Germany's decision to shut down its nuclear power plants has been criticized by nuclear energy advocates worldwide, but there is no significant push in Germany to reverse it.

The German government has deemed nuclear power as non-green and unsustainable.

Germany pledged to phase out nuclear power in the 2000s.

The 2011 Fukushima disaster prompted Germany to accelerate its nuclear phase-out.

Germany aims to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 by increasing renewable energy use and moving away from nuclear energy.

Removing nuclear power can cause major economic losses in countries unable to produce their own energy.

Denuclearization can increase earth's pollution due to greater fossil fuel dependence.

Nuclear power generates little carbon dioxide and is relatively inexpensive.

Nuclear power currently lacks a suitable alternative.

Abandoning nuclear power can hinder net zero emissions efforts by 2050 due to increased greenhouse gas emissions.

Removing nuclear power could hinder a country's ability to meet its net-zero targets, as it is a low-carbon source of power.

Nuclear power plants produce less carbon emissions than coal, but more than wind or solar energy.

Building nuclear power plants is a less practical solution for decarbonizing the global economy due to high costs and time-consuming processes.

Investing in nuclear technology may distract from other renewables like wind, hydro, and solar.

Nuclear power plants pose safety concerns and accident risks that can harm nearby communities and the environment.

The disposal of nuclear waste is a significant challenge due to the lack of a comprehensive solution for its harmful isotopes.

Removing nuclear power could increase greenhouse gas emissions and worsen climate change.

Nuclear energy is a low-carbon source of electricity that poses significant environmental and health risks.

Nuclear power is costly, while solar and wind energy are becoming more competitive as their costs decrease.

Nuclear power plants take decades to build, hindering their feasibility in addressing climate change.

The risk of nuclear accidents, like Fukushima and Chernobyl, cannot be ruled out.

Nuclear energy is not a viable solution to climate change due to radioactive waste and nuclear weaponization risks.

Renewable energy sources like solar and wind can meet future demands, contrary to 'nuclear propaganda' claims.

Modular reactors and nuclear fusion are potential alternatives to traditional nuclear power, still in early development.

Nuclear fusion is decades away from being practical and may not be a near-future solution to climate change.

The EU classifies nuclear energy as sustainable, which some see as 'greenwashing'.

Investing in nuclear power may divert funds from renewable energy.

Removing nuclear power from the grid could hinder the transition to sustainable sources, as it plays a pivotal role in the energy transition.

Removing nuclear power could negatively impact remote areas where small reactors provide power.

Nuclear power provides baseload low-carbon energy and on-demand load following that could be lost if removed.

The industrial sector, reliant on fossil fuels, could be negatively impacted by nuclear power removal, as nuclear provides clean, low-cost, high-temperature power.

High renewable penetration may require nuclear power to ensure system reliability.

Nuclear power costs should not be directly compared to wind and solar due to different use cases and needs.

Removing nuclear power could hinder climate change targets due to its low-carbon benefits and flexibility.

Nuclear power can utilise existing sites, which would be a lost opportunity if removed from the grid.

The Russian-Ukrainian war has accelerated Germany's energy crisis, highlighting the need for green energy to reduce prices.

Germany has finalized a nearly 100 billion euro energy subsidy plan.

In Germany, high energy prices are affecting SMEs, with a quarter reducing production and another quarter scaling back operations.

Reducing German purchase of Russian energy could be a significant lever against Russian aggression in the Russian-Ukrainian war.

Cutting off Russian gas would send Germany into recession.

A reduction in Russian energy purchases by Germany would impact Germans who rely on Russian gas for heating and power.

Reducing Russian energy purchases would likely have a far more significant impact on the Russian economy and war machine.

Russia's war machine relies on energy payments, which fund it.

Germany must reduce its purchase of Russian energy to help end the war.

Reversing the nuclear plant shutdown could reduce Germany's reliance on Russian energy.

64% of Germans support restarting nuclear power to address the energy crisis.

40% of the Green Party voters support restarting nuclear power.

Nuclear power could cut Germany's carbon emissions by 25-30 million tons annually.

The German Technical Supervision Association found the three nuclear power plants normal in a March inspection, and restart is possible with limited further testing.

Thierry Breton says Germany's three remaining nuclear plants should stay open for now.

Elon Musk supports keeping German nuclear plants running.

Preussen Electra says the Isar 2 NPP can run beyond year's end if the government wishes.

TÜV Süd reports the plant's continued operation poses no safety risk.

