social unrest.

While some political figures have called for a reversal of the nuclear phase-out to address shortages, the government only considered short-term extensions for the last three reactors based on potential gas shortages and safety assurances.

Germany’s leadership has been criticized for its dependence on Russian energy, which gave Moscow leverage and complicated the country’s policy responses during the war in Ukraine.

Despite these challenges, parliament approved measures in late 2022 to help those most affected by high energy and living costs, including welfare reforms and renter support.

Debate continues in Germany over energy policy as lessons from recent crises spark calls for strategic reassessment, but currently, there is no official move to resurrect nuclear power as a long-term solution.

Germany’s decision to close its last nuclear power plants has been controversial, with critics arguing for postponement and further nuclear development.

Public satisfaction with the government’s move is low, as many worry about increased reliance on coal and gas, both of which negatively impact the environment.

The policy shift was not easy for German authorities and was partly influenced by the Chernobyl accident and more recently, the war in Ukraine.

Germany’s plan had been to close all its nuclear plants by the end of 2022, a move supported during Angela Merkel’s tenure after Fukushima in 2011.

Some politicians, including Bavaria's Prime Minister Markus Söder, have requested the federal government to reconsider, suggesting that all energy options should remain until the transition to renewables is secure.

At the European level, discussions have included the EU’s dependency on Russian uranium and proposals for sanctions against states importing it.

Despite these debates, Germany has firmly stated it will not return to nuclear power, describing the issue as exhausted and no longer under consideration.

With Russia reducing or cutting off gas supplies in response to Western sanctions over Ukraine, Germany has been forced to temporarily reactivate coal-fired power plants to save gas and build reserves for winter.

Officials insist coal’s return is temporary and will not derail Germany’s ambition to phase it out by 2030.

This energy transition has led to internal tensions within Germany’s ruling coalition but remains supported by Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who maintains nuclear power will not help the country in the short term.

Scholz also highlights that Germany bears responsibility for electricity supply both domestically and to neighboring countries.

Costs and unresolved issues around nuclear waste and safety further complicate nuclear energy’s future.

Germany has been developing liquefied natural gas import infrastructure to diversify sources and maintain supply.

Rising energy prices and broader economic risks, including possible recession, have resulted from increased sanctions on Russia.

Chancellor Scholz has temporarily approved a short extension of nuclear power due to gas shortages, but the remaining nuclear stations represent only a small portion of the national energy mix.

Despite popular and political debate, Germany continues to follow its plan to close its last reactors, aiming to replace them with renewable energy as soon as possible.

Germany’s closure of its last three nuclear reactors and its exit from the atomic energy sector raises concerns about the impact on the European Union’s largest economy.

The move could hinder the technology viewed by some as a clean and reliable alternative to fossil fuels.

German Environment Minister Stevie Lemke stated that a nuclear renaissance is a myth, citing data showing nuclear power’s shrinking share in global electricity production.

Construction of new nuclear plants in Europe has experienced significant delays and cost overruns.

Europe faces a severe energy crisis and is preparing for a difficult winter, with uncertainty about energy reliability.

The European Commission reported this as the worst drought in five centuries, warning of significant environmental risks and losses.

German Greens like Kenzbendit have fought nuclear power in Germany for decades and now in government, see any extension of plant operation as disregarding public demands and damaging Germany’s reputation.

In France, support for nuclear is seen as necessary for employment in the industry, making open criticism rare.

Germany's three remaining nuclear power plants were scheduled to be disconnected on a Saturday, a process delayed due to the Russian war on Ukraine and the ensuing energy crisis.

The decision to phase out nuclear power was made by Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder’s government in 2002, but Angela Merkel reversed an earlier extension after the 2011 Fukushima disaster and set 2022 as the closure deadline.

Some opponents of Germany’s nuclear exit fear the EU’s increased reliance on Russian energy imports.

The German government has ruled out legal action regarding the EU’s energy policy, though Austria and Luxembourg intend to proceed with lawsuits against it.

EU partners, including the Netherlands, have pressured Germany to continue nuclear generation to alleviate the current crisis, but Berlin is unlikely to comply.

Dutch Minister Rob Gettin formally requested this of German Economy Minister Robert Habeck.

Germany has revived idle coal plants for winter emergency use, providing up to 450 million euros to operators, but insists coal use will still end by 2030.

Environmental activist Greta Thunberg called it a “bad idea” for Germany to replace nuclear power with coal, saying it would be a mistake if nuclear is already functional.

German Chancellor has rejected public demands for the country’s return to nuclear energy.

The last nuclear station has now closed.

Due to the lack of a foolproof method to store nuclear waste, critics have questioned whether nuclear energy should be considered a clean energy source.

West Germany has experienced political confusion and policy indecision regarding nuclear power.

Despite initially extending reactor operation times, a series of nuclear accidents—culminating in the Fukushima disaster in Japan in 2011—shifted German public and political opinion sharply against nuclear energy.

The impact of the Fukushima accident was felt especially strongly in Germany, prompting accelerated plans to phase out nuclear power.

By the end of 2021, Germany planned to close three more nuclear plants, and aimed to raise the share of renewables in its energy mix to 80% by 2030, focusing on wind and solar.

The Fukushima accident highlighted the danger of insufficient countermeasures, making risk-averse Germans unwilling to accept continued nuclear operations.

Globally, however, some countries are reinvesting in nuclear energy, seeing it as essential for both energy diversity and achieving net zero emissions, due to its low-carbon credentials and reliability.

Germany’s anti-nuclear movement dates back to August 1986, when the Social Democratic Party passed a bill to abandon nuclear power within 10 years, leading to the termination of new reactor development and the shutdown of several planned units.

Decisions on nuclear policy sometimes required parliamentary approval, and it was uncertain if policy shifts would cover all remaining reactors.

A challenge with renewables is their intermittent production, leading to a low average capacity factor compared to fossil fuel or nuclear plants, and consequently higher reliance on backup sources like natural gas.

Despite Germany’s transition plans, fossil fuels still account for 46.3% of Germany’s electricity, and wholesale power prices have risen considerably.

Political reluctance to raise electricity and gas prices has made market reforms difficult, especially near election periods.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine further underscored the strategic vulnerability of Germany’s energy supply, given its historical dependence on Russian gas, leading to urgent discussions about extending the operation of the country’s last nuclear plants.

While the Green Party has insisted on a full nuclear exit, others, such as the FDP’s transport minister, have advocated keeping the reactors online longer to ensure supply security.

In 2009, Germany’s new government briefly considered nuclear energy as a bridging technology to aid the transition to renewable energy.

Title:

Content: Home / News / World /  Germany quits nuclear power; shuts final 3 plants
Back

Germany has shut its final three nuclear plants, marking the end of the country's end of nuclear era that has spanned more than 60 years.

Nuclear power has long been contentious in Germany.

The move has come as Germany's eyes achieve its green goal. Steffi Lemke, Germany’s Federal Minister for the Environment and Consumer Protection and a Green Party member, "The position of the German government is clear: nuclear power is not green. Nor is it sustainable".

Closure of three nuclear plant's history:

Germany shut three plants-- Emsland, Isar 2, and Neckarwestheim, representing the culmination of a plan set in motion more than 20 years ago.

During the 1970s, a strong anti-nuclear movement emerged in Germany. The movement gave birth to the green party, which is now part of governing coalition.

However, it was in the 2000s the German government pledged to phase out nuclear power and start shutting down plants.

But in 2009, a new government came to power and it seemed brief as if nuclear would get a reprieve as a bridging technology to help the country move to renewable energy.

Then Fukushima happened. In 2011, an earthquake and tsunami caused three reactors of the Fukushima Daiichi power plant to melt down.

Three days later then-Chancellor Angela Merkel who was previously pro-nuclear, announced Germany would accelerate a nuclear phase-out, with older plants shuttered immediately.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine provided another plot twist.

Germany isn’t the only country committed to walking away from nuclear — Italy gave up the technology in 1990, and Lithuania recently struck a deal to dismantle its Soviet-era reactors, which have sat idle for over a decade. But in many advanced economies, nuclear is experiencing a resurgence.

On Sunday, Finland will start regular power production at Europe’s newest and biggest reactor. The 1,600-megawatt Olkiluoto-3 unit that faced years of delays had been planned to enter commercial production on Monday. France is planning to build at least six new reactors by 2050 as well as experiment with smaller, modular ones. The UK has similar ambitions. And even in Japan, after a decade of paralysis following the nuclear accident in Fukushima, the public is warming up to the use of nuclear power. The Japanese government wants to restart reactors that have sat idle since the disaster and to extend the lifespan of existing units.

Catch all the Business News, Market News, Breaking News Events and Latest News Updates on Live Mint. Download The Mint News App to get Daily Market Updates.
More Less
Recommended For You
×
Get alerts on WhatsApp
Set Preferences My Reads Watchlist Feedback Redeem a Gift Card Logout

However, former Chancellor Angela Merkel accelerated the plan to phase out nuclear power in Germany following the Fukushima disaster in Japan in 2011.

Title:

Content: Three nuclear-fired power plants will be taken off the grid in Germany on Friday as part of the country's plan to end atomic power.

"The nuclear phaseout makes our country safer and helps to avoid radioactive waste," said Federal Environment and Nuclear Safety Minister Steffi Lemke.

"It is now essential to ... advance the search for a final repository for high-level radioactive waste as well as permanent solutions for low- and medium-level radioactive waste," the environment ministry said.

Former German Chancellor Angela Merkel speeded up the phaseout following the 2011 Fukushima accident in Japan.

Friday's shutdown affects power plants in Brokdorf in Schleswig-Holstein, Grohnde in Lower Saxony and Gundremmingen C in Bavaria.

Germany's remaining three nuclear plants — Emsland in Lower Saxony, Isar 2 in Bavaria and Neckarwestheim 2 in Baden-Württemberg — will be closed by the end of 2022 "at the latest," the environment ministry said.

"Since 2011, Germany has been drawing a line under a highly problematic technology in an orderly, reliable process," Lemke said.

Nuclear accounts for about 10 percent of Germany's electricity production. The shutdown has sparked criticism as Germany will have to dramatically ramp up renewable energy and has also increased its reliance on highly polluting coal-fired power.

"Security of supply in Germany continues to be guaranteed," said Robert Habeck, federal climate and economy minister. He added that reliable and "sustainably generated electricity" is a "central requirement for aligning our economy and industry toward climate neutrality."

That stance puts Berlin at loggerheads with France, where nuclear is the largest element of its energy mix (and also helps supply Germany).

EU Internal Market Commissioner Thierry Breton said in September that existing nuclear plants, which provide low-carbon electricity essential to the green transition, can be kept running "for two, five, 10 years," adding: "Why deprive ourselves of this production capacity?"

France is planning to scale down the share of nuclear in its electricity mix from 75 percent to 50 percent by 2035, but President Emmanuel Macron said in November that France "will restart the construction of nuclear reactors" while "continuing to develop renewable energies."

Macron also said France will invest €1 billion into research and development, notably into small modular reactors.

Belgium recently decided to shut down all its nuclear power plants by 2025, but plans to invest €100 million in new generation nuclear reactors and research.

More from ... Louise Guillot

Germany closed three nuclear reactors in 2021 and planned to shut its remaining three at the end of 2022 as part of its commitment to end atomic power entirely.

Title:

Content: World

Berlin against, Rome is silent, Paris in favor. Nuclear power explodes in the EU

Germany closed three reactors in 2021 and plans to do the same with the other three in 2022. Belgium shares the same idea, “shut down” its seven plants by 2025. Spain, which has some reactors in operation as well, does not consider them “green” at all. Luxembourg dismisses the proposal to include the atom in the green taxonomy as a “provocation”. Austria of the atom does not want to know, with 82% of its primary energy production made from renewables (data 2019), and is studying a legal action against the Commission. France is delighted to see nuclear power (77% of its domestic production) taken into account by Brussels. Italy, which is fond of Minister Cingolani’s idea of increasing its gas extractions, is currently silent and at least hopes for a golden rule to exclude “green” investments from the calculation of the deficit. A few days after the publication of the draft of the European Commission on the green taxonomy, the distances between the 27 instead of narrowing, are widening and if yesterday they seemed divided, today they show themselves to be shattered.

The definition of the green taxonomy is fundamental in orienting investments: with the “green” stamp, industrial and infrastructure projects can be much more attractive for private capital. However, the decision to include nuclear and gas in the EU’s green taxonomy has met with harsh criticism already in recent weeks, when rumors had not yet taken the form of a draft Commission. The technicians from Brussels and the team of experts who collaborated in the drafting of the central document for the definition of the EU energy planning in the context of the Green New Deal tried to circumvent the foreseeable resistance by introducing some conditions for the two sources that are not neutral with respect to the climate and the environment. Nuclear and gas, first of all, will be considered compatible with the green taxonomy only for a defined period of time and “to the extent that they contribute to the transition towards climate neutrality and do not significantly damage the environment”, according to an official of Brussels. “The Commission sees the future energy mix as a predominantly renewable or low-carbon energy system. We really hope that this proposal will help bring about the change we need and channel private funding towards low-emission energy sources ”.

In fact, it means that investments in nuclear power will be “green” only if the projects presented have a well defined plan, funds and site for the disposal of radioactive waste in total safety. Building permits will only be allowed until 2045. It is worth remembering that at the moment there is still talk of third generation or third plus nuclear power. Not the fourth, the (slag-free) fusion that experts believe may have a role on an industrial scale no earlier than the middle of the century. As for gas, investments in power plants will be green only if they contribute to emissions of less than 270 grams of CO2 equivalent per kWh and replace more polluting fossil fuel plants. They will need to obtain a building permit before 2030.

On gas, the Commission’s conditions appear much more stringent. It is a non-solid fossil source, certainly less polluting than coal and to which Italy looks with interest, having unused methane deposits. Moreover, in a European context of high prices and constant reduction of supplies from the main supplier, Russia, for reasons of a geopolitical nature. But it is on nuclear power that the clash risks worsening at the community level.

“We believe nuclear technology is dangerous,” government spokesman Steffen Hebestreit told reporters in Berlin, noting that the question of what to do with the radioactive waste remains unresolved. Hebestreit added that Germany “expressly rejects” the EU assessment on atomic energy and has repeatedly affirmed this position towards the Commission. Germany is now considering the next steps to take. Germany is set to shut down the remaining three nuclear power plants later this year and phase out coal by 2030, while its neighbor France aims to modernize existing reactors and build new ones to meet energy needs. Berlin plans to rely on natural gas until it can be replaced by non-polluting energy sources. The opposite paths taken by two of the EU’s largest economies have led to an embarrassing situation for the Commission. The draft EU executive branch concludes that both nuclear power and natural gas can be considered sustainable under certain conditions for investment purposes.

Hebestreit said the German government’s goal is to use natural gas only as a “bridge technology” and replace it with non-polluting alternatives such as hydrogen produced from renewable energy by 2045, the deadline the country has set for becoming climate neutral. . The spokesman did not say whether Chancellor Olaf Scholz supports the opinion of the Minister of Economy and Climate Robert Habeck that the European Commission’s proposals are a form of “greenwashing”.

Germany has pulled the plug on three of its last six nuclear power plants. The Brokdorf, Grohnde and Gundremmingen C reactors, operated by the E.On and Rwe utilities, were closed on December 31st after 35 years of operation. The last three nuclear power plants – Isar 2, Emsland and Neckarwestheim II – will be shut down by the end of 2022. However, closure does not mean decommissioning, which will take much longer and is expected to take place by 2040 in the case of Brokdorf, for example. .

In 2021, the six nuclear power plants contributed about 12% of electricity generation in Germany. The German energy mix consists of 41% renewables, 28% coal and 15% gas. By 2030, Germany aims to meet 80% of energy demand with renewables. This is not the case in France where – given Eurostat 2019 – 77.6% of its energy produced comes from the atom and only 20% from renewable.