61% of Germans support extending nuclear power plant operations, an ARD poll found.

Sascha Müller-Kraenner, director of Deutsche Umwelthilfe, opposes extending nuclear power plant operations and may take legal action.

Germany has shut down its last three nuclear power plants as part of its plan to use only renewables by 2035.

German Environment Minister Stevie Lemke calls the nuclear renaissance a myth, citing shrinking atomic energy shares in global electricity production.

Experts say Germany's 5% nuclear electricity share can be easily replaced, eliminating the need to restart reactors.

German Economy Minister Robert Habeck ruled out extending the life of the country's last three nuclear plants, citing a potential gas savings of only up to 2 percent.

The coalition is divided on nuclear power.

Finance Minister Christian Lindner is open to temporarily extending the life of nuclear power plants.

Lindner prefers extending nuclear power to reusing coal-fired power.

German Economy Minister Robert Habeck may extend the life of a Bavarian nuclear plant if necessary for grid stability.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz will decide on extending nuclear power after reviewing stress test results due out by early next month.

Germany's top forecasters warned of an economic downturn in 2023 if Russian gas imports are stopped.

Germany's GDP will fall by 2.2 percent in 2023 if gas supplies are cut.

The cumulative decline for 2022 and 2023 will be around 220 billion euros, or 6.5% of annual wealth.

The GDP decline could reach 5% in Q2 2023, before a late-year rebound.

Berlin has reduced its Russian imports from over 55 percent to 40 percent and is seeking alternative suppliers.

Germany will not phase out Russian gas until mid-2024.

The war in Ukraine is negatively impacting the economy in terms of supply and demand.

The inflation rate is expected to reach 6.1% this year and perhaps even 7.3% if the gas supply is stopped.

In 2023, the inflation rate will be 5.0% if supplies stop and 2.8% if they continue.

Most Germans, 57%, oppose a total ban on Russian energy imports.

The war in Ukraine has disrupted Europe's energy, particularly Germany's supply.

Germany has developed a heavy dependence on Russian energy imports over three decades.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine has impacted Germany's energy supply.

The Russian-Ukrainian war is expected to cost Germany's economy around 4% of its GDP, or 160 billion euros, by year's end.

Germany's industry is expected to pay 40% more for energy in 2023 than in 2021 due to the war.

German companies are struggling with high energy prices, particularly gas, which is three to five times higher than in the US.

German electricity prices are four times higher than France's, which has ample nuclear power.

The Federation of German Chambers of Industry and Commerce expects a recession this year due to the war's impact on energy prices.

The war has caused irreparable human suffering and economic losses in Germany.

Many German companies have seen a strong increase in their energy costs.

Germany's reliance on Russian pipeline gas has made it vulnerable to high energy prices.

Russia's war on Ukraine prompted Germany to restart construction of two abandoned LNG terminals.

Germany relies heavily on Russian natural gas imports, making it vulnerable to disruptions.

The war in Ukraine has led to increased energy prices, causing concern in Germany and potentially impacting its economy.

Germany will seek liquefied natural gas from countries like the US and Qatar to diversify its energy supply.

Germany lacks terminals to receive liquefied natural gas and new ones will take three to four years to build.

Germany is reviving abandoned LNG terminal projects in the North Sea.

Germany plans to increase coal imports and may delay its coal phase-out.

Germany still relies on Russian oil and gas despite vowing to end imports.

The US fears Germany's dependence on Russian energy will compromise its relations with Washington and boost Moscow's influence.

Germany's energy ties with Russia may harm trans-Atlantic cooperation.

A prolonged Ukraine-Russia conflict could threaten the European continent and Germany's energy supply.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz warned that sanctions on the Kremlin should have minimal repercussions for European economies, particularly Germany's energy supply.

Germany's refusal to cut off energy ties with Russia has made it an outlier among NATO allies, potentially threatening its energy supply and security.

Some Germans are protesting the return of nuclear reactors, with recent demonstrations in several cities, including Berlin, Düsseldorf, and Frankfurt.

Germany is restarting work on two nuclear reactors set to be shut down this year, amid public and Green Party opposition.

The

Germany's decision to shut down its nuclear power plants has been criticized by nuclear energy advocates worldwide, but there is no significant push in Germany to reverse it.

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 German government has deemed nuclear power as non-green and unsustainable.

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

Germany pledged to phase out nuclear power in the 2000s.