Germany is not alone in the firm opposition to the proposal put forward by Brussels: the draft “is a provocation from a procedural point of view” and “in terms of content it hides the risk of greenwashing”, wrote on Twitter the Minister of Energy of the Luxembourg, Claude Turmes, saying he is ready to “examine the proposal in detail and discuss further steps” together with Germany and Austria, equally opposed to including nuclear power among sustainable investments. The proposal was sent to governments on Friday, “in a nocturnal and nebulous action. This says a lot about transparency ”, attacked Turmes.

The same tones used by Vienna: if these are the plans “we will sue”, wrote on Twitter the Austrian Federal Minister for Climate, Environment and Energy, Leonore Gewessler, highlighting that nuclear energy is “dangerous and not it represents a solution in the fight against the climate crisis ”. Austria has no reactors and produces almost all of its energy from renewable sources.

The Spanish government also rejected the European Commission’s proposal to include nuclear and natural gas energy in the EU’s “green” taxonomy. According to Madrid, this is “a step backwards” and “a wrong signal” for the financial markets. Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Ecological Transition and Demographic Challenge, Teresa Ribera, stressed that “regardless of whether we can continue to invest in one or the other, we believe they are not green or sustainable energies”. Spain – he added – “is a firm supporter of green taxonomy as a key tool to have common references that can be used by investors to achieve the decarbonisation of the economy and climate neutrality by 2050”, but include nuclear and gas “It would be a step backwards,” according to the government official Sanchez. “It makes no sense and sends the wrong signals for the European energy transition as a whole,” he stressed. While admitting that both nuclear power and natural gas have a role to play in the transition, this is “limited in time”. Member States have until 12 January to provide their response to the Commission. Then, once published, it will have to pass the scrutiny of the EU Council and Parliament, where the environmentalist parties are also announcing a battle.

In 2019, France was the country that produced the largest share of energy in the EU (20% of the total), followed by Germany (17%), Poland (9.6%), Italy and Sweden (6%). ). However, the debate on green taxonomy is intertwined with energy security (or sovereignty) in a particular historical phase, marked by risks to the security of supply due to geopolitical and military reasons, as shown by the tensions on the Ukrainian border. Primary energy production in the EU in 2019 was distributed among various energy sources, the most important of which in terms of the size of its contribution were renewables, with over a third (36.5%) of the total. Second place for nuclear power, with 32.0% of total primary energy production, with France in the lead, followed by Belgium (77% of domestic production in 2019) which, however, is about to abound in nuclear power like Germany. However, all European energy production is not enough to meet its needs: more than half of Europe’s energy is imported. The EU energy dependency rate exceeds 50%.

Source link

James Reno

Editor-in-Chief, James loves playing games and loves to write about them more. He knows a lot about entertainment because he has done a drama course. James loves writing, so he is our writer. email: james@d1softballnews.com

Related Articles

Back to top button

The German government has argued that nuclear power is neither an entirely clean energy source nor risk-free, emphasizing safety concerns and labeling it as risky and expensive.

Title:

Content: EU chaos! Macron and Scholz in furious bust-up over EU energy plans: ‘Risky and expensive'

FRENCH President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz are locked in a furious bust-up over EU energy policy plans as disagreements have sparked division in the bloc.

Link copied

Macron wields 'tools to set EU agenda'

While France has been pushing for nuclear to be included in the EU’s sustainable finance taxonomy, Germany is in the process of completely phasing out the energy source in the country. The EU’s taxonomy is intended to hand a green badge to companies and activities — or to withhold it — to “help shift investments where they are most needed". This is part of the bloc’s aim to direct funding towards energy sources with a low or zero carbon footprint.

But this has sparked fury as Germany does not view nuclear power as a form of clean energy.

Mr Macron wants gas and nuclear to be labelled as a “transitional” source under the taxonomy as he claims they are needed for the clean energy transition.

He says that this is because renewables are “intermittent, and thus not totally substitutable, even with our interconnections [in Europe], for non-intermittent sources of electricity production” like gas or nuclear power.

And these calls do not come as much of a surprise, given that 70 percent of French electricity is generated by nuclear power.

Mr Macron has pointed to the verdict from experts on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to back up his calls.

Macron and Scholz are in a furious energy bust-up (Image: Getty )

Emmanuel Macron is pushing for nuclear power to be included in the EU taxonomy (Image: Getty )

They claim that “nuclear power is one of the solutions to decarbonise our economies”.

And this seems to have convinced Brussels, as the EU Commission drew up a draft proposal, circulated on 31 December, for this to come into effect.

Subject to a consultation period until Friday (21 January), It gave EU members and others just three weeks to analyse the proposal and provide their own comments.

Germany is strongly opposed to the nuclear plans and has been phasing out nuclear power for over two decades.

It also plans to shut down its three remaining plants at the end of the year.

READ MORE: World holds breath as Ukraine to fire rocket amid Russia tension

Olaf Scholz's Government is opposed to the EU's proposal (Image: Getty )

But it is not Berlin who disapproves of the proposal.

The EU Platform on Sustainable Finance, a European Commission advisory body, has torn the proposal apart.

In an opinion piece, it argued that nuclear power is not an entirely clean energy source, and that fossil gas is “far from green”.

Under the EU’s draft proposal, gas-fired power plants would get a “transitional” investment label if they meet a certain criteria.

That is if they use “at least 30 percent of renewable or low-carbon gases as of 1 January 2026, and at least 55 percent of renewable or low-carbon gases as of 1 January 2030”.

DON'T MISS
Boris on brink: Red Wall poll signal end of the road for PM [REPORT]
EU Galileo blow as UK’s OneWeb network signs major deals [REVEAL]
EU helpless over Russia thanks to Merkel as Biden poised to step in [INSIGHT]

Germany argued nuclear is not a clean energy source (Image: Getty )

And as of January 1, 2036, the Commission said all gas-fired power plants would have to “switch to renewable or low-carbon gases” to qualify for the EU’s green investment label.

But under EU rules, no technology can be considered green if it causes “significant harm” to any of the taxonomy’s six environmental objectives.

Those are climate change mitigation and adaptation, water protection, the transition to a circular economy, pollution prevention, and biodiversity protection.

Germany has been kicking up a fuss over the proposals, calling them “risky and expensive” in a letter sent to Brussels.

Vice Chancellor Robert Habeck said in a joint statement with Environment Minister Steffi Lemke: “As the federal government, we have once again clearly expressed our rejection of the inclusion of nuclear energy. It is risky and expensive."

Germany has also claimed that there is a lack of safety requirements in the nuclear field.

Robert Habeck sent a letter to Brussels slamming the proposal (Image: Getty )

And it argued that the lengthy construction of new reactors "does not offer a short-term opportunity" to phase out carbon-intensive energy sources such as coal.

But while it has poured cold water over nuclear plans, Germany does not seem so opposed to the inclusion of gas.

In the letter sent to Brussels, it reads that gas used in "ultra-modern and efficient gas-fired power plants forms a bridge for a limited transitional period".

But the German Government did mention that the proposed fuel switch targets to low-carbon and renewable gases laid out by the taxonomy proposal are not realistic.

And Mr Macron is travelling to Berlin today to meet with Mr Scholz.

While the leaders’ meeting will focus on the Russia’s mounting pressure on Ukraine, the energy plans will no doubt be a topic of conversation too.

Berlin rejected proposals to reclassify nuclear energy as “clean” in the EU’s taxonomy for sustainable investments and voiced concerns over insufficient nuclear safety requirements.

France, in contrast, plans to build at least six new nuclear reactors by 2050 and currently generates around 77.6% of its electricity from nuclear sources, while Germany focuses increasingly on renewables.

The Spanish government also opposed the European Commission’s attempt to include nuclear and natural gas in the EU’s green taxonomy, and Austria threatened legal action if the proposal moved forward.

The closure of nuclear plants in Germany was supported by all major parties, marking a victory for the Greens but contributing to Germany’s reliance on Russian gas.

Title:

Content: How decades of complacency have left Germany facing a cold, dark winter

Betrayed by its own elite, the country is at risk of social unrest

Germany is facing its worst winter for 75 years. The impending catastrophe risks crippling its economy, sweeping away its government and bringing chaos to the heart of Europe.

In 1946-47, perhaps half a million Germans starved or froze to death in their ruined cities. Older Germans still shudder at the memory of the “Hunger Winter”. Some blamed the Nazis, others the Allied occupation. In fact, the British sent food, fuel and clothing they could ill afford to spare themselves.

Now Europe’s largest economy is heading for a winter of recession, rationing and possible blackouts. This time, though, there is nobody to blame except Germany’s complacent – and in some cases corrupt – political establishment.

As Vladimir Putin chokes off Russian gas supplies – already down to a fifth of their pre-war level – by closing the Nord Stream 1 pipeline for “maintenance” yet again next week, the lamps are going out for Olaf Scholz and his “traffic light” coalition of Social Democrats, Liberal and Greens.

'Autumn of rage'

The Bundesbank has been predicting a recession and the latest figures show that business activity is already contracting. Inflation, which hit 8.5 per cent last month, is expected to keep rising along with the rest of the eurozone, probably into double figures.

Yet for historical reasons Germans won’t just accept high inflation as a consequence of the war in Ukraine. The world remembers the hyperinflation that undermined the Weimar Republic a century ago; only older Germans recall the hyperinflation after the Second World War, which lasted longer. For three years Germany’s only stable currency was American cigarettes. No wonder Germans have been allergic to inflation ever since.

It is true that Germans are not yet demanding big pay rises or going on strike. But energy prices are already rising exponentially. The country's one-year ahead power price has skyrocketed to almost €1,000 per megawatt-hour, a jump of more than 720pc since the start of 2022. If Putin turns off the tap, bringing the mighty German economy to a juddering halt this winter, there is a real danger of civil unrest.

Intelligence officials are warning that extremist organisations, such as the neo-Nazis of Combat 18, are planning an “autumn of rage”. As a foretaste, in the old Prussian town of Neuruppin near Berlin, there were ugly scenes this month as Scholz was shouted down by far-Left and far-Right protesters.

But the panic and indignation now brewing go far beyond the ranks of the “unteachable” extremists.

Germans sense that unaccountable elites have ceded control of their country’s destiny to Putin. The more they are must pay him for Russian gas, the bigger his war chest with which to perpetrate genocide in Ukraine.

Forcing Germany to be complicit in a colossal crime against humanity is a diabolical twist in the vengeance that Putin is now exacting upon Europe for backing Ukraine. According to The Economist’s Christian Odendahl, at present prices Germany will need to spend 8.4 per cent of its GDP on gas. Hitherto it was just 1 per cent.

Already preparations are underway for central heating to be rationed or even switched off, forcing residents to seek shelter in schools or town halls.

The country is scrambling to reduce its reliance on gas with a campaign to make households cut back, and a massive national effort has brought gas storage levels up to 81 per cent full.

Food prices, meanwhile, rose at a rate of nearly 15 per cent in July. Those who fear being unable to afford to heat their homes or feed their families are prey to angst and anger.

Actions have consequences... or do they?

Few foresaw the Russian invasion of Ukraine, let alone its devastating consequences for Europe. But it is dawning on the German people that the seeds of the present crisis were sown over the quarter of a century from 1998 to 2022, under Angela Merkel and her predecessor, Gerhard Schröder.

These were the years of plenty for Germany, when Berlin dominated the European Union, ensuring that its export-led economy benefited from the single currency while loading the social costs on to its poorer neighbours. But Germany’s dirty secret was cheap Russian energy.

Under Schröder – who went on to become one of Putin’s “useful idiots” – German industry began to abandon its postwar reliance on coal and nuclear energy in favour of Russian gas and renewables.

In 2011, after the Fukushima accident, Mrs Merkel announced that all German nuclear power plants would be closed down. It was a pyrrhic victory for the Greens but backed by all the major parties. Public opinion had been turned against nuclear energy in the 1980s by the Soviet-funded “peace movement”. Now the Greens are the keystone of the Scholz coalition.

Even in the country’s present predicament, Robert Habeck, the Green Vice-Chancellor and Environment Minister, is refusing to reverse the exit from nuclear to alleviate the energy crisis, though it is still possible over time to reactivate a number of nuclear power stations.

Yet Berlin is demanding that 26 other EU member states make huge cuts in energy use this winter to help Germany – to the irritation of the Spanish and others, who don’t depend on Russian gas and recall lectures from Berlin during the eurozone crisis about actions having consequences.

For decades, the Kremlin acted as Germany’s geopolitical drug-dealer, tempting Berlin to become ever more addicted to the energy that fuelled its manufacturing, pharmaceutical and chemical factories. Now that the Germans are about to go cold turkey, they are discovering how cynically the national interest was betrayed by their politicians and captains of industry.

With Schröder as its salesman, a new Nord Stream 2 pipeline was built under the Baltic Sea — with the blessing of Mrs Merkel, who fended off Anglo-American pressure to cancel what was regarded as a threat to European energy security.

Last year, as Russian tanks massed on the Ukrainian border and Nato warned of imminent invasion, Gazprom redoubled its efforts to keep the flagship project on track.

The Russian energy giant poured €192 million (£163m) into an environmental foundation set up by Manuela Schwesig, the Social Democratic premier of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern — the state that hosted Nord Stream 2 and stood to gain most. She proceeded to denounce the US for opposing the pipeline, claiming that American sanctions were purely self-interested.

Putin’s stooges almost succeeded in persuading Scholz to defy his Nato allies. He dithered until the eve of February’s invasion before shelving Nord Stream 2.

Now, after six months of Europe’s worst war since 1945, some German politicians are once again calling for the pipeline to be opened “so that people do not have to freeze in winter and our industry does not suffer serious damage”, as Wolfgang Kubicki, Vice-President of the German Parliament, puts it.

Meanwhile Ms Schwesig has just been re-elected as leader of the Social Democrats in her state by a large majority. Schröder has yet to be expelled from the party, let alone sanctioned.

Germany’s Achilles’ heel

This is the measure of Germany’s abject reliance, not only on Russian energy, but on the Russian state. For Putin, gas and oil were only ever a means to an end. He has always wanted to reduce the Germans — towards whom Russians have traditionally had an inferiority complex — to a status of servility.

Stalin only succeeded in dividing Germany. Putin seeks to turn the entire Federal Republic into his client state — and thereby impose his will upon Europe.

With the unerring eye of the predator, Putin grasped that energy was Germany’s Achilles’ heel. A single plant of a single corporation, the headquarters of the chemical and pharmaceutical giant BASF at Ludwigshafen, uses as much energy as Denmark.

Over the last 25 years, Germany’s craving for cheap energy led it into an unequal relationship with Russia — what the philosopher Hegel called “the dialectic of master and slave”.

Putin saw that some German politicians could be bought (Schröder), others bamboozled (Merkel), and still others bullied (Scholz). Other EU countries followed the German example by relying heavily on Moscow for energy, influenced by the evasion and ambivalence that has characterised Berlin’s policy for decades.

Germany, whose economy is substantially larger than Britain’s, has given just £1 billion in military aid to Ukraine compared to the UK’s £3.5 billion. The United States has given ten times as much as the EU. Yet Ukraine is a European country under genocidal attack.

The reluctance to provoke Putin that still prevails in wide circles of the Federal Republic is rooted in exaggerated notions of Russian military power, economic importance and cultural pre-eminence.

German fatalism about Russia’s ability to absorb casualties and yet win ultimate victory reflects folk memories of the Eastern Front. But Putin, unlike Stalin, does not have a vast conscript army at his disposal, he does not enjoy technical superiority and he cannot afford the war of attrition that he has unleashed. Nor are the Russian people united against an invading force in defence of their homeland. Only in Berlin do they think this is another Stalingrad.

This historical myopia has much to do with the long-standing German habit of subsuming the other nations that made up the Soviet Union into Russia. To this day most Germans have no awareness of the fact that the Nazis killed millions of Ukrainian civilians and devastated their country.

Ironically, many artists, writers and musicians who have fled Ukraine have found refuge in Germany. One example is the composer Valentin Silvestrov, who fled to Berlin aged 84 with one suitcase, full of his manuscripts. Once there, he discovered that Ukrainian music was unknown in Germany. Now that Silvestrov’s works are being performed, including at the Proms in London, the Germans are slowly waking up to the presence of a greater living composer than any of their own.

Many ordinary Germans, like the British, instinctively warm to the Ukrainian cause. The difference is in leadership – or lack of it. Chancellor Olaf Scholz, unlike Boris Johnson or Liz Truss, has shown only lukewarm support for Kyiv and has been implicitly rebuked by President Zelensky.

Hamburger grilled

Although there is no suggestion that Scholz has been bribed to go easy on Russia, he himself has become embroiled in a corruption scandal. He is accused of helping M.M. Warburg & Co, Germany’s oldest and largest private bank, to avoid a €47 million fine in 2016, during his time as Finance Minister in the Merkel coalition.

The Hamburg-based bank is alleged to have made up to €300 million in a capital gains tax scam which came to light while Scholz was also mayor of the city state. Just as he finds himself facing an unexpectedly grim present and a positively terrifying future, his provincial past has returned to haunt him.

Last week the Chancellor was grilled by a committee of inquiry in Hamburg. The normally meticulous Scholz claimed not to remember any details about his meetings with Warburg’s former chief, Christian Olearius, who has now been charged with tax evasion. Germany’s safe pair of hands, whom millions had entrusted with the nation’s finances, is now accused of being cosy with tax-dodging bankers and being an unimpressive, even unreliable, witness.

In other ways, too, Scholz is failing to live up to the moral example set by the two great Social Democratic Chancellors of post-war Germany, Willy Brandt and Helmut Schmidt. At a joint press conference with Mahmoud Abbas in Berlin earlier this month, Scholz remained tight-lipped while the Palestinian leader delivered an anti-Semitic tirade, accusing Israel of committing “many Holocausts” against his people.

Schmidt, who concealed the fact he had a Jewish grandfather from the Nazis but as Chancellor was an outspoken philosemite, would not have been impressed by his fellow Hamburger Scholz. Nor would Brandt, who famously fell to his knees at the memorial to the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising.

Not for decades has anti-Semitism been such a threat in Germany: in July, Berlin’s Holocaust Memorial was desecrated with swastikas. Now, as Putin’s myrmidons massacre and deport Ukrainians near the site of Nazi genocide, while a quarter of the Russian Jewish population has emigrated in anticipation of pogroms, Germany needs a leader who is not afraid to denounce anti-Semitism even at the cost of diplomatic niceties.

After less than a year in office, Scholz’s personal ratings are plumbing depths never seen during Mrs Merkel’s 16 years at the helm. As Germans brace themselves for unprecedented hardships in peacetime, they are led by a weak and indecisive Chancellor at the head of a fragile three-party coalition.

Post-heroic, post-patriotic

Wednesday’s visit to Kyiv by Boris Johnson – his third – to mark Ukraine’s Independence Day was hugely appreciated not only by Volodymyr Zelensky but by all Ukrainians. Yet it was a gesture of solidarity that did not occur – could not have occurred – to Olaf Scholz.

The German Chancellor’s only visit to the Ukrainian capital last June, accompanied by Emmanuel Macron and Mario Draghi, was an awkward, chilly affair that yielded little more than promises. This week, Scholz posted a short video message, concluding: “Our hearts are with you.” Ulrich Speck, a German foreign policy analyst, commented: “Hearts, yes. But not weapons.”

Johnson, by contrast, knows he is among friends in Kyiv – a friendship symbolised by Zelensky awarding him Ukraine’s highest honour, the Order of Liberty. It is impossible to imagine the lugubrious German Chancellor finding the Prime Minister’s pithy words: “While people [in the West] are paying energy bills, people in Ukraine are paying with blood.” Nor would Scholz echo him in declaring: “I believe Ukraine can and will win this war.”

For his part, Zelensky told his people that they had been “reborn” in the heat of war. “We used to say: ‘Peace’. Now we say: ‘Victory’,” he declared.

Highly educated Germans find it hard to empathise with such Churchillian sentiments. Jürgen Habermas, the eminence grise of German intellectuals, makes condescending comments about Ukraine as a primitive place, still captive to the nationalist illusions of the last century, unlike more sophisticated, “post-heroic” Germany. It doesn’t occur to the 93-year-old philosopher that without the heroism of its soldiers and civilians, Ukraine would by now have ceased to exist.

Prussian military prowess has long since given way to post-patriotic pusillanimity. Where Merkel and Scholz feared to tread and even Biden was hesitant, Johnson was the first to commit himself wholeheartedly to the cause and to visit war-torn Kyiv.

Many other nations – the Poles, the Baltic states, the Scandinavians and the Canadians among them – have been more supportive than the Germans, who owe Ukrainians the greatest moral debt.

Berlin boasts of handing out a handful of howitzers while dithering over clapped-out armoured vehicles. Meanwhile British arms and training, Turkish drones and American rocket artillery systems have proved decisive on the battlefield.

Sold down the Dnieper

Although the Scholz coalition officially sides with Ukraine, the unpalatable fact remains that Germany and its EU partners are financing Russian aggression by paying vast sums for Russian gas.

Will they stand up to Putin in Germany when the enormity of the ordeal ahead becomes clear to everybody? Will public opinion continue to back even the present feeble commitment, or will the voices calling for peace at the expense of Ukrainians prevail? It is all too believable that at some point, probably early next year when gas storage facilities are empty, Berlin – and Brussels – will open negotiations with the Kremlin, regardless of Kyiv’s wishes.

Yet it is then that the ghosts of the past may rise up to intervene in the present. The thought of Germans and Russians redrawing the map of Eastern Europe at the conference table sends shivers down the spines of every Pole, Lithuanian, Latvian, Estonian and, of course, Ukrainian. On August 23, 1940, exactly 82 years ago this week, the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was signed, carving up Poland (which then included Lviv and other parts of present-day Ukraine) and the Baltic states between Russia and Germany. No German Chancellor wishes to be reminded of that precedent.

However, nor can Scholz risk presiding over an even deeper and more lasting recession than that caused by the Covid pandemic. Somehow he must steer a course between the Scylla of appeasing Putin and the Charybdis of economic ruin.

The tension between these positions is reflected in the tripartite coalition. Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock and the Greens are the hawks, Finance Minister Christian Lindner and his pro-business Free Democrats are the doves, while the Social Democrats are deeply divided. The party leadership leans towards Moscow, the rank and file towards Kyiv. This explains why Scholz never says that he wants Ukraine to win the war, merely that they must not lose it.

The opposition Christian Democrats are only slightly more united. They too have a large wing that privately favours a negotiated peace, represented by their pro-business leader Friedrich Merz, and a smaller but not insignificant group led by the foreign affairs expert Norbert Röntgen, who hope for a Ukrainian victory. Merz has papered over the cracks by focusing on a campaign to reverse his predecessor Mrs Merkel’s exit from nuclear energy.

Meanwhile, the “understanding Putin” lobby has the support of both the hard Left Die Linke and anti-immigration AfD parties. German public opinion has slowly tiptoed away from its initial admiration for Ukrainian resistance and towards a compromise peace.

That subtle shift could soon become an overwhelming tide, once Germans are required to make real sacrifices. Vladimir Putin, we may be sure, is counting on it.

From October, Scholz will impose a gas levy on consumers to compensate energy companies for the cost of replacing Russian gas supplies. Germany’s biggest energy company, Uniper, was bailed out in July to the tune of £12.5 billion; it is now claiming another £18.5 billion of levies.

This policy is bound to be unpopular, since it redistributes tens of billions from the poor to the rich — curious thinking for a government of the Left. But this is nothing compared to the prospect of protests sparked by a national shutdown caused, not by a deadly virus, but by Putin’s energy politics.

A change in the air?

Modern Germany has a volatile history of popular protest. It began with the revolution that toppled the Kaiser in 1918. The Nazis mobilised the masses to carry out their “national revolution” in 1933. A workers’ uprising in East Germany was crushed by Soviet tanks in 1953. Student protests brought about a cultural revolution in 1968. Uniquely bloodless and benign was the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. This was Germany’s finest hour.

The defiance that breached the Wall and sent the Soviet army home was a blessing, but the despair that Putin’s revenge may induce this winter will surely be a curse. Gas has given the Russian dictator coercive control over the German political class, which willingly acquiesced in its fate.

In Kyiv, Boris Johnson said: “I can tell you that we in the UK will not for one second give in to Putin’s blackmail.” Olaf Scholz is incapable of speaking like this — because he does not believe it. He has failed to frame the coming ordeal as a battle in which Germans must make sacrifices for their own liberty, not just Ukraine’s. People don’t mind his lack of charisma; they do mind facing a nightmarish winter with spineless hypocrisy at the helm.

Will it become so obvious by next spring that Scholz is unequal to the task that either he or his coalition are replaced? Can the centre of German politics hold — or are we about to see a terrible revolt of the masses against a discredited political establishment? It has happened before. It can happen again.

Daniel Johnson was the Telegraph’s correspondent in Germany and Eastern Europe in the late 1980s. He is now the editor of TheArticle.

With the outbreak of war in Ukraine, Russia turned off gas supplies in response to European opposition to the invasion, which caused energy supply and price shocks in Germany.

Title:

Content:   1. Skip to content
  2. Skip to main menu
  3. Skip to more DW sites
The upper house of Germany's parliament signed off on a number of major legislative packages on Friday aimed at helping address inflation and soaring energy costsImage: Wolfgang Kumm/dpa/picture alliance
PoliticsGermany

Germany approves welfare reform, extends nuclear power

2 hours ago

Germany's upper house of parliament approved measures aimed at helping people hit hard by high energy prices and the high cost of living. The country's nuclear power extension will also take effect immediately.

https://p.dw.com/p/4K5HV

The upper house of Germany's parliament, the Bundesrat, approved extending the use of three nuclear power plants, overhauling unemployment benefits and other major legislation on Friday after heated debate among lawmakers.

After receiving approval from the Bundesrat, the measures will soon enter into law. DW breaks down what's set to change in 2023.

Nuclear power extension

The Bundesrat signed off on the extension of three nuclear power plants after the lower house, the Bundestag, approved the move earlier this month.

The nuclear plants — Isar 2, Neckarwestheim 2 and Emsland — will remain operational until April 2023 to provide enough power through the winter. The facilities had been slated to close at the end of this year under Germany's nuclear phaseout plans.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz decided to extend the life of the nuclear plants after Germany found itself facing a severe energy shortage. Russia turned off supplies of gas in response to the backlash over Moscow's invasion of Ukraine.

The extension was bitterly debated among Scholz's center-left Social Democrats (SPD), the environmentalist Greens and the pro-free market Free Democrats (FDP).

With Friday's approval from the upper house, the nuclear power plant extension will take effect immediately.

Germany set to keep nuclear plants running

Unemployment reform

Germany is set for a major welfare overhaul after the Bundesrat signed off on a compromise to reform unemployment benefits.

The changes will go into effect as of January 1, 2023, replacing the current and frequently criticized "Harz IV" unemployment benefits system that has been in place since 2005.

Under the new "Bürgergeld" system (which means "citizen's money"), those who are unemployed will get higher benefits and better vocational skills training.

The initial proposal by Scholz's government was rejected by conservative lawmakers in the Christian Democrats (CDU/CSU) bloc. Under the compromise, benefits could be cut during a six-month "trust period" if an unemployed person is deemed to not be looking hard enough for work.

According to the plans, those receiving benefits will also get more support in job training programs to prepare for permanent employment. The change also is an attempt to mitigate the shortage of skilled workers Germany is currently experiencing.

"This reform is a milestone of social policy in Germany," Scholz told the magazine Focus on Friday after the votes. "This reform put assistance for untrained people who belong to the long-term jobless front and center."

The measure must still be signed by German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, although nearly all measures approved by the Bundesrat are signed-off by the president.

More money for Germany's unemployed?

Tax relief, higher child benefits

With inflation hitting consumers hard, lawmakers approved measures aimed at softening the blow.

The upper house approved legislation that would help people who receive pay raises that adjust for inflation. The new measures would prevent people having to pay more taxes due to pay raises.

Starting in January 2023, child benefit payments will also be raised. Families will now receive €250 ($260) per month for each child in the household.

The change is a big jump from the current system, which saw parents receive €219 per month for their first and second child, €225 per month for a third child, and €250 for each additional child.

More support for renters

The upper house of parliament also greenlit a law that seeks to help renters deal with skyrocketing heating costs.

Starting from January 1, renters will no longer have to shoulder the costs of heating with oil and natural gas — landlords and property owners will have to chip-in as well.

For buildings that are not energy efficient and produce a high proportion of CO2 emissions, landlords will need to pay more — and not the renters.

In addition, more people in low-income households will receive a housing allowance from the government. The expansion to the law means 1.4 million households are eligible for the payments, as opposed to the current 600,000 households that qualify.

While you're here: Every Tuesday, DW editors round up what is happening in German politics and society. You can sign up here for the weekly email newsletter Berlin Briefing.

rs/ar (dpa, KNA, epd)

Climate, energy woes dim views of holiday lighting

Skip next section Related topics
Skip next section DW's Top Story

DW's Top Story

Ukraine updates: Power returns to nuclear plants

Skip next section More stories from DW
Go to homepage

This energy crisis led to soaring food prices and fears among Germans about affording heating and basic needs, raising the risk of social unrest.

While some political figures have called for a reversal of the nuclear phase-out to address shortages, the government only considered short-term extensions for the last three reactors based on potential gas shortages and safety assurances.

Title:

Content: Germany To Postpone Closure Of Last Three Nuclear Power Plants - WSJ

(@ChaudhryMAli88)

MOSCOW (UrduPoint News / Sputnik - 17th August, 2022) Germany, faced with possible energy shortages in the winter as gas supplies from Russia have dropped, intends to postpone the closure of its last three nuclear power plants (NPPs) in a move marking a departure from a two-decade policy to abandon nuclear energy, The Wall Street Journal reported citing German government officials.

The decision, which has to be formally adopted by the cabinet of Chancellor Olaf Scholz and would possibly require a vote in Parliament, could be weeks off, but already now the German government says two key conditions have been met that allow a temporary extension of the life of the three remaining NPPs, currently expected to close December 31: the possibility of a gas shortage and the confidence that a longer operation of reactors would pose no safety concern, according to the officials.

"The reactors are safe until Dec. 31, and obviously they will remain safe also after Dec. 31," the WSJ quoted a senior official as saying.

Scholz last week said for the first time that it could make sense to keep Germany's last three nuclear reactors online.

However, even if the life of the three German NPPs is extended, this will not be a panacea for Germany's looming energy crisis this winter as the country is mainly missing natural gas, primarily used for heating and manufacturing.

The European Union has been seeking to diversify energy imports and reduce dependence on Russia after Moscow started its special military operation in Ukraine.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has repeatedly said that Russia has never used gas supplies to punish anyone, but sells energy solely in its own interests, to increase the welfare of Russians and on a commercial basis.

The German government has also outlined measures to reduce gas and power consumption in the country over the next two years. The measures in particular include lowering the temperature in public buildings. According to Germany's energy regulator, gas consumption will have to be cut by 20 percent if Germany wants to avoid a gas shortfall during this coming winter and next winter.

The three officials who spoke to the WSJ said the extension of the NPPs' life would only be made for several months.