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

The 2011 Fukushima disaster prompted Germany to accelerate its nuclear phase-out.

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

Germany aims to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 by increasing renewable energy use and moving away from nuclear energy.

Germany aims to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 by increasing renewable energy use and moving away from nuclear energy.

Germany aims to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 by increasing renewable energy use and moving away from nuclear energy.

Removing nuclear power can cause major economic losses in countries unable to produce their own energy.

Title:

Content: News of Hong Kong
Giving up nuclear energy is easy.
At the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference in Dubai, more than 20 countries advocated tripling nuclear power to current levels in order to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
Interestingly, some of these countries, such as the United Kingdom, France, Japan and South Korea, which previously supported reducing their reliance on nuclear energy, have now changed their positions.
Remembering the 2011 earthquake in Japan, which caused a serious accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, the people of all countries to reflect on the drawbacks of nuclear power development, and there was an unprecedented anti-nuclear wave everywhere.
Many environmental groups and idealists have called on governments to abandon nuclear weapons, so that the earth will have a living environment free of nuclear pollution.
However, the development of the past decade or so has proved that this demand is impossible. After all, nuclear energy accounts for a large proportion of national electricity, and the suspension of operation will cause major losses to the economies of countries that cannot produce their own energy.
Denuclearization also raises another problem, which is to increase the pollution of the earth.
As we all know, the main driving force of economic development is electricity, and power generation methods are firepower, hydropower and nuclear energy.
Fuels such as oil and coal emit large amounts of carbon dioxide, damaging the environment.
By contrast, nuclear power generates very little carbon dioxide and costs less.
Once countries get rid of nuclear weapons and become more dependent on oil or coal, it is even less environmentally friendly.
Science and reality show that because there is currently no optimal alternative to nuclear power, it is difficult to give up nuclear power.
As a responsible government, we can only continue to develop nuclear energy to meet the country ’ s growing energy needs.
Therefore, the mainstream practice of all countries in the world is to actively accept nuclear power, for example, Japan has abolished the life limit of nuclear power plants, and decided to maximize the use of nuclear power plants to more than 60 years.
The German government, which has insisted on denuclearization, earlier admitted that its energy policy was a failure.
Idealists are often lauded for their pursuit of truth, but some of the ideas they promote are also unrealistic.
In recent years, governments have stopped advocating a ban on the development of nuclear power, which just reveals the drawbacks of idealism.
Please download on.cc for iPhone / iPad / Android /
Everyone is a reporter.
Explosive method:
Explosive Hotline:
(852) 3600 3600
Faxed:
(852) 3600 8800
SMS:
(852) 6500 6500

Denuclearization can increase earth's pollution due to greater fossil fuel dependence.

Title:

Content: News of Hong Kong
Giving up nuclear energy is easy.
At the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference in Dubai, more than 20 countries advocated tripling nuclear power to current levels in order to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
Interestingly, some of these countries, such as the United Kingdom, France, Japan and South Korea, which previously supported reducing their reliance on nuclear energy, have now changed their positions.
Remembering the 2011 earthquake in Japan, which caused a serious accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, the people of all countries to reflect on the drawbacks of nuclear power development, and there was an unprecedented anti-nuclear wave everywhere.
Many environmental groups and idealists have called on governments to abandon nuclear weapons, so that the earth will have a living environment free of nuclear pollution.
However, the development of the past decade or so has proved that this demand is impossible. After all, nuclear energy accounts for a large proportion of national electricity, and the suspension of operation will cause major losses to the economies of countries that cannot produce their own energy.
Denuclearization also raises another problem, which is to increase the pollution of the earth.
As we all know, the main driving force of economic development is electricity, and power generation methods are firepower, hydropower and nuclear energy.
Fuels such as oil and coal emit large amounts of carbon dioxide, damaging the environment.
By contrast, nuclear power generates very little carbon dioxide and costs less.
Once countries get rid of nuclear weapons and become more dependent on oil or coal, it is even less environmentally friendly.
Science and reality show that because there is currently no optimal alternative to nuclear power, it is difficult to give up nuclear power.
As a responsible government, we can only continue to develop nuclear energy to meet the country ’ s growing energy needs.
Therefore, the mainstream practice of all countries in the world is to actively accept nuclear power, for example, Japan has abolished the life limit of nuclear power plants, and decided to maximize the use of nuclear power plants to more than 60 years.
The German government, which has insisted on denuclearization, earlier admitted that its energy policy was a failure.
Idealists are often lauded for their pursuit of truth, but some of the ideas they promote are also unrealistic.
In recent years, governments have stopped advocating a ban on the development of nuclear power, which just reveals the drawbacks of idealism.
Please download on.cc for iPhone / iPad / Android /
Everyone is a reporter.
Explosive method:
Explosive Hotline:
(852) 3600 3600
Faxed:
(852) 3600 8800
SMS:
(852) 6500 6500

Nuclear power generates little carbon dioxide and is relatively inexpensive.