The power plants in question are Isar 2 in the southern state of Bavaria, Neckarwestheim 2 in Baden-Wurttemberg and Emsland in Lower Saxony. They are operated, respectively, by E.On SE, EnBW AG, and RWE AG.

After the start of Russia's special military operation to denazify and demilitarize Ukraine, the West has stepped up sanctions pressure on Russia, which has led to an increase in prices for energy and food in Europe and the United States.

Germany’s leadership has been criticized for its dependence on Russian energy, which gave Moscow leverage and complicated the country’s policy responses during the war in Ukraine.

Despite these challenges, parliament approved measures in late 2022 to help those most affected by high energy and living costs, including welfare reforms and renter support.

Debate continues in Germany over energy policy as lessons from recent crises spark calls for strategic reassessment, but currently, there is no official move to resurrect nuclear power as a long-term solution.

Germany’s decision to close its last nuclear power plants has been controversial, with critics arguing for postponement and further nuclear development.

Title:

Content: Germany on Friday shut down three of the six nuclear power plants that were still in operation.
Three closed reactors were first put into operation in the mid-1980s, reports AP News.
Together, they provided electricity to millions of German families for nearly four decades.
One of the stations, Brockdorf, is located 40 kilometers northwest of Hamburg on the Elbe River.
It became the center of anti-nuclear protests sparked by the Chernobyl disaster of 1986.
The other two are Gronde, 40 kilometers south of Hanover, and Gundremmingen, 80 kilometers west of Munich.
The German government said this week that the decommissioning of all nuclear power plants next year and the subsequent abandonment of coal by 2030 will not affect the country ’ s energy security or its goal of making Europe ’ s largest economy “climate neutral ” by 2045.
According to the Fraunhofer Institute, renewable energy provided almost 46% of Germany ’ s electricity generation in 2021.
Coal accounted for more than 51% and nuclear energy for more than 13%.
The decision to phase out nuclear power and switch from fossil fuels to renewables was first made by Gerhard Schröder ’ s center-left government in 2002.
His successor, Angela Merkel, has set 2022 as the deadline for the plant ’ s closure.
Earlier, in December 2019, the Philipsburg nuclear power plant, one of the seven nuclear power plants operating at that time, was shut down in Germany.
You may also be interested in news:

Public satisfaction with the government’s move is low, as many worry about increased reliance on coal and gas, both of which negatively impact the environment.

Title:

Content: The people are not particularly happy with the government ’ s choice.
recommendations
Germany has completely abandoned nuclear power, turning off the last three power units located at the Emsland nuclear power plant (Lower Saxony), Necarwesteim-2 (Baden-Württemberg), Isar-2 (Bavaria).
Now the country has only to get rid of nuclear waste.
advertising
The decision to phase out nuclear power came from then-Chancellor Angela Merkel after the disaster of 2011, when the accident at the Fukushima-1 nuclear power plant in Japan, which killed at least 15.9 thousand people.
Initially, it was planned to stop nuclear reactors on December 31, 2022, but due to rising energy prices, the German government delayed this until mid-April 2023.
The nuance is that in the near future, Germany will have to rely on coal and gas, which have a negative impact on the environment.
Of the advantages, only that you need to compensate a little - 6% of electricity generation, which was just those nuclear reactors.
recommendations
According to YouGov, two-thirds of Germans do not support the government ’ s decision to replace the cheap “peaceful atom ”.
For the post accrued remuneration
This material is written by a visitor to the site, and a reward is accrued for it.
2
Popular news

The policy shift was not easy for German authorities and was partly influenced by the Chernobyl accident and more recently, the war in Ukraine.

Title:

Content: Chernobyl and the war: how the events in Ukraine prompted Germany to abandon nuclear energy
Greenpeace activist at a protest against nuclear power in Berlin, Germany.
Photo by REUTERS / Nadja Wohlleben
The end of the atomic age.
This weekend, Germany, as promised, shut down its last nuclear power plants.
On Sunday night, the Germans decommissioned three stations: Izar 2 in Bavaria, Necarwesteim-2 in Baden-Württemberg and Emsland in Lower Saxony.
Nuclear power plants, which have recently produced about 5% of the country ’ s electricity, have been shut down as part of the so-called “energy transition. ”
Its goal is to completely switch to green energy by 2035, that is, to produce electricity from renewable sources.
Read also:
The decision to finally abandon the peaceful atom was given to the German authorities not easy.
A week ago, in political Berlin, there were calls to postpone the closure of the reactors for at least a few months, so as not to jeopardize the security of energy supply in the country.
Moreover, the temporary continuation of the work of the nuclear power plant of Chancellor Olaf Scholz was requested by both the opposition Christian Democrats and the liberals included in the ruling coalition.
Most Germans did not support the closure of the nuclear power plant.
According to sociologists, about 60% of the country ’ s residents called the government ’ s decision to abandon the peaceful atom wrong.
The reason is obvious: people are afraid of further increases in electricity prices, which have literally exploded.
Farewell to the atom: the Ukrainian factor
In fact, the decision to close all German nuclear power plants was made in 2011 by the government of Angela Merkel after the accident at the Japanese nuclear power plant Fukushima.
But the discussion about the abandonment of nuclear power began much earlier — in 1986, after the disaster at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant.
The accident sparked widespread protests against the use of the peaceful atom, and after Chernobyl, the now ruling Social Democratic Party announced that it would support the closure of all German nuclear power plants and enshrined this position in its political program.
Events in Ukraine also affected the timing of the closure of the nuclear power plant.
Germany planned to shut down all its nuclear power plants by the end of 2022.
However, after a full-scale Russian attack on Ukraine, the operation of the reactors was decided to extend for several more months.
Germany, which took the course of abandoning all Russian energy resources, was afraid of problems with energy supply.
Bavarian exception: will one of the richest lands in Germany be allowed to restart nuclear power plants
In the final rejection of the peaceful atom, it seems, not all German politicians believe.
At least regional.
The prime minister of Bavaria - one of the richest German states - Markus Seder has already said that he will ask the federal government to reconsider its decision.
And this is a few hours after the closing of the last nuclear power plant!
Seder wants the Bavarians to make an exception – allowed them to continue to operate the nuclear power plant “Izar-2 ”, located on the territory of the earth.
Like, now, in times of energy crisis, to abandon nuclear energy is not only risky, but also stupid.
That can be done a little later.
"Bavaria demands that the federal government take responsibility for the continued operation of nuclear power.
Until the crisis is over and the country has switched to renewable energy, we must use all forms of energy before the end of the decade.
Anyone who, like the ruling coalition, hopes that the next winter will be as mild as the previous one, acts extremely naive and careless for an industrial country like Germany, ” said Seder.
And he promised that in the case of a positive decision from Berlin, Bavaria is ready to take responsibility for the operation of the nuclear power plant.
The Bavarian prime minister thought about other lands.
It requires the government to develop and submit a plan for the reactivation of disconnected nuclear power plants.
If necessary, nuclear power plants will be able to resume their work quickly.
Official Berlin has already responded to the calls of the Bavarian Prime Minister – the Minister for Environmental Protection advised Zeder not to engage in political populism.
Non-peaceful atom: Germany wants sanctions against Russian nuclear energy
On the day of the closure of their own nuclear power plants, the Germans also mentioned the nuclear energy of the aggressor country of Russia.
Vice-Chancellor and Minister of Economy of Germany Robert Gabeck proposed to impose sanctions against the nuclear industry of the Russian Federation.
At the EU level.
For example, to include penalties in the next, already eleventh, sanctions package, the development and coordination of which the Europeans will begin in the near future.
“We have seen that Russia purposefully uses dependence in the energy sector for pressure.
Therefore, the federal government called on the European Commission to impose sanctions on the civilian nuclear sector.
Nuclear technology is an extremely sensitive area, and Russia can no longer be perceived as a reliable partner here, ” Gabek said.
What sanctions are we talking about – the politician did not specify.
However, in early April, after a visit to Ukraine, he proposed to impose sanctions against states that buy uranium from Russia for their nuclear power plants.
Not immediately, but after the transition.
“It is important to start and not be afraid of decisive actions in this area, ” Gabek explained.
The EU ’ s dependence on Russia ’ s nuclear sector is really serious.
About 20% of the uranium for their nuclear power plants EU countries receive from Russia.
Bulgaria, Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic are completely dependent on these supplies, that is, 100%.
On the sale of uranium in the European Union, Russia earns 450 million euros a year.
Topical on the topic
Children Hub is a safe way to adapt Ukrainian children and migrants in the EU
Over a thousand children from 3 to 15 years old are given free employment in Warsaw
Help develop CHILDREN HUB

Germany’s plan had been to close all its nuclear plants by the end of 2022, a move supported during Angela Merkel’s tenure after Fukushima in 2011.

Some politicians, including Bavaria's Prime Minister Markus Söder, have requested the federal government to reconsider, suggesting that all energy options should remain until the transition to renewables is secure.

At the European level, discussions have included the EU’s dependency on Russian uranium and proposals for sanctions against states importing it.

Despite these debates, Germany has firmly stated it will not return to nuclear power, describing the issue as exhausted and no longer under consideration.

Title:

Content: Germany will not resume the use of nuclear energy
Nuclear energy died in, turning into a “dead horse ” for the country ’ s economy.
will not build a nuclear power plant and relies only on solar and wind energy.
This was stated on Saturday by the Chancellor of Germany, reports AP.
In a Saturday radio interview with Deutschlandfunk, Scholz stated that nuclear power is "a dead horse" in Germany.
(This expression literally translates as “dead horse ”, and means something that has exhausted itself, a question that has lost its relevance; a question that is better to forget).
“Nuclear power is over.
The problem of nuclear energy in Germany has exhausted itself, it is a dead horse.
Anyone who wants to build a new nuclear power plant will need 15 years and will have to spend 15 – 20 billion euros (16.2 – 21.6 billion dollars) each, ” said Scholz.
According to him, any talk about the resumption of the use of nuclear energy will imply the construction of new nuclear power plants.
But this is not in the plans of the FRG.
Scholz stressed that Berlin intends to “expand the use of renewable sources, such as wind and solar energy ”
Earlier, the German Chancellor rejected the proposal of the junior partner in the power coalition that the country should leave open the possibility of using its closed nuclear power plants.
Rambler: top news

With Russia reducing or cutting off gas supplies in response to Western sanctions over Ukraine, Germany has been forced to temporarily reactivate coal-fired power plants to save gas and build reserves for winter.

Title:

Content: In the world
News of Moscow
Politics
Society
Accidents
Science and technology
Show business
Army
Games
Scholz considers it important to continue the dialogue with Putin
The Chancellor considers it important to continue the dialogue with the Russian President.
As difficult as it may be, direct communication is important, especially in times of crisis.
I want our messages to reach the President of Russia directly to take responsibility.
My clear message to him is that his strategy will not work, - he said in an interview published on Tuesday with the Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter, which the politician gave in connection with his visit to the capital of the kingdom. - Putin needs to know what we demand from him, which is why I think such conversations are important, including in the future. "
According to the Chancellor, it is impossible to normalize relations with Russia in the foreseeable future.
“I don ’ t think it will happen in the foreseeable future.
Russia is waging a war against Ukraine, bringing great suffering and destruction.
Until Russia stops this war, withdraws its troops from Ukraine and makes peace on reasonable terms, I do not see an opportunity to even start thinking about normalization, "he said.
Putin on February 24 announced a special military operation in response to the appeal of the leaders of the republics of Donbass with a request for assistance.
He stressed that Moscow ’ s plans do not include the occupation of Ukrainian territories, the goal is the demilitarization and denazification of the country.
After that, the United States, Great Britain, as well as a number of other states introduced large-scale anti-Russian sanctions and increased arms supplies to the Ukrainian authorities.
Energy issues
The German government is making preparations for German industry to cope with the reduction of Russian gas supplies.
If Russia had cut off its energy supplies on February 24, Germany would have been hit hard.
We have devoted the last few months to extensive preparatory work to cope with supply cuts or even stoppages.
Gas reserves for the winter are much higher than last year.
We have resumed the operation of coal-fired power plants to save gas, ” explained Scholz.
According to him, the authorities continue intensive work in this area.
"Along the coast, we are actively working to create the necessary infrastructure to be able to import liquefied gas by sea.
In the remaining months before the cold season, we will work intensively to prepare for a difficult situation, ” he continued.
At the same time, Scholz does not give an answer to the question whether Berlin is ready to reconsider the decision to phase out nuclear energy.
“For us, nuclear energy is not a sustainable form of energy production.
The costs are high, the issue of final disposal of nuclear waste and safety has not yet been resolved.
In principle, this opinion has not changed, ” he explained.
The Chancellor reminds that Germany is responsible for the supply of electricity not only at home, but also in neighboring European countries.
"We are currently conducting a stress test, during which we once again find out whether it is possible to slightly extend the operation of the remaining three nuclear power plants, which are actually due to be decommissioned on December 31," he explained.

Officials insist coal’s return is temporary and will not derail Germany’s ambition to phase it out by 2030.

Title:

Content: Russian President Vladimir Putin is playing hard with the European Union, cutting off gas supplies to some of his best buyers in a fit of rage over sanctions imposed after the start of the special operation in Ukraine, write Lorenz Gerke, Karl Matisen and Paola Tamma on June 20 in the European version of Politico.
Pierre Edouard Frere.
Furnace Melting (Fragment)
As a result, the authorities of these countries are under enormous political pressure, there is a risk that in the case of a cold winter, the inhabitants of European countries will simply freeze, and there is a danger of disrupting the climate goals of the bloc, whose states have to switch their energy from gas to coal.
Such a development could even lead to a recession on the continent.
Simone Tagliapietra, a specialist at the Bruegel think tank, calls Russia ’ s policy “energy blackmail. ”
Only 40% of the normal volume of gas passes through the Nord Stream pipeline from Russia to Germany, which affects supplies to France, Italy and Austria, as well as to Germany.
Russia ’ s gas monopoly, Gazprom, has already cut off all supplies to Poland, Bulgaria, the Netherlands, Finland and Denmark after energy companies in those countries refused to comply with the Kremlin ’ s demands to pay for supplies in rubles.
In response, some countries are planning to launch coal-fired power plants.
“It is necessary to recognize that Putin is gradually reducing gas supplies to Europe, including to increase gas prices, and we must take retaliatory measures, ” German Economy and Climate Minister Robert Habeck said in a television interview on June 19, adding that“ this is a tense, serious situation. ”
Austria plans to restart one of its coal-fired power plants, Poland seeks to subsidize coal mining for heating their homes, and the Netherlands on June 20 decided to abandon previously adopted plans to limit electricity generation at its four coal-fired power plants.
“If it weren ’ t for these special times, we would never have done it, ” Dutch climate and energy minister Rob Jetten said.
Compressor station "Portovaya"
Official website of PJSC Gazprom
Nord Stream gas pipeline
Official website of PJSC Gazprom
The Italian government is scheduled to hold a crisis meeting on June 21, while Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi has ordered two LNG regasification plants and is negotiating with countries including Qatar, Angola and Algeria to sign gas supply agreements from them in a desperate attempt to secure supplies in the event of a halt to imports from Russia.
Brussels, for its part, seeks to radiate confidence, but its anxiety is obvious.
“We take the current situation very seriously.
But we are ready, ” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said at a meeting with journalists on June 20.
Times are not getting easier. ”
Dirty Deals
Such a desire to start using coal again to provide energy is, in symbolic terms, inconvenient for the inhabitants of European countries, which are very concerned about the climate.
However, few believe that the EU or its member states will move far from their previous policy of reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
In Germany, officials are adamant that the return of coal will be short-lived and will not jeopardize the country ’ s ambition to phase out its use by 2030.
Coal will act as a reserve for the energy sector, allowing the country to build up gas reserves before winter.
Meanwhile, the government plans to rapidly increase the production of clean energy.
Coal thermal power plant in Förde, Germany
Daniel Ullrich Threedots
According to Simon Muller, director of Agora Energiewende analytical center, political support for renewable energy sources has increased in Germany due to Russia ’ s special operation in Ukraine.
“This additional urgency factor that we now have in the face of this situation helps provide the political momentum that we need for some very important accelerations in the development of renewable energy, ” Mueller said.
The German parliament is considering 10 measures on energy efficiency and renewable energy, and as Müller noted, the three-party coalition as a whole adheres to the importance of removing barriers to green energy.
Green organizations are also optimistic.
“There is currently no plan in Germany that could call into question the timing of a coal phase-out, ” said Christoph Bals, political director of Germanwatch.
But the need to quickly change the approach to coal recycling is exacerbating political tensions.
In Berlin, the conservative opposition criticized Habeck for allowing more coal to be used, while excluding the further operation of Germany ’ s three remaining nuclear power plants after the end of this year.
“I do not understand why the climate minister of the Greens prefers to extend the operation of coal-fired power plants, rather than carbon-neutral nuclear power plants, ” Jens Spahn, deputy head of the Christian Democratic Party in parliament, told German television on June 20.
The policy of abandoning nuclear energy was adopted by the former leader of his party, Angela Merkel.
And this course is a source of tension within the ruling coalition.
“It is necessary that the three remaining nuclear power plants last longer, ” said Bijan Jir-Sarai, secretary general of the Liberal Free Democrats.
While acknowledging that the move was a “violation of the taboo, ” Habek said coal is still better than a revival of nuclear power, arguing that a change in nuclear policy would only have an impact at the end of next year — too late to prepare for this winter.
He was supported by Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who said in an interview published on June 20 that “nuclear energy will not help us now or in the next two years, and that is the main thing. ”
Political leaders are calling on their people to save energy and cut gas consumption, while governments are working to increase storage capacity to allow the continent to survive the winter shutdown of gas supplies to Russia.
At the very least, they are thinking about rationing the gas.
Cutting off gas supplies will almost certainly lead the bloc into recession.
The European Central Bank has warned that next year the eurozone economy will shrink by 1.7% if Russia completely closes the faucet.
“Power outages and small opportunities for immediate replacement of gas supplies from Russia are likely to require some rationing and redistribution of resources, which will lead to a reduction in production in the eurozone, in particular in energy-intensive sectors, ” the bank said in a statement, according to which, if this happens, the bloc ’ s economy will recover next year.
But the ECB also issued a warning to Russia.
“As for the Russian economy, the scenario assumes a serious recession with a contraction in production similar to the contraction that occurred during the collapse of the Soviet Union, ” the organization said.

This energy transition has led to internal tensions within Germany’s ruling coalition but remains supported by Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who maintains nuclear power will not help the country in the short term.

Scholz also highlights that Germany bears responsibility for electricity supply both domestically and to neighboring countries.

Costs and unresolved issues around nuclear waste and safety further complicate nuclear energy’s future.

Germany has been developing liquefied natural gas import infrastructure to diversify sources and maintain supply.

Rising energy prices and broader economic risks, including possible recession, have resulted from increased sanctions on Russia.

Title:

Content: Pseudo-green policy of Germany isolates the country, says the expert - RIA Novosti, 15.04.2023
Registration was successful!
Please follow the link from the letter sent to
Germany ’ s pseudo-green policy isolates the country, says expert
Expert Damien Ernst: pseudo-green policy deprives Germany of leadership in the EU
© RIA Novosti / Igor Zarembo | Go to the media bankView of the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin
View of the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin.
Archive photo
Read ria.ru in
BRUSSELS, April 15 – RIA Novosti.
The radical energy policy of Germany and its attempt to impose its vision on partners will only lead to the isolation of Germany from other countries of the European Union, Damien Ernst, a European expert, a lecturer at the University of Liege in Belgium and the Polytechnic Institute in Paris, told RIA Novosti.
Germany will stop on April 15, 2023, the operation of the last three operating German nuclear power plants “Isar-2 ”,“ Neckarwesteim-2 ” and “Emsland ”.
It was originally planned that Germany would abandon nuclear power in 2022, but later plans were changed.
Three of the country ’ s last six nuclear power plants have already been shut down.
Earlier it was reported that the majority of the population did not agree with this decision, while other countries announced their intention to continue or expand the use of nuclear energy.
No guarantees.
The Americans decided to leave Europe without gas
“Today ’ s coalition in Berlin is clearly at the mercy of the Greens, and Germany is making its energy stance more radical, isolating itself from most other EU countries.
Germany is making the wrong decisions and losing leadership in Europe.
Germany will press its partners to impose its costly energy vision.
Many will not support it, ” the expert said.
In his opinion, the energy issue has already become a stumbling block in relations between Germany and France.
“
The "special relationship" between Germany and France is dead.
Chancellor Scholz is going to Beijing without inviting Macron to join him, but the main disagreement is about nuclear energy, "Ernst said.
Against the background of the energy crisis in Europe, Germany ’ s decision will only aggravate the situation.
“Pressure on gas prices will rise again next winter, if you add to this the decision of Germany to end nuclear energy, it will lead to higher prices for all European citizens, ” the expert said.
Russians, out!
Germany wants a nuclear rematch
In addition, according to him, the supposedly green policy of the country will only lead to an increase in carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere, as Germany will have to open new coal and gas power plants instead of closed nuclear power plants.
“
“Renewable sources cannot (produce so much energy – ed.), they are terribly expensive for the sake of very small and unreliable production (energy – ed.) ”, – concludes the expert.
The energy crisis in the European Union worsened in early July 2022, when there were the first interruptions in the supply of gas from Russia to a number of EU countries, including problems with the maintenance of turbines for Nord Stream due to sanctions imposed against the Russian Federation.
The West has increased sanctions pressure on Russia over Ukraine, which has led to higher prices for electricity, fuel and food in Europe and the United States.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has previously said that the policy of containing and weakening Russia is a long-term strategy of the West, and sanctions have dealt a serious blow to the entire world economy.
According to him, the main goal of the West is to worsen the lives of millions of people.
Russia has repeatedly stated that Russia will solve all the problems that the West creates for it.
Repeat the fate of the USSR.
Destroying the European Union from the inside
News feed
0
New firstOld firstFirst
loader
On-line
Title of the material to be opened
To participate in the discussion,
log in or register
loader
Chats
Title of the material to be opened

Chancellor Scholz has temporarily approved a short extension of nuclear power due to gas shortages, but the remaining nuclear stations represent only a small portion of the national energy mix.

Despite popular and political debate, Germany continues to follow its plan to close its last reactors, aiming to replace them with renewable energy as soon as possible.

Germany’s closure of its last three nuclear reactors and its exit from the atomic energy sector raises concerns about the impact on the European Union’s largest economy.

Title:

Content: Chairman of the Board of Directors and Editors
I'm sorry.
Mohamad Elbaz
Chairman of the Board of Directors and Editors
I'm sorry.
Mohamad Elbaz
EXPRESS: Germany ’ s exit from atomic energy sector affects Europe ’ s largest economy
Germany ’ s closure of the country ’ s last three nuclear reactors and its eventual exit from the atomic energy sector raises concerns about the impact of the decision on the European Union ’ s largest economy.
Germany ’ s action could deal a blow to the technology they see as a clean and reliable alternative to fossil fuels.
Berlin is implementing its plan to limit electricity generation to renewable sources by 2035.
Earlier this week, Germany shut down its last three nuclear power plants as part of Berlin's plan to limit power generation to renewables by 2035, ending a six-decade programme that has sparked one of Europe's most powerful protest movements.
Other industrialized countries, such as the United States, Japan, China, France and Britain, rely on nuclear power to replace the fossil fuels that are warming the planet, and Germany ’ s decision to stop using both has been met with some skepticism, as well as unsuccessful last-minute calls to halt the shutdown, the report said.
Nuclear energy advocates around the world have criticized the German shutdown, realizing that the action taken by Europe ’ s largest economy could deal a blow to technology they see as a clean and reliable alternative to fossil fuels.
The German government has acknowledged that in the short term, the country will have to rely more on polluting coal and natural gas to meet its energy needs, even as steps are taken to dramatically increase electricity production from solar and wind power, and Germany aims to be carbon neutral by 2045.
But officials like German Environment Minister Stevie Lemke say the idea of a nuclear renaissance is a myth, citing data showing that the share of atomic energy in global electricity production is shrinking.
The construction of new nuclear plants in Europe has faced significant delays and cost overruns.
Limki noted that the construction of new nuclear plants in Europe has faced significant delays and cost overruns, and said the money spent on maintaining old reactors or building new ones would be better spent on installing cheap renewables.
Experts such as Claudia Kemfert of the German Institute for Economic Research in Berlin say the 5% share of German electricity currently coming from its three remaining reactors can be easily replaced without risking power outages.

The move could hinder the technology viewed by some as a clean and reliable alternative to fossil fuels.

German Environment Minister Stevie Lemke stated that a nuclear renaissance is a myth, citing data showing nuclear power’s shrinking share in global electricity production.

Construction of new nuclear plants in Europe has experienced significant delays and cost overruns.

Europe faces a severe energy crisis and is preparing for a difficult winter, with uncertainty about energy reliability.

Title:

Content: Despite his opponents...
Europe 'chooses' nuclear power to pass harsh winter
Europeans suffering from a severe energy crisis will set a date with a historic test this winter, with the first attack of the cold, in a way that cannot be trusted.
The old continent has experienced an unusual warmth in recent weeks, which slightly eased the pressure on its decision-makers, but it soon found itself faced with the consequences of a drought crisis like no other in Europe in 500 years.
The European Commission said in its latest report that it was the worst drought in five centuries, warning of the risks and major environmental losses caused by it.
The most prominent of these losses affected the production of nuclear energy, the strength of electricity in Europe today, and the alternative solution sought by some countries in light of the energy crisis with Russia.
Although European nuclear power has been the biggest sponsor of the rupture in German-French relations, it is now seen as a solution to the electricity crisis.
New countries are also seeking accreditation, such as Poland, which two days ago opted for a US offer to build its first nuclear power plant.
At the same time, the countries that possess this energy are seeking to increase and strengthen their reactors, undeterred by the opposition of peoples and voices calling for renewable energy.
Germany and the return to nuclear
In Germany, work has begun on two nuclear reactors that were due to be shut down by the end of this year, in line with the country ’ s plan to graduate from nuclear power.
The project will cost around 100 million euros and will be operational after December.
This comes at a time when the nuclear power plant "Isar 2" plans to carry out maintenance at a cost of about 50 million euros, and the preparatory work at the nuclear plant "Neckaroisthaim-2" will cost a similar amount.
The shutdown of nuclear power plants was one of the most prominent demands of the German people in recent demonstrations in Berlin, Düsseldorf, Hannover, Stuttgart, Dresden and Frankfurt, especially supporters of the Green Party and supporters of the transition to green energy.
Kenzbendit, 29, said: “We Greens have been fighting nuclear power in Germany for decades, in the streets and now in the government.
Kensbendit told Erm News: "We do not know how the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Environment was deceived and delayed for months in order to prevent the extension of German nuclear power plants."
The young man who participated in the recent demonstrations added that "energy policy is not really for politicians, because they think and work to implement their political agendas, but energy policy is always long-term, and granting the tasks of the Environmental Self-Awareness Squad to the Ministry of Economy is illogical.
"The extension of the work at the nuclear power plant is incredible, disregarding and insulting the demands of the people, and will make Germany" ridiculous "all over the world," he said.
Paris turns its back on the environment
France is the world ’ s largest producer of nuclear energy, generating 70 percent of its electricity from 56 nuclear reactors and exporting to neighboring countries.
Nuclear reactors in France have suffered and half of them have been shut down due to malfunctions or drought, causing electrical output to fall to its lowest level in 30 years, and exports to fall by almost half, according to the latest government reports.
This led the French administration to increase the power of nuclear reactors and change the plan to gradually abandon nuclear reactors in favor of renewable sources such as the sun and wind.
The French move, analysts predict, will meet public anger and opposition from countries around the world seeking to combat climate change and calling for nuclear power to be replaced by other sources, in addition to the heavy financial burden on the French government.
It is well known that nuclear power is not practical in the economic sense, otherwise France would not need to nationalize EDF to be able to operate the reactors with government support.
Drought disrupts nuclear power
The drought crisis will significantly limit this planned expansion, according to data from nuclear reactor operators, because nuclear plants use large amounts of fresh water from rivers and lakes for cooling, and reduced river flows as a result of drought will reduce electricity generation at nuclear power plants.
According to French energy advisor Bernard Labonch, nuclear power is not only about the best way to generate electricity, but it is a historical legacy in France that is inextricably linked to nationalism, and it is taboo for any French citizen to advocate against nuclear power.
"If you want to get a job as an engineer or researcher in France you have to be a proponent of nuclear energy, so there are very few who openly criticize it," he said.
Thus, all indications are that nuclear energy will remain in France for decades to come, despite widespread public opposition and environmental warnings about the dangers posed by the water that nuclear power plants dump into rivers after they have used it for cooling, and the dangers it poses to ecosystems, fish and aquatic plants.
Most Read
No stories found.
Erm News
www.eremnews.com

The European Commission reported this as the worst drought in five centuries, warning of significant environmental risks and losses.

German Greens like Kenzbendit have fought nuclear power in Germany for decades and now in government, see any extension of plant operation as disregarding public demands and damaging Germany’s reputation.

In France, support for nuclear is seen as necessary for employment in the industry, making open criticism rare.

Germany's three remaining nuclear power plants were scheduled to be disconnected on a Saturday, a process delayed due to the Russian war on Ukraine and the ensuing energy crisis.

Title:

Content: German Minister of Environment expresses satisfaction with the closure of the last nuclear power plant in the country - Sunrise Gate
Saturday 15 April 2023 1: 55 PM Cairo Cairo 24 °
Most Read
You might like it, too.
Share your opinion
Do you support the decision of the owner of Pyramids Club to stop investing in Egypt?
German environment minister welcomes shutdown of country ’ s last nuclear power plant
DBA
Published on: Saturday 15 April 2023 - 1: 46 PM | Last updated on Saturday 15 April 2023 - 1: 46 PM
German Environment Minister Steffe Lemke welcomed the closure of the country ’ s last nuclear power plant on Saturday.
Speaking to the German news agency dpa, she said: “Leaving nuclear power makes Germany safer.
In the event of an accident, the risks of nuclear energy are ultimately uncontrollable. ”
According to the assessment of the German Federal Office for the Safety of Nuclear Waste Management, the exit from nuclear power is a sound step in light of the Russian war against Ukraine.
According to the Office of Internal Oversight Services, radioactive elements stored in the final repositories within deep geological layers are thus more protected against attacks or sabotage than in a reactor or temporary storage facility above ground.
Head of the office, Wolfram Konech, said: “Concrete, barbed wire and security guards cannot replace long-term storage in deep and stable geological formations. ”
Germany's three remaining nuclear power plants are due to be permanently disconnected from the grid on Saturday.
This was supposed to happen at the end of last year, but because of the Russian war on Ukraine and the resulting energy crisis.
Last year, the German government decided to allow the reactors to continue operating during the winter.
You might like it, too.
Share your comment

The decision to phase out nuclear power was made by Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder’s government in 2002, but Angela Merkel reversed an earlier extension after the 2011 Fukushima disaster and set 2022 as the closure deadline.