Title:

Content: News of Hong Kong
Giving up nuclear energy is easy.
At the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference in Dubai, more than 20 countries advocated tripling nuclear power to current levels in order to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
Interestingly, some of these countries, such as the United Kingdom, France, Japan and South Korea, which previously supported reducing their reliance on nuclear energy, have now changed their positions.
Remembering the 2011 earthquake in Japan, which caused a serious accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, the people of all countries to reflect on the drawbacks of nuclear power development, and there was an unprecedented anti-nuclear wave everywhere.
Many environmental groups and idealists have called on governments to abandon nuclear weapons, so that the earth will have a living environment free of nuclear pollution.
However, the development of the past decade or so has proved that this demand is impossible. After all, nuclear energy accounts for a large proportion of national electricity, and the suspension of operation will cause major losses to the economies of countries that cannot produce their own energy.
Denuclearization also raises another problem, which is to increase the pollution of the earth.
As we all know, the main driving force of economic development is electricity, and power generation methods are firepower, hydropower and nuclear energy.
Fuels such as oil and coal emit large amounts of carbon dioxide, damaging the environment.
By contrast, nuclear power generates very little carbon dioxide and costs less.
Once countries get rid of nuclear weapons and become more dependent on oil or coal, it is even less environmentally friendly.
Science and reality show that because there is currently no optimal alternative to nuclear power, it is difficult to give up nuclear power.
As a responsible government, we can only continue to develop nuclear energy to meet the country ’ s growing energy needs.
Therefore, the mainstream practice of all countries in the world is to actively accept nuclear power, for example, Japan has abolished the life limit of nuclear power plants, and decided to maximize the use of nuclear power plants to more than 60 years.
The German government, which has insisted on denuclearization, earlier admitted that its energy policy was a failure.
Idealists are often lauded for their pursuit of truth, but some of the ideas they promote are also unrealistic.
In recent years, governments have stopped advocating a ban on the development of nuclear power, which just reveals the drawbacks of idealism.
Please download on.cc for iPhone / iPad / Android /
Everyone is a reporter.
Explosive method:
Explosive Hotline:
(852) 3600 3600
Faxed:
(852) 3600 8800
SMS:
(852) 6500 6500

Nuclear power currently lacks a suitable alternative.

Title:

Content: News of Hong Kong
Giving up nuclear energy is easy.
At the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference in Dubai, more than 20 countries advocated tripling nuclear power to current levels in order to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
Interestingly, some of these countries, such as the United Kingdom, France, Japan and South Korea, which previously supported reducing their reliance on nuclear energy, have now changed their positions.
Remembering the 2011 earthquake in Japan, which caused a serious accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, the people of all countries to reflect on the drawbacks of nuclear power development, and there was an unprecedented anti-nuclear wave everywhere.
Many environmental groups and idealists have called on governments to abandon nuclear weapons, so that the earth will have a living environment free of nuclear pollution.
However, the development of the past decade or so has proved that this demand is impossible. After all, nuclear energy accounts for a large proportion of national electricity, and the suspension of operation will cause major losses to the economies of countries that cannot produce their own energy.
Denuclearization also raises another problem, which is to increase the pollution of the earth.
As we all know, the main driving force of economic development is electricity, and power generation methods are firepower, hydropower and nuclear energy.
Fuels such as oil and coal emit large amounts of carbon dioxide, damaging the environment.
By contrast, nuclear power generates very little carbon dioxide and costs less.
Once countries get rid of nuclear weapons and become more dependent on oil or coal, it is even less environmentally friendly.
Science and reality show that because there is currently no optimal alternative to nuclear power, it is difficult to give up nuclear power.
As a responsible government, we can only continue to develop nuclear energy to meet the country ’ s growing energy needs.
Therefore, the mainstream practice of all countries in the world is to actively accept nuclear power, for example, Japan has abolished the life limit of nuclear power plants, and decided to maximize the use of nuclear power plants to more than 60 years.
The German government, which has insisted on denuclearization, earlier admitted that its energy policy was a failure.
Idealists are often lauded for their pursuit of truth, but some of the ideas they promote are also unrealistic.
In recent years, governments have stopped advocating a ban on the development of nuclear power, which just reveals the drawbacks of idealism.
Please download on.cc for iPhone / iPad / Android /
Everyone is a reporter.
Explosive method:
Explosive Hotline:
(852) 3600 3600
Faxed:
(852) 3600 8800
SMS:
(852) 6500 6500

Abandoning nuclear power can hinder net zero emissions efforts by 2050 due to increased greenhouse gas emissions.