Title:

Content: Saturday 28 Jumada I 1443 AH - 1 January 2022 |
Programs
Watch our latest episodes online
Germany shuts down half of its nuclear plants
Associated Press
A A A
Print Article
German authorities on Friday shut down half of its nuclear plants still in operation, a year before the end of their decades-old use.
The three reactors, Brockdorf, Gründe and Gündermpengben, were commissioned and now closed for the first time in the mid-1980s.
Together, they have provided electricity to millions of German homes for nearly four decades.
The center-left government of Gerhard Schroeder made the decision in 2002 to phase out nuclear power and switch from fossil fuels to renewable energy, but his successor, Angela Merkel, reversed its decision to extend the life of German nuclear plants in the wake of the 2011 Fukushima disaster in Japan and set 2022 as the deadline for their closure.
Some in Germany have called for the decision to end the use of nuclear power to be reconsidered again because already operating power plants produce relatively little carbon dioxide.
Advocates of atomic energy argue that it could help Germany meet its greenhouse gas reduction targets.
The German government said this week that shutting down all nuclear plants next year and then phasing out coal use by 2030 would not affect the country ’ s energy security or its goal of making Europe ’ s largest economy “climate neutral ” by 2045.
The remaining three nuclear plants – Emsland, Essar and Neckarostheim – will be decommissioned by the end of 2022.

Some opponents of Germany’s nuclear exit fear the EU’s increased reliance on Russian energy imports.

Title:

Content: “Green washing. ”
Europe forced to drop its green ratings | Politics and economics | In-depth analysis with a broader perspective than DW | DW | 09.07.2022
1.
Inhalt
2.
Navigation
3.
Weitere Inhalte
4.
Metanavigation
5.
Suche
6.
Choose from 30 Languages
Announcement
Politics and Economics
"Green laundry."
Europe is forced to fall back on its environmentally-friendly ratings
In a remarkable development, the European Parliament approved the green marks for energy investments including gas and nuclear amid an unprecedented energy crisis following the Russian aggression on Ukraine, a decision with significant repercussions, according to German and European experts.
The Dukovani Nuclear Power Plant is a nuclear power plant near the village of Dukovani in the Czech Republic.
The European Parliament (6 July 2022) approved a resolution classifying investments in the gas and nuclear sectors as sustainable green energy, under the EU ’ s classification of public funding for green projects.
The decision comes in the context of directing the investments of the continental bloc to achieve its climate goals by 2050, namely the elimination of greenhouse gas emissions.
A major attempt to block the proposal failed to garner the 353 votes needed to oppose the bill, with only 328 lawmakers voting against.
The bill has been sharply criticized by environmental protection organizations and some EU lawmakers for what they called a “green wash ” of fossil and nuclear energy investments since it was proposed by the European Commission late last year, saying it misled European consumers about corporate environmental practices or the environmental benefits of a product or service.
Some opponents of this shift in European policy fear the bloc ’ s increased reliance on Russian energy imports.
The German newspaper Rheinische Zeitung, published in Koblenz (6 July 2022), wrote that the European decision does not necessarily mean “a political commitment to relying more on nuclear or gas power in the climate crisis nor redirecting public investment to the era of nuclear or fossil energy. ”
The resolution ’ s obtaining a clear majority in the European Parliament, which was almost unanimously calling for an immediate exit from Russian gas, also has to do with the nervousness of MPs.
"They have just been under tremendous pressure from environmental groups against the label, but at the same time they expect greater social pressure from the general public in the fall."
The new measures are expected to take effect from 2023 unless EU member states object to them in the coming weeks.
Germany has already declared its opposition to the proposal, while Austria and Luxembourg have said they will file a case against the new law with the European Court of Justice.
watch video 37: 37
Europe is looking for alternatives to Russian gas.
Where did you get to?
Arguments of supporters and opponents of the new classification
Supporters of the new resolution argue that refusing to classify gas and nuclear power as "sustainable" would necessarily lead to higher energy prices, thereby hampering efforts to ditch more environmentally damaging coal.
A group of conservative European MPs stated in a statement that “nuclear power, for example, can provide stable and affordable energy supplies and reduce emissions quickly if given adequate access to the necessary capital. ”
The German news agency dpa reported that environmental activist Greta Thunberg criticized the European move in a tweet, saying it “will delay the truly sustainable transition that is so desperately needed. ”
The hypocrisy is blatant, but unfortunately it is not surprising. ”
The Commission of the European Union believes that this decision will be temporary because it is necessary to pass a transition phase, considering that gas is a fossil energy that many EU countries need to lead and manage their energy transition projects.
The Stuttgart-Zeitung newspaper (July 6) wrote that as long as the electricity produced by nuclear power plants cannot be replaced in a climate-friendly manner, shutting them down will have a negative impact on the climate.
In Germany, where a greater proportion of electricity is produced from coal, this substitution is damaging to the climate.
But that doesn ’ t stop Germany from moving forward with its projects to phase out nuclear power. ”
Despite all attempts, opponents of the project in the European Parliament failed to stop the legal action on the new classification.
Berlin has rejected the new European classification.
The German government has been quick to criticize the European Parliament ’ s decision, rejecting the classification of nuclear energy investments as climate-friendly.
In this regard, government spokesman Steffen Hipschtwright (July 6) stressed that "Berlin, regardless of the outcome of the vote, will remain in its position and will consider nuclear energy unsustainable."
However, it is still theoretically possible to prevent the implementation of these plans if at least 20 member states agree to represent at least 65% of the EU population by July 11, which is unlikely.
The German government has ruled out any legal action, with Hipschtwright saying: "We do not consider filing a lawsuit to be the appropriate course of action."
watch video 26: 06
Made in Germany - Global Challenges: War and Environmental Protection
Neue Tsurikhe Zeitung (June 6) went in another direction and showed flexibility in understanding the European decision; “There is a great risk that German industry will also fall back (on climate targets) if the EU changes sustainability standards, but the existence of different labels is not a market failure, but reflects that sustainability can be understood in different ways.
Anyone who manipulates information about sustainable investments should also take into account the discontent of consumer protection groups and the media as well as unfair competition. ”
Europe's inability to guarantee its energy security
In the context of the repercussions of the Russian aggression on Ukraine, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen (July 6) stressed that the continental bloc must "prepare for further disruptions in gas supplies, and even a complete interruption by Russia."
The Commission is expected to unveil an emergency plan for energy supply security on July 20.
Von der Leyen added: "We must support European solidarity.
"We need to protect the single market (in the EU) as well as the supply chains of the industry."
The Czech Presidency of the European Union announced in a tweet that it had called for an extraordinary meeting of EU energy ministers on July 26, following the Commission ’ s plan, and that the aim was “primarily to work on joint European projects that will free us from our dependence on Russia. ”
The continental bloc has launched a €300 billion plan to ease its dependence on Russian fossil fuel supplies while investing heavily to shift the market towards renewables.
The Berlin newspaper Tagesspiegel (July 6) presented the predicament of the German model in the European context, writing: "Germany on average has a large industrial sector and for this reason lives in a high level of luxury.
Short-term gas replacement is almost impossible, but more effective and efficient use can be achieved.
This is evidenced by the consumption of gas in the first five months of this year, after adjusting consumer behavior by lowering temperatures, consumption decreased by about ten percent compared to last year, "so the high price motivates consumers to save and innovate among those involved in the sector.
The Paris-based International Group of Liquefied Natural Gas Importers is pessimistic about when to get out of Europe ’ s worst energy crisis.
Vincent Demory, secretary-general of the group, said: "We may cross the coming winter without much damage.
But the winter that follows is likely to be more difficult, and the winter that follows. ”
Good weather last winter enabled Europe to have larger than expected gas reserves for heating in the coming winter season, but gas prices continue to rise in winter markets.
Austria and Luxembourg file suit against new classification
If Germany has announced that it will not go to court, Austria and Luxembourg have confirmed their intention to proceed with legal proceedings against the new European classification.
The German news agency dpa reported that Luxembourg ’ s energy minister Claude Torms confirmed in a tweet that the two countries would go ahead with legal proceedings, while his Austrian counterpart Leonor Gossler tweeted that Austria would file a lawsuit to overturn the decision with the European Court of Justice once the so-called “green washing program ” went into effect.
She added that she would work to mobilize more allies to participate in the lawsuit.
Gossler said the decision "puts our future at risk, and it is more than a reckless decision."
Germany has ruled out judicial recourse, with government spokesman Steffen Hipschtwright saying: "We do not consider filing a lawsuit to be the appropriate course of action."
Germany is under pressure from partners such as the Netherlands, which has asked it to continue operating nuclear power plants to cope with the current crisis, but Berlin is unlikely to respond.
According to Bloomberg (July 7), Dutch Minister of Climate and Energy Policy Rob Gettin has made the request to German Economy Minister Robert Habeck.
Electricity prices have skyrocketed after Russia cut natural gas supplies to several countries in response to sanctions imposed after its invasion of Ukraine.
German channel 1 ’ s Tageschau website wrote a warning (July 6): “Those who now want to invest their money in nuclear power plants should allow the question of whether they have already understood the essence of the problem at all about Europe ’ s 2050 climate neutrality targets?
It is not about replacing the evil of carbon dioxide that poisons the climate, another human being. The radiation of nuclear waste persists over thousands of years, not indirectly destroying life through warming, but directly through radioactivity. ”
Hassan Zinind

The German government has ruled out legal action regarding the EU’s energy policy, though Austria and Luxembourg intend to proceed with lawsuits against it.

EU partners, including the Netherlands, have pressured Germany to continue nuclear generation to alleviate the current crisis, but Berlin is unlikely to comply.

Dutch Minister Rob Gettin formally requested this of German Economy Minister Robert Habeck.

Germany has revived idle coal plants for winter emergency use, providing up to 450 million euros to operators, but insists coal use will still end by 2030.

Title:

Content: Environmental activist Greta Thunberg calls Germany's use of coal instead of nuclear power a "bad idea"
© AFP 2022 / CRISTINA QUICLERSwedish schoolgirl and environmental activist, Greta Thunberg, December 11, 2019
Follow us via
Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg has criticised Germany ’ s plan to shut down its remaining nuclear plants while increasing its coal-fired power.
Thunberg, 19, said in a television interview that turning off nuclear power plants was a “bad idea ” if it meant switching to coal, according to Politico.
Asked if nuclear power is the best for the climate, Greta Thunberg, 2019 Time magazine ’ s Person of the Year, replied: “It depends, if the nuclear already works for them I think it would be a mistake to shut it down and switch to coal. ”
Germany plans to close its remaining three nuclear plants by the end of 2022, under pressure from gas shortages and prolonged outages of French nuclear plants, which have caused supply shortages and soaring prices.
Germany is likely to extend the life of two of its nuclear reactors until April 2023.
Germany restarts first coal-fired power plant amid gas crisis
Berlin has revived its idle coal plants in order to cope with the current energy crisis and is paying operators of closed brown coal plants up to 450 million euros to equip them for emergency operation during the winter, but the German government still insists it will end coal use by 2030.
In August, Germany ’ s Uniper restarted a backup coal-fired power plant to secure power supplies, due to power shortages caused by sanctions on Russia.
News Ticker
0.
To participate in the discussion
Sign in or Register
loader
Conversations
Заголовок открываемого материала

Environmental activist Greta Thunberg called it a “bad idea” for Germany to replace nuclear power with coal, saying it would be a mistake if nuclear is already functional.

German Chancellor has rejected public demands for the country’s return to nuclear energy.

Title:

Content: German Chancellor rejects demands for his country ’ s return to nuclear energy - Sunrise Gate
Monday 4 March 2024 3: 47 PM Cairo Cairo 24 °
Most Read
You might like it, too.
Share your opinion
Do you support calls to boycott some restaurants that have been proven to support the occupation soldiers?
German chancellor rejects calls for his country to return to nuclear power
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz
Zendelwingen (Germany) - DPA
Published on: Monday 4 March 2024 - 3: 34 PM | Last updated on Monday 4 March 2024 - 3: 34 PM
German Chancellor Olaf Schulz rejected the demands of his country to return to the use of nuclear energy in the generation of electricity, pointing in this regard to the high cost and long time required to rebuild nuclear plants.
Speaking at a vocational education centre in the city of Zendelwingen in the southwestern German state of Baden-Württemberg, Schulz said: “If someone decides now to build a nuclear power plant, it will be completed in 15 to 20 years according to the current construction times.
By then, we should have solved all our problems already. ”
The electricity generated by such plants costs twice as much as electricity generated from wind, solar or other production sources, Schulz said, noting that uranium stocks are ultimately limited.
"If we look back 20 years later, whoever made a less expensive and more efficient decision to produce electricity, it will be our country," he said.
In its draft new core program, the Christian Alliance (which leads the opposition in the country) expressed support for the use of nuclear energy and said it wanted to rely on "fourth-generation and fifth-generation nuclear power plants".
You might like it, too.
Share your comment

The last nuclear station has now closed.

Title:

Content: The last station closed.
Germany ends production of nuclear energy
Germany has cut the last three remaining nuclear power plants off the grid, ending the country ’ s nuclear energy production after more than 60 years.
The three remaining nuclear reactors in Germany, Essar II in Bavaria, Issland in Lower Saxony and Neckarvistheim in Baden-Württemberg, were shut down yesterday.
The operator of the Nikarvistheim 2 nuclear plant was the last to report that the shutdown had been completed.
Print

Due to the lack of a foolproof method to store nuclear waste, critics have questioned whether nuclear energy should be considered a clean energy source.

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

West Germany has experienced political confusion and policy indecision regarding nuclear power.

Despite initially extending reactor operation times, a series of nuclear accidents—culminating in the Fukushima disaster in Japan in 2011—shifted German public and political opinion sharply against nuclear energy.

The impact of the Fukushima accident was felt especially strongly in Germany, prompting accelerated plans to phase out nuclear power.

By the end of 2021, Germany planned to close three more nuclear plants, and aimed to raise the share of renewables in its energy mix to 80% by 2030, focusing on wind and solar.

Title:

Content: • En
Germany to close three more nuclear plants by the end of 2021
There is no turning back, so only three nuclear plants remain in Germany and will be fully decommissioned by the end of 2022.
Germany ’ s Issa 2 nuclear power plant will be decommissioned by the end of 2022 (Photo / Twitter PreussenElektra)
Germany, which is committed to eliminating nuclear waste, closed three of its remaining six nuclear plants on the last day of 2021, Europe ’ s largest economy, demonstrating its determination to phase out nuclear energy and move toward renewable energy.
The plants in Gundremmingen, Grohnde and Brokdorf, which have been in operation for 35 years, were removed from service, Reuters reported.
This leaves Germany with only three remaining nuclear plants, which are expected to close by the end of 2022.
Since the 2011 earthquake in Japan and the meltdown of the reactor core in Fukushima, the worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl in 1986, Germany has decided to accelerate the phase-out of nuclear energy.
However, it will not be easy for Europe ’ s economic powerhouse to abandon what some see as “cheap and clean ” nuclear power, which means more money will have to be invested in renewable energy to meet its climate goals, and higher electricity prices are inevitable.
According to 2021 data, the remaining six nuclear power plants account for about 12% of Germany ’ s total electricity supply.
Renewable energy accounts for 41%, while coal-fired and gas-fired power accounts for 28% and 15% respectively.
Germany aims to increase its renewable energy supply to 80% by 2030, mainly wind and solar power.
Extended reading:
The crossroads of nuclear power, climate change has given nuclear power a chance to rise again.
【 311 Fukushima nuclear disaster ten years 】 The reconstruction is not complete, the forbidden land is still a shocking number to look back on the disaster

The Fukushima accident highlighted the danger of insufficient countermeasures, making risk-averse Germans unwilling to accept continued nuclear operations.

Title:

Content: Alert
The hot and cold reaction of the competition was obvious when Su Zhenchang and Lai Qingde helped the platform Chen
Why do many countries decide to reinvest in nuclear power?
【 Li Shulian / Editorial Department of North American Intellectual Property News 】
Recently, a number of countries that originally supported the decommissioning of nuclear plants have turned around and announced that they will extend the operation of their domestic nuclear plants. Not only that, but they will also invest tens of billions of dollars to create more large and small nuclear reactors.
That ’ s all because nuclear energy can effectively solve two of the world ’ s biggest crises: energy and climate change.
The energy crisis and climate change can be said to bring a breakthrough development opportunity for nuclear energy, the former to pursue energy diversity, the latter to pursue net zero emissions, and known as the best efficiency of green energy of nuclear energy of course become one of the mandatory items when formulating energy policies in many countries.
However, these major powers, including the United States, Japan, the United Kingdom and South Korea, have frozen their investment in nuclear power plants due to public doubts about nuclear safety caused by the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant earthquake, so that the relevant technology to build nuclear power plants has been surpassed by Russia and China.
However, this has not hindered the determination of many countries to restart nuclear power, on the road to a nuclear-free homeland, should the Chinese government also stop, look, listen?
Energy security concerns and recent spikes in energy prices, especially after Russia ’ s invasion of Ukraine, highlight the importance of a diverse mix of non-petrochemical and domestic energy sources.
Russia ’ s invasion of Ukraine has exacerbated an already tense global fuel market and continues to push up electricity prices.
According to the European Union ’ s Energy Regulatory Cooperation Agency (ACER), retail electricity prices have increased by an average of 30% year-on-year in February 2022, with the biggest price increases in regions where electricity generation is heavily dependent on natural gas, such as Madrid by 55% and Rome by 80%.
On the other hand, over the past few years, the number of countries pursuing Net Zero Emissions (NZE) has increased, with more than 70 countries covering 76% of the world ’ s energy-related CO2 emissions committing to net zero by 2022; more than 10 times more in four years, compared with only six countries committing to net zero at the end of 2018.
As countries move towards a net-zero future, renewable energy, especially wind and solar photovoltaics, is often seen as the largest source of electricity.
At the same time, however, a growing number of countries have announced their support for new nuclear power plant investment plans.
In February 2022, France announced plans to build six new large reactors starting in 2028 at a cost of around €50 billion, with an additional eight to be built by 2050, while committing €1 billion to develop innovative reactors, including small modular reactors by 2030.
China plans to continue its current pace of nuclear reactor construction in order to reach its goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2060.
South Korea ’ s new president, Yoon Seok Hyuk, has also made an election pledge to reverse South Korea ’ s nuclear phase-out policy by supporting the extension and reactivation of existing nuclear facilities at two sites, while seeking to build 10 nuclear plants overseas using South Korean technology by 2030.
Table 1.
Major Nuclear Energy Developments by Country in 2020-2022
Without nuclear energy, it would be difficult for the world to achieve net-zero emissions.
The deployment of nuclear energy has increased the diversity of the energy mix, which in addition to promoting the rise of variable renewable energy sources such as wind and solar, can greatly reduce dependence on fossil fuels.
In the 10 years since the first oil crisis, nearly 170 GW of nuclear power plants began construction; these plants still account for 40% of the nuclear capacity in operation today.
Many of the reasons why governments are restarting nuclear power today are also affected by the energy crisis.
On the other hand, as a mature large-scale low-emission energy source, nuclear energy can effectively help decarbonize the electricity supply.
In the International Energy Agency ’ s (IEA) net-zero 2050 setting, emissions from the energy sector are expected to fall by about 40% from 2020 to 2030, before falling back to net-zero in 2050.
This narrow but achievable path requires immediate and rigorous policy action by governments around the world to reshape energy systems in many ways.
In reality, extending the service life of a nuclear power plant is the most cost-effective and integral part of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050.
Despite the fact that renewable energy already dominates nearly 90% of the net zero-emission energy supply, nuclear energy still plays an important role.
Today, around 260 GW (63%) of nuclear power plants worldwide have been in use for more than 30 years and are nearing the end of their initial operating license.
Nuclear power plants that have extended their service in the past three years account for about 10% of the world ’ s nuclear power plants. By 2030, the number of nuclear power plants operating in developed economies could shrink by a third.
More than half of the nuclear power plants are now able to extend their service lives for net-zero emissions, reducing the need for other low-emission options by nearly 200 GW.
By 2030, the capital cost of most extended nuclear power plants will be around $500 to $1,100 per kilowatt (kW), which is extremely competitive compared to solar and wind in most regions.
Nuclear power plays an important role in the path to net-zero emissions.
Nuclear power will double from 413 GW at the beginning of 2022 to 812 GW by 2050 in the net-zero emissions journey; and 27 GW per year between now and 2030.
If countries do not consider the extension of nuclear power plants or the construction of new nuclear power plants, the share of nuclear power in total generation will fall from 10% in 2020 to 3% in 2050, so that solar and wind energy need to fill this gap, not only need higher capital investment, but also increase the uncertainty of energy supply.
If a country like Taiwan has congenital restrictions on developing renewable energy, it needs to be filled with low-carbon energy sources such as natural gas, and the cost is even more substantial.
The contribution of nuclear energy to safe and low-emission power systems is not valued
IEA data show that nuclear power currently operates in 32 countries with a capacity of 413 GW, which could reduce global CO2 emissions by 1.5 gigatons (gigatons) and 180 billion cubic meters (bcm) of natural gas demand annually.
While wind and solar are leaders in alternative fossil fuels, they also need to be complemented by scalable resources; as the second largest source of low-emission power after hydropower, nuclear power with scalable and growth potential has become an option for many countries.
However, the current power market design fails to fully reflect the two major benefits of nuclear power.
First, nuclear power is a scalable resource that avoids costly economic and social harm from power outages when the average power supply system load approaches the level of available supply capacity.
In addition, nuclear power is low-emission green energy, but most electricity markets do not reward the low-carbon nature of nuclear power. While many countries support clean energy production, such as production and investment tax credits and subsidized electricity prices, nuclear power is excluded from subsidies or other subsidy mechanisms available for wind and solar.
The Fukushima nuclear disaster can be avoided, and it is not advisable to waste food because of choking.
Some countries have ruled out nuclear energy in the green energy option, mainly due to concerns about safety and nuclear waste management, and these countries have decided to phase out nuclear power mainly due to public safety concerns.
In the wake of the Three Mile Island nuclear leak, the failure of the Chernobyl nuclear reactor, and three major accidents at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant in Japan, public support for nuclear power in many countries has weakened significantly.
Countries that retain and continue to develop nuclear energy also strongly demand higher safety standards at their nuclear plants.
The 2011 accident at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant prompted countries to reassess and strengthen nuclear safety and emergency preparedness. Many countries have conducted safety inspections or pressure tests on existing reactors, and have required some types of reactors to undergo safety modifications.
These considerations have also led some countries to adjust their nuclear power use plans.
Germany, for example, has built 36 nuclear reactors with a total capacity of 30 GW, which accelerated the phase-out of all of them in the wake of the Fukushima disaster. Most of the reactors have now been shut down, and the three reactors still in operation will be closed by the end of 2022.
Other European countries, such as Spain, Sweden and Switzerland, have also announced phasing out or not renewing their nuclear plants.
In Japan, many of the nuclear plants that were shut down after the Fukushima accident have not yet been restarted, and the share of nuclear power generation has fallen from a high of 35% in 2002 to about 5% today.
The Fukushima accident raised global concerns about the risks and potential costs of a nuclear disaster, leading to the decision to idle or shut down other reactors and increase thermal power generation, resulting in higher import costs for fossil fuels.
However, in response to the Fukushima disaster, the official investigation concluded that the accident should have been foreseen and prevented. [1]
The Independent Commission of Inquiry into the Nuclear Disaster has confirmed that the structure of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant cannot withstand the impact of the March 11, 2011 earthquake and tsunami.
On the other hand, the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant was not prepared for a serious accident; in fact, both Tepco and the regulatory authorities were aware of the risks posed by such natural disasters, but neither took any precautions.
The Commission noted that the structure of Unit 1 of the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant could not withstand the strong earthquakes and tsunamis caused by 311, and that the specifications of the plant lacked sufficient seismic and tsunami strength because (1) the guidelines for the construction of Units 1 to 3 of the plant were from the late 1960s, so the guidelines for the construction were inadequate, and (2) the area around the plant was considered to be seismic activity. The smallest, never even experienced earthquake damage.
Based on this assessment, the safe tolerance level for the maximum seismic acceleration in the seismic design is set at 265 Gal, [2] with very low seismic resistance.
In addition, the lack of countermeasures to cope with the tsunami is also one of the causes of the nuclear disaster.
The Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant was built in 1967, based on seismological knowledge at the time and the possibility of core damage in such a tsunami situation. However, the early seismological knowledge was far from adequate for the emergency that occurred on 311 in 2011.
Stop, Look and Listen on the Road to a Non-Nuclear Home
As the development of renewable energy failed to meet the target, China's original 2025 renewable energy accounted for 20% of the target has been determined to be postponed to October 2026, proof that the policy should be adjusted according to the actual situation; the same, on the road to non-nuclear homes, the government should stop, look, listen, and not ignore the actual situation has been moving forward.
The general public, too, should learn more about nuclear and renewable energy to make informed decisions.
Stop: Since the Russo-Ukrainian War, the world situation has changed rapidly, seriously affecting the supply of raw materials and prices, and policymakers should stop and rethink.
Look: Reviewing established energy policies, especially the bottleneck in the development of renewable energy, is a major obstacle to the pursuit of net zero emissions, and seeing the goal of 60 to 70% of total electricity generation by 2050 is almost impossible, should we see how other countries respond and make early adjustments?
Listen: Please listen to the suggestions and advice of the business community, the business community representatives unanimously believe that the government's national energy policy must be reviewed, in the energy structure should not exclude nuclear energy, even if the four nuclear power, at least to consider a new generation of nuclear energy, will be listed as an option.
[3] Has the government listened?
[This article is not finished, please see the full content of "North American intellectual rights" 317: "energy series report" why many countries decided to re-nuclear arms?
* If you would like to reprint this article, please contact the North American Intellectual Property Journal
[For details, please refer to North American Intellectual Property Journal No. 317; welcome to subscribe to North American Intellectual Property Journal e-newsletter.]
Reference Materials:
Nuclear Power and Secure Energy Transitions, International Energy Agency, IEA Publications, June 2022
The official report of The Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission, The National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission, 2012.
Remarks:
1.
The official report of The Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission, The National Diet of Japan Fukushima Nuclear Accident Independent Investigation Commission, 2012.
2.
Gal is a unit of acceleration.
3.
Taiwan ’ s energy structure business sector: options for a new generation of nuclear energy, Business Times Tam Shu-chen 2022.06.26
Extended reading
Russian missile strikes nuclear power plant again! Ukraine: Less than 300 meters from reactor
75% of French support nuclear energy
Zaporizhia Nuclear Power Plant is safe for the time being
IAEA urges Russia to withdraw from Zaporozhye nuclear power plant
Related News
Why do many countries decide to reinvest in nuclear power?
Recently, a number of countries that originally supported the decommissioning of nuclear plants have turned around and announced that they will extend the operation of their domestic nuclear plants. Not only that, but they will also invest tens of billions of dollars to create more large and small nuclear reactors.
That ’ s all because nuclear energy can effectively solve two of the world ’ s biggest crises: energy and climate change.
The energy crisis and climate change can be said to bring a breakthrough development opportunity for nuclear energy, the former to pursue energy diversity, the latter to pursue net zero emissions, and known as the best efficiency of green energy of nuclear energy of course become one of the mandatory items when formulating energy policies in many countries.
However, these major powers, including the United States, Japan, the United Kingdom and South Korea, have frozen their investment in nuclear power plants due to public doubts about nuclear safety caused by the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant earthquake, so that the relevant technology to build nuclear power plants has been surpassed by Russia and China.
However, this has not hindered the determination of many countries to restart nuclear power, on the road to a nuclear-free homeland, should the Chinese government also stop, look, listen?
IP Dictionary Patent Application Withdrawn
Withdrawal of a patent application, subject to exceptions, is in principle the freedom of the applicant, the applicant may withdraw his application at any time before the trial or punishment of the patent application.
In order to withdraw a patent application, the applicant should submit an application in writing. If there are more than two applicants, the application should be withdrawn by all the applicants.
China ’ s digital collection industry should set a red line as soon as possible
Avoidance.
This has been the consensus when China's blockchain technology is popularized in various fields, but it will inevitably be abused by some lawless or speculative individuals or units.
Analyses of drug precursors
Drugs are extremely important in our daily lives, and the reason why various drugs have different therapeutic effects is mainly due to their unique chemical structure.
Drugs for mood disorders, epilepsy drugs and cancer drugs, for example, all have different specific chemical structures, making them very different from the diseases they can treat.
U.S. Senators Propose Amendments to 35 U.S.C. 101 Patent Eligibility Requirements
U.S. Senator Thom Tillis has proposed a new amendment to the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2022, S.4734, to amend 35 U.S.C. 100 (b), add 35 U.S.C. 100 (k), and rewrite 35 U.S.C. 101. A new round of policy tug of war has officially begun.
The Rise of Green Consumption: Sustainable Trends in the Food Industry
Global consumers are becoming more concerned about the climate, and the food industry is beginning to see the emergence of “Climavores ”, which is to choose food from food ingredients or processes that take into account the climate impact. Google search has also found that searches for different food ingredients and climate have doubled and continued to increase. New ‘ sustainable ’ dietary needs are taking shape …
Product recommendation
udn Forum

Globally, however, some countries are reinvesting in nuclear energy, seeing it as essential for both energy diversity and achieving net zero emissions, due to its low-carbon credentials and reliability.

Germany’s anti-nuclear movement dates back to August 1986, when the Social Democratic Party passed a bill to abandon nuclear power within 10 years, leading to the termination of new reactor development and the shutdown of several planned units.