Title:

Content: News of Hong Kong
Giving up nuclear energy is easy.
At the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference in Dubai, more than 20 countries advocated tripling nuclear power to current levels in order to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
Interestingly, some of these countries, such as the United Kingdom, France, Japan and South Korea, which previously supported reducing their reliance on nuclear energy, have now changed their positions.
Remembering the 2011 earthquake in Japan, which caused a serious accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, the people of all countries to reflect on the drawbacks of nuclear power development, and there was an unprecedented anti-nuclear wave everywhere.
Many environmental groups and idealists have called on governments to abandon nuclear weapons, so that the earth will have a living environment free of nuclear pollution.
However, the development of the past decade or so has proved that this demand is impossible. After all, nuclear energy accounts for a large proportion of national electricity, and the suspension of operation will cause major losses to the economies of countries that cannot produce their own energy.
Denuclearization also raises another problem, which is to increase the pollution of the earth.
As we all know, the main driving force of economic development is electricity, and power generation methods are firepower, hydropower and nuclear energy.
Fuels such as oil and coal emit large amounts of carbon dioxide, damaging the environment.
By contrast, nuclear power generates very little carbon dioxide and costs less.
Once countries get rid of nuclear weapons and become more dependent on oil or coal, it is even less environmentally friendly.
Science and reality show that because there is currently no optimal alternative to nuclear power, it is difficult to give up nuclear power.
As a responsible government, we can only continue to develop nuclear energy to meet the country ’ s growing energy needs.
Therefore, the mainstream practice of all countries in the world is to actively accept nuclear power, for example, Japan has abolished the life limit of nuclear power plants, and decided to maximize the use of nuclear power plants to more than 60 years.
The German government, which has insisted on denuclearization, earlier admitted that its energy policy was a failure.
Idealists are often lauded for their pursuit of truth, but some of the ideas they promote are also unrealistic.
In recent years, governments have stopped advocating a ban on the development of nuclear power, which just reveals the drawbacks of idealism.
Please download on.cc for iPhone / iPad / Android /
Everyone is a reporter.
Explosive method:
Explosive Hotline:
(852) 3600 3600
Faxed:
(852) 3600 8800
SMS:
(852) 6500 6500

Removing nuclear power could hinder a country's ability to meet its net-zero targets, as it is a low-carbon source of power.

Title:

Content: Top

Powering the future

X

Responding to a question in the Rajya Sabha on December 16, Jitendra Singh, Minister of State in the Department of Space and Department of Atomic Energy, noted that India currently had a nuclear power capacity of 6,780 MW and the government planned to expand it to 22,480 MW by 2031 as part of a plan for India to meet its net-zero targets. The minister also noted that the Centre had already given 'in-principal' approval for setting up six new nuclear plants in Jaitapur in Maharashtra with a capacity of 1,650 MW each. At a combined capacity of 9,900 MW, this would be the largest-ever expansion of India's nuclear power portfolio. But the Shiv Sena has taken up an aggressive opposition to the construction of the nuclear plants, supporting locals in saying that the project cannot be 'imposed' on the state of Maharashtra. Locals in the area are reportedly concerned that the nuclear plants will damage the environment and particularly affect the mango and cashew orchards in the region. BJP unit chief for Maharashtra, Chandrakant Patil, has denounced such objections from the Sena as being 'politically motivated' given that the project is expected to create 50,000 jobs in the state and bring in annual revenues of around Rs 21,000 crore. But leaving aside the debate over whether Shiv Sena's objections are political or not, they do cut to a very relevant discussion regarding nuclear energy in the age of climate change. Is the nuclear technology environment friendly or not? This is, after all, no longer a simple academic question. In the age of climate change and net-zero targets, nuclear energy is one of the many options on the menu for India and the world at large to move towards de-carbonisation. Proponents of nuclear technology say that nuclear power is a solution to climate change that came up even before the issue had taken centre stage in global politics. These same supporters maintain that nuclear technology has the ideal mix of high energy potential, low greenhouse emissions and a high degree of reliability when it comes to the ever-growing demand for power. But opponents of such a view decry the sweeping generalisations, biases and incomplete information that feed an almost-falsified narrative of nuclear energy that 'greenwashes' all its less than attractive bits. Though there is plenty of debate in this regard, it is generally accepted that nuclear energy produces a lot less carbon emissions as compared to coal in the process of energy production though the emissions are still worth noting if compared to the emissions created while using wind or solar energy. Critics also say that nuclear power plants are generally too expensive and too time-consuming to build as a practical solution for decarbonising the global economy on a tight timetable that the rapid climate change has handed to humanity. Indeed, the general view is that investment in nuclear technology distracts nations from making larger investments in wind, hydro, solar, etc., energy sources. Then, of course, there are the more significant public image concerns that nuclear power has in regards to safety issues. Nuclear accidents are rare and nuclear power plants on average are known to cause less worker accidents and deaths in the nearby community when compared to something like a coal power plant. But when something does go wrong with a nuclear power plant, it is not just nearby communities that suffer but rather nations as a whole. Consider the example of the Fukushima Daiichi accident in 2011 that was frightening enough to make the Japanese government back away from nuclear power for nearly a decade. Though nuclear power plants often bring jobs and subsidies to communities, it is understandable why they would, at least initially, be less than enthusiastic about having a nuclear power plant nearby. Then there is the issue of nuclear waste disposal, a real limiting factor for the technology given that humanity currently has no way of comprehensively dealing with nuclear waste that is produced as a result of energy production. At best, humanity can store these harmful isotopes underground, sometimes in deep geological disposal sites. But even these sites are not an absolute guarantee that the nuclear waste will not eventually leak out and cause contamination over its very long lifespan. But all these concerns do not mean that nuclear technology is currently at a dead-end. As the Indian government has stated, nuclear power is still an essential part of plans to attain net-zero emission targets. It is still a reliable technology that has allowed a country like France to register one of the lowest energy-production related emission rates in the EU without many of the large-scale disasters that have come to symbolise nuclear power to much of the world. More importantly, the technology has not reached its endpoint. One of the many expected future innovations in the technology includes the building of small modular reactors that produce less energy overall as compared to older generation nuclear reactors but also come with less safety risks and costs as compared to their full-sized cousins. All in all, it is clear that despite objections, criticisms and warnings, nuclear energy is still one of the more reliable methods of sustainably producing energy though there is a definite need to remain pragmatic regarding its dangers and limitations.

Next Story

Nuclear power plants produce less carbon emissions than coal, but more than wind or solar energy.

Building nuclear power plants is a less practical solution for decarbonizing the global economy due to high costs and time-consuming processes.

Investing in nuclear technology may distract from other renewables like wind, hydro, and solar.

Nuclear power plants pose safety concerns and accident risks that can harm nearby communities and the environment.

The disposal of nuclear waste is a significant challenge due to the lack of a comprehensive solution for its harmful isotopes.

Removing nuclear power could increase greenhouse gas emissions and worsen climate change.

Title:

Content: News of Hong Kong
Giving up nuclear energy is easy.
At the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference in Dubai, more than 20 countries advocated tripling nuclear power to current levels in order to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
Interestingly, some of these countries, such as the United Kingdom, France, Japan and South Korea, which previously supported reducing their reliance on nuclear energy, have now changed their positions.
Remembering the 2011 earthquake in Japan, which caused a serious accident at the Fukushima nuclear power plant, the people of all countries to reflect on the drawbacks of nuclear power development, and there was an unprecedented anti-nuclear wave everywhere.
Many environmental groups and idealists have called on governments to abandon nuclear weapons, so that the earth will have a living environment free of nuclear pollution.
However, the development of the past decade or so has proved that this demand is impossible. After all, nuclear energy accounts for a large proportion of national electricity, and the suspension of operation will cause major losses to the economies of countries that cannot produce their own energy.
Denuclearization also raises another problem, which is to increase the pollution of the earth.
As we all know, the main driving force of economic development is electricity, and power generation methods are firepower, hydropower and nuclear energy.
Fuels such as oil and coal emit large amounts of carbon dioxide, damaging the environment.
By contrast, nuclear power generates very little carbon dioxide and costs less.
Once countries get rid of nuclear weapons and become more dependent on oil or coal, it is even less environmentally friendly.
Science and reality show that because there is currently no optimal alternative to nuclear power, it is difficult to give up nuclear power.
As a responsible government, we can only continue to develop nuclear energy to meet the country ’ s growing energy needs.
Therefore, the mainstream practice of all countries in the world is to actively accept nuclear power, for example, Japan has abolished the life limit of nuclear power plants, and decided to maximize the use of nuclear power plants to more than 60 years.
The German government, which has insisted on denuclearization, earlier admitted that its energy policy was a failure.
Idealists are often lauded for their pursuit of truth, but some of the ideas they promote are also unrealistic.
In recent years, governments have stopped advocating a ban on the development of nuclear power, which just reveals the drawbacks of idealism.
Please download on.cc for iPhone / iPad / Android /
Everyone is a reporter.
Explosive method:
Explosive Hotline:
(852) 3600 3600
Faxed:
(852) 3600 8800
SMS:
(852) 6500 6500