Title:

Content: ● Talk from the beginning
In October 1973, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, led by Saudi Arabia, imposed a embargo on countries supporting Israel with oil as a weapon. The embargo lasted until March 1974, when the global price of oil rose by nearly 300%, from $3 per barrel to nearly $12.
Recognizing the importance of stable energy supply and price, many countries have begun to develop nuclear power.
In that era, the development of nuclear energy in Germany and France went hand in hand. Both countries imported nuclear power technology from the United States, and both established independent nuclear power industries.
In 1979, the Three Mile Island accident in the United States did not change the Social Democratic Party's support for nuclear energy in Germany at the time, and then the 1986 Chernobyl disaster in Russia caused a major impact on Germany's nuclear energy policy. In August 1986, the Social Democratic Party passed a bill to abandon nuclear power within 10 years, Germany terminated the development plan for new reactors, and power companies dared not plan to build a nuclear power plant. Merchants.
Overall, the passage of the Act did not affect the operation of the nuclear power plants in transit in Germany, with a capacity of 20,339 and 20,583,000 megawatts in 23 years from 1986 to 2009, and a further 22.9 million megawatts in 1989.
In other words, the ruling party in Germany recognized the importance of nuclear power to the country ’ s economic development and did not implement the nuclear abolition bill hastily passed in August 1986 under the anti-nuclear passion of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant disaster in Russia.
Obviously, the non-nuclear file, can only say, can not be done.
Non-nuclear weapons are a bargaining chip for political power
In October 1998, the Social Democratic Party and the Green Party organized a joint government and began to discuss a non-nuclear timetable with power companies. The Green Party, a small party with ideological leadership and national recognition of only 6.7%, changed the national energy policy through the power to gain the leadership of energy policies that are closely related to national security.
The assumption of power by political parties recognized by more people is the basic tenet of the operation of democratic politics.
When, in order to gain political power, different political parties used coalitions to lead to the opinions of the minority and hostage the understanding of the majority, is this the normal state of democratic politics?
Ridiculous, even more pathetic!
After numerous and varied threats, the coalition government and the power companies reached an agreement in late 2000.
The key point of the agreement is that the government will allow the units in operation at the time to continue operating until the cumulative generation of 2,623 billion kWh, equivalent to an average useful life of the units of 32 years (the power company originally expected 36 years), and that Germany will be non-nuclear by 2022.
The government is committed to ensuring the smooth operation of the nuclear power plant and the disposal of nuclear waste without political interference. In June 2001, the “Red Green ” coalition government signed an agreement with four power companies.
The agreement clearly stipulates that Germany will no longer build nuclear power plants and allow the temporary storage of used nuclear fuel at the site.
Based on the cap on nuclear power generation, a less cost-effective unit was stopped in 2003 and 2005, with a installed capacity of 640,000 MW and 340,000 MW, respectively, and it operated for 31 and 36 years.
In addition, a unit with a capacity of 1.22 million megawatts was built in 1986 on the banks of the Rhine. The unit was discontinued in 1988 due to anti-nuclear protests, and its power company abandoned the unit in 2003 to begin decommissioning work. Two units with a capacity of 771,000 megawatts and 1.26 million megawatts were suspended in 2007 and 2009, respectively, for 30 years and 25 years.
These two units are boiling water reactors, which are different from the mainstream pressurized water reactors in Germany.
Germany ’ s non-nuclear decision in 2000 was a pragmatic compromise that quelled the protests of anti-nuclear groups, kept the plant running smoothly, and provided the government with enough time to think about national energy policy.
An industrial leader reminded the government that reliable and affordable energy is an important part of Germany ’ s economic policy.
Opposition leaders in Congress said there was a chance they would change the decision.
The expectation of power companies is to increase the average operating year of all nuclear power units from 32 to 40 years, and then to 60 years depending on the situation of individual units.
● New opportunities brought about by the change
In September 2009, the new coalition government of the Christian Democrats and the Liberal Party announced plans to withdraw the "non-nuclear policy".
At this time, Germany still has 17 operational nuclear power units, but one is in a long-term state of decommissioning.
If all the units can be extended from the original agreed 32 years of operation to 60 years, it is estimated that the additional profit of the power company will be 100 billion euros, and the government must take a share, let alone 50 billion euros.
Financial negotiations took a year to complete.
The new nuclear policy allows for 40 years of operation (an additional 8 years) for units that were negotiated before 1980, and 14 years for units that were negotiated after 1980.
The government pays dividends on the extension of nuclear power plants to the national treasury under various taxes, donations and surcharges.
For example, the tax on nuclear fuel based on the weight of nuclear fuel used is increased to 2.3 billion euros per year, equivalent to 0.016 euros per kilowatt-hour.
In order to supplement the development of renewable energy, we will provide 300 million euros each in 2011 and 2012, 200 million euros each from 2013 to 2016, and 0.009 euros per nuclear power generation after 2016. The funds will also fund a recovery plan for a waste salt mine that is disposed of from nuclear waste.
Germany ’ s policy of abandoning nuclear energy has officially turned a corner.
• Planning does not change
On March 15, 2011, German Chancellor Angela Merkel announced that the new nuclear energy policy adopted only four months ago was suspended for three months. At the same time, seven units that had been negotiated before 1980 were immediately shut down. This represents a decrease of 8,336 MW, or 6.4% of the total installed capacity.
In May 2011, the German regulatory authority issued a statement saying that after various assessments, all German nuclear power units are in good condition and there are no concerns about their safety.
Despite this, the German government announced on May 30 that under pressure from anti-nuclear local governments, it will return to its original non-nuclear policy and close all nuclear power plants by 2022. At the end of June and July 8, the German House of Representatives and the Senate respectively passed decrees to expand wind power generation in response to the shutdown of nuclear power plants, while agreeing to build coal-fired power plants and gas plants without changing carbon reduction targets.
In order to solve the problem of insufficient baseload power after the nuclear power plant is stopped, electricity will be imported from France, Russia and Poland.
It ’ s all about non-nuclear policy.
Some nuclear power plants have been forced to shut down, but the nuclear power plants that continue to operate still have to pay various heavy taxes according to the 2011 revision of the Atomic Energy Law. Tax rebates of €6.3 billion between 2011 and 2016 and the suspension of tax on nuclear fuel.
The nuclear fuel tax was abolished at the end of 2016. In order to avoid the nuclear fuel tax, the fuel exchange time of five German units was postponed to January 2017, and a total of 8 billion kWh of power generation was lost from mid-December to the end of February 2016.
After 10 years of litigation, the government reached a settlement with four power companies for a total amount of 4.8 billion euros.
This amount of money is the most direct price of policy repetition.
In response to nuclear waste, in order to maintain a stable power supply, the huge investment in power generation and transmission systems is a heavier burden on society.
In May 2011, the German power grid department warned that the closure of nuclear power plants will lead to insufficient baseload power generation capacity, and renewable energy generation facilities are scattered, and renewable energy rich areas and power consumption areas are at a distance, requiring transmission networks.
The lack of power transmission capacity will make the grid fragile and unreliable, and the stability of the grid is facing great challenges. In May 2012, Germany announced a 10-year plan to expand and strengthen the grid, with a total of 26 transmission projects, with a total investment of 10 billion euros.
Germany calls the policy of increasing the proportion of renewable energy generation and phasing out nuclear energy as Energiewende (energytransition), an appropriate translation is also our slogan, "energy transition"!
For the public, the direct cost of the energy transition is that household electricity prices are the second highest in Europe and the highest in Denmark.
According to statistics, in December 2021, the price of domestic electricity in Germany was 80% higher than that of France.
Electricity prices in Germany
The electricity market in Germany is completely liberalized, and power companies sell electricity generated by various forms of electricity generation in the wholesale market. The price of electricity in the wholesale market is open information, which allows power companies to obtain electricity from the wholesale market and transmit it to consumers through the electricity network.
Taxes paid by different types of consumers are also different.
Due to various measures to reward renewable energy, distorting the market mechanism, the German wholesale electricity price is lower than other countries, and sometimes even negative, 298 hours of wholesale electricity price is negative in 2019 and 139 hours in 2021.
The average wholesale price of electricity in the German electricity market is 0.03767 euros / kWh in 2019, 0.03047 euros / kWh in 2020, and 0.09685 euros / kWh in 2021. The average price in the first half of the year is 0.054 euros / kWh, rising to 0.1380 euros / kWh in the second half of the year.
As shown in the attached figure, the Russian-Ukrainian war caused a surge in gas prices, which had a huge impact on electricity prices in Germany; in July 2022, the high price of 0.3153 euros per degree was 6.4 times that of January 2019!
The price of electricity for domestic or small commercial use in Germany is very high.
Look at the price structure of electricity for German households.
Germany ’ s household electricity price in 2006 was 0.1946 euros per kWh. It rose to 0.3216 euros per kWh in 2021, and has reached 0.3714 euros in 2022. In 2021, more than half of Germany ’ s household and small business electricity price burden came from additional taxes or fees due to energy policies. 16% is a sales tax, 20% of the renewable energy surcharge is paid to the renewable energy industry, 6% of the electricity tax (also known as the ecological tax), and there are three smaller surcharges.
If so, why not in the first place?
In 2010, Germany had 17 nuclear power units with a total installed capacity of more than 20 million megawatts, accounting for about 15% of the total installed capacity. In 2010, the total generation capacity was 133 billion kWh, accounting for about 25% of the total generation capacity. At the end of 2011, there were 9 nuclear power units with a total installed capacity of 12 million megawatts.
Compared to 1990, the total installed capacity was 1.3 times, but the power generation increased by only 11%.
Wind and photovoltaics account for nearly half of the installed capacity, but only 28% of the generation.
Nuclear power plant capacity accounted for only 4.1%, but power generation accounted for 12.4%. In 2021, three nuclear power units were shut down, and there are only three units in operation, with a total installed capacity of 4.055 million megawatts, accounting for less than 2%, and the total power generation may be about 6%. Can the economy afford to shut down the remaining three nuclear plants in 2022?
According to a news report on August 18, "Germany is facing an energy shortage crisis this winter and has planned to delay the closure of the country's last three nuclear power plants."
The decision has not yet been formally adopted by Prime Minister Bernard Shaw and may need to be passed by parliament. Details are still being discussed and a cabinet resolution will have to wait weeks for an energy demand assessment to come out, but officials believe the results are already known, according to three officials.
According to online data, Germany has eight decommissioned units that have not been in service for 40 years, and if the international consensus is that nuclear power units can be used for at least 60 years, the extension of these units can significantly reduce the dependence on imported natural gas.
It remains to be seen whether the shift in German nuclear policy will extend to these eight units.
● Other Mountain Stone
Looking at Taiwan ’ s electricity situation, the schedule summarizes Taiwan ’ s electricity data for 2019 and 2021, which can be compared with Germany ’ s data for 2019. Germany ’ s total installed capacity and total power generation in 2019 are 4.1 times and 2.2 times that of Taiwan, respectively.
The average capacity factor for electrical equipment in Germany is 30% and in Taiwan it is 56%.
Renewable energy cannot generate electricity all the time, and when the installed capacity is large, the average capacity factor will be low.
But there are other factors, in 2019, Germany ’ s natural gas installation capacity of 46 million megawatts, generating 90.8 billion kWh; Taiwan is 17.57 million megawatts and 91.2 billion kWh; the installed capacity is only 38% of Germany ’ s, but the power generation is equivalent.
Germany ’ s electricity grid is part of the European continent ’ s electricity grid, and data can be found on the network. In 2020, Germany exported 66.39 billion kWh of electricity and imported 48.05 billion kWh. About 20% of Germany ’ s domestic electricity production is exchanged with other countries.
If the exchange is not possible, it is necessary to abandon electricity when the amount of renewable energy generation exceeds the amount of electricity used or the capacity of the grid; when the renewable energy generation is insufficient, more dispatchable units are needed.
Renewable energy generation must be coupled with a power generation facility that can be scheduled, so that the power grid can be stable.
When the capacity of renewable energy installations is large, the capacity of the installations with the power generation facilities that can be adjusted will also increase.
The average capacity factor of German natural gas units is only 15%.
In other words, Germany ’ s natural gas unit is idle 85% of the time, isn ’ t that the cost of renewable energy?
When renewable energy must have a total installed capacity of 12.7 million megawatts (54.8%) of renewable energy (wind, light, water, and waste) with a capacity of 255.1 billion kWh (41.9%); the installed capacity is 16.3 times that of Taiwan ’ s 7.8 million megawatts in 2019, and the power generation capacity is 16.8 times that of Taiwan ’ s share is only 5.6%. Degrees.
From the number of renewable energy generation, Taiwan really can not be compared with Germany, but can we really develop to the realm of Germany?
Germany ’ s territory covers an area of 357,622 square kilometers, 9.9 times Taiwan ’ s 35,980 square kilometers.
Simply estimate the amount of renewable energy generated per square kilometer of land in Germany is only 1.7 times that of Taiwan.
In other words, if Taiwan ’ s renewable energy development can be as good as Germany ’ s, our renewable energy generation capacity can be doubled again! Is that enough? What does the rest rely on? Petrified fuels? Taiwan ’ s use of fossil fuels for power generation is 82.0% in 2019 and 83.3% in 2021. What should we do about the reduction of greenhouse gases? Energy can be developed, hydrogen is an energy carrier, not energy, that is, hydrogen production still depends on other sources of energy.
The Germans can ’ t take the risk, we don ’ t see it.
Germany's nuclear energy policy is all caused by natural gas, on the one hand, the source is cut off, on the other hand, the natural gas shortage caused by the soaring price of fossil fuels.
Fossil fuels account for 46.3% of Germany ’ s electricity generation, and the rise in wholesale electricity prices has been alarming. The German government has revised its nuclear energy policy once again in order to spread the risk of excessive reliance on natural gas.
In Taiwan, fossil fuel power generation accounted for 83.3% in 2021, can the impact on electricity prices be lighter than in Germany?
You can't see that Taiwan Power Company is expected to have a loss of 200 billion yuan this year, and CNOOC is also in the tens of billions!
The government is afraid to adjust the price of electricity and natural gas for fear of affecting the election.
A few days ago, the media reported that the government has compiled a budget to directly eliminate the deficit.
Do they still have the law in their eyes?
If the government respects the results of the 2018 referendum on nuclear and green energy, and four years ago it began to promote the renewal of the licenses of the four nuclear companies to transfer and operate China's power plants, Taiwan will pay a lot less in this wave of soaring fossil fuel prices.
A while ago, the military exercise across the strait, it can be seen that it is rehearsing to block Taiwan, if it is really blocked in the future, our natural gas stocks can stand for a few days! Our government seems to be old in the ground is not proper, still clinging to the god of the non-nuclear homeland, refusing to open their eyes to see the latest international energy trends.
After Germany abandoned its non-nuclear policy, the only countries in the world that have used nuclear energy, only Taiwan has a non-nuclear timetable, China, the United States, France, Japan, South Korea and India, etc., are building or planning new nuclear power plants.
The Taiwanese government should wake up.
Those who pretend to sleep cannot wake up, so let us spit on those who stand in line with those who pretend to sleep!
With the election looming, let ’ s ask the candidates whether they support nuclear power?
If not, ask him to tell you where Taiwan's energy policy should go, how Taiwan meets the requirements of international carbon reduction, what to do when Taiwan is short of power, and who pays when electricity prices surge? (The author is a Distinguished Professor of Engineering and Systems Science, National Tsing Hua University)
※ The above statements do not represent the position of Wangzhong Media Group ※
# Germany # Unit # Electricity # Euro # Nuclear

Decisions on nuclear policy sometimes required parliamentary approval, and it was uncertain if policy shifts would cover all remaining reactors.

A challenge with renewables is their intermittent production, leading to a low average capacity factor compared to fossil fuel or nuclear plants, and consequently higher reliance on backup sources like natural gas.

Despite Germany’s transition plans, fossil fuels still account for 46.3% of Germany’s electricity, and wholesale power prices have risen considerably.

Political reluctance to raise electricity and gas prices has made market reforms difficult, especially near election periods.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine further underscored the strategic vulnerability of Germany’s energy supply, given its historical dependence on Russian gas, leading to urgent discussions about extending the operation of the country’s last nuclear plants.

Title:

Content: Germany ’ s transport minister has called for the creation of an expert committee to examine whether the country ’ s nuclear power plants should be extended.
The move also sparked disagreements within the ruling coalition over nuclear power.
Since Russia ’ s invasion of Ukraine, Germany has tried to break away from its energy dependence and sparked discussions about the use of the country ’ s only three remaining nuclear power plants.
After the 311 earthquake in Japan, the Merkel government appealed for non-nuclear homes, which were scheduled to be completely decommissioned by the end of 2022.
Prime Minister Olaf Scholz of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) has tried to pressure the dispute between the ruling Green Party and the Liberal Democratic Party (FDP).
The Greens have been pressing for a withdrawal from nuclear power, but the transport minister of the Liberal Democratic Party (FDP) has called for an extension of the plant ’ s life until at least April.
Transport Minister Volker Wissing said electric vehicles are not environmentally friendly unless they use zero-carbon nuclear power.
“We need an expert answer on how to ensure that we achieve our climate protection goals while having a stable and affordable energy supply, ” the minister said.
Critics of Germany ’ s withdrawal from nuclear power say it could force Germany to rely more on coal than expected during its transition to renewable energy.
Coal is more carbon polluting than natural gas.
The Green Party is strongly opposed to the resumption of Germany's nuclear power program, arguing that extending the use of nuclear power would be costly and that more could be achieved by developing renewable energy.
# Nuclear Power # Germany # Minister of Transport # Extension # Nuclear Power Plant

While the Green Party has insisted on a full nuclear exit, others, such as the FDP’s transport minister, have advocated keeping the reactors online longer to ensure supply security.