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

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.

Title:

Content: Against the backdrop of a global energy landscape that is evolving at an unprecedented rate, and driven by the urgent need to transition to secure and sustainable sources of power, the role of nuclear power in the energy mix and on the pathway to net-zero has seen a resurgence.

This trend is evident in the volume of policy, regulatory and financial initiatives in nations with a traditionally favourable stance toward nuclear energy, such as the US and UK, with the former’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) creating new incentives for nuclear generation through production and investment tax credits, and the latter’s establishment of Great British Nuclear (GBN). Similarly, even conventionally cautious nations such as Japan and South Korea are re-evaluating their previous policies, and some even reversing their plans to phase out nuclear energy.

Therefore, nuclear could assume a pivotal role in the energy transition. This significance is amplified when considering the inherent benefits of small and advanced reactors, which can provide power in remote areas and locations where the grid infrastructure is less developed or robust. They are designed to deliver not only baseload low-carbon energy but on-demand load following.

They are also projected to achieve nth-of-a-kind (NOAK) learning efficiencies earlier in a programme and development lifecycle due to their modular construction and factory build approach, and shorter build times. Small and advanced reactors also have the potential to utilise existing nuclear sites, and to co-locate with other technologies.

Nuclear could play a crucial role in the industrial sector, currently heavily reliant on fossil fuels.

Relative to renewables and storage portfolios – and outside of the baseload vs. intermittent characteristic – the above advantages are particularly noticeable at high levels of renewable penetration. Increased levels of renewable penetration will lead to a decreasing contribution of intermittent resources to system reliability, as the timing of electricity shortfalls will shift to other periods of the day and year where intermittent can't contribute. Therefore, in markets with high renewable penetration, nuclear could both complement and compete in the energy portfolios.

Nuclear could also play a crucial role in the industrial sector, which is currently heavily reliant on fossil fuels due to their low-cost and ability to generate high temperatures—attributes that renewable sources lack.

Advanced nuclear has the potential to facilitate industrial decarbonisation by providing clean, low-cost, high-temperature power, which is crucial for various chemical processes. The primary challenge, however, lies in validating and achieving the commercialisation and deployment phase of this technology. Whilst the levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) of wind and solar is attractive today, the imperative consideration remains the use case – and need – for small and advanced reactors technologies in hard-to-abate industries. Industries heavily reliant on high heat levels cannot solely rely on renewables sources for their operations.

Therefore, comparing the costs of wind, solar and nuclear does not capture the nuances of each technology: it is not as binary as often purported. Nuclear needs to be contrasted against other low-carbon technologies at the start of their cost reductions pathways. Examining the economic advantages of nuclear energy also needs to include its flexibility characteristics and ancillary services.

From a customer perspective, capturing the full ‘energy system thinking’ is vital to determine if a first-of-a-kind mover risk, and the price sensitivity that comes with it, is palatable – and, therefore, which technology and energy generation source will best enable climate change targets to be met.

Meera Kotak is associate principal at Charles River Associates

Get the Recharge News App
Read high quality news and insight on the energy transition on-the-go

Title:

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

Title:

Content: U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm hinted at her support for nuclear power this week in an interview with Reuters, suggesting that California officials could reconsider closing the state’s last nuclear power plant — whose current licenses will expire by 2025. Granholm’s remarks come as nuclear power is gaining momentum in Europe, while also creating divisions among policymakers.

Mary Nichols is a senior visiting fellow at the Cornell Atkinson Center for Sustainability and a former chair of the California Air and Resources Board. Under her leadership, CARB enacted the first comprehensive cap on industrial greenhouse gas emissions by any major regulatory agency in the world. Nichols says California is on track to meet its energy needs through “an array of renewable technologies” and that reversing plans to close the state’s last nuclear plant would not be simple.

Nichols says:

“It was the owner, PG&E, that initiated the shutdown process. The plant was already uneconomical to operate and has not improved. All regulatory agency, unions and neighboring communities signed off on the plan. The process took years, and reversing it would not be a simple action.

“The plant sits in a location that blocks grid modernization and interferes with plans to develop clean, renewable resources including offshore wind. Like coal interests, the nuclear industry and its front groups will not stop searching for openings to expand its share of the energy portfolio. But California is on track to meet its current and future needs through an array of renewable technologies.”

---

Mark Lynas is a visiting fellow at the Cornell Alliance for Science and author of “Nuclear 2.0: Why a Green Future Needs Nuclear Power.” Lynas says we’re reaching a stage where anti-nuclear attitudes are in “full retreat” and that nuclear shutdowns will be both reassessed and reversed.

Lynas says:

"For too long, public opinion and scientific knowledge on nuclear power have been out of step. Scientists know that nuclear generates little waste, is one of the safest energy technologies ever invented, and can make a major contribution to decarbonizing societies in response to the climate emergency.

“I believe we are approaching a tipping point, where anti-nuclear attitudes are in full retreat, and where premature nuclear shutdowns will be reassessed and reversed in the U.S. and elsewhere.

“There is abundant evidence that where nuclear plants are retired early they are replaced by fossil fuels. Nuclear can also help balance the grid with the scaling up of intermittent renewables, making these technologies partners in the new zero-carbon energy economy."

Cornell University has dedicated television and audio studios available for media interviews supporting full HD, ISDN and web-based platforms.

- 30 –

Title:

Content: Germany ’ s last three nuclear power plants may be delayed
In light of the potential energy crisis in Europe in the winter, officials revealed that Germany intends to delay the decommissioning of the last three nuclear plants in the country, although it will only temporarily prolong the life of the plants, but it marks the first time that Germany has deviated from the energy policy introduced in the millennium and has so far been enshrined by almost all parties.
The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) quoted senior officials as saying that German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has not yet formally adopted the proposal to delay the discharge, and if it is decided to do so, there are technical and legal issues, including passing through parliament.
The cabinet is currently discussing some details, and while it will have to wait for the results of the energy demand assessment in the coming weeks to come to a conclusion, officials have revealed that everything is almost a foregone conclusion.
The last three nuclear plants in Germany were due to be decommissioned on December 31, and the government reportedly believes that a temporary delay would require two conditions: Germany is likely to suffer from a natural gas shortage and there are no safety concerns about keeping nuclear reactors in operation.
The shift in German policy underscores the shock of Russia ’ s invasion of Ukraine to European political circles, especially Germany, which has been closely tied to Russia ’ s economy and has long relied on Russian gas supplies.
After the Russian invasion of Ukraine, he began to increase military spending, send weapons to Ukraine, break years of pacifism, supply arms to conflict zones, the latest energy policy shift, and involve the almost sacred issue of “nuclear abolition ” in German politics.
The German economy ministry, which dominates energy policy, declined to comment on the report, saying only that it all depends on the outcome of an assessment of Germany ’ s energy needs.
The remaining three nuclear power plants account for about 6% of Germany's electricity generation, and if they continue to supply power, they will not have to use natural gas or coal-fired power to fill the gap, allowing some areas to continue to have natural gas.
In some parts of Germany, huge coal-fired power plants have resumed operations in response to a potential power outage from a Russian supply cut in June, disrupting Germany ’ s progress so far in reducing carbon and fighting air pollution.
The German government has drawn up two executive orders on how to reduce natural gas and energy consumption over the next two years.
Energy authorities estimate that Germany will need to reduce its use of natural gas by 20% in order to avoid a shortage of natural gas this winter and next.
It is unclear when the German authorities may extend the discharge period, with some officials offering a few months, but the ruling Liberal Democrats believe it should be extended to 2024.
Extended reading
Related Posts

Nuclear energy is a low-carbon source of electricity that poses significant environmental and health risks.

Nuclear power is costly, while solar and wind energy are becoming more competitive as their costs decrease.

Title:

Content: As It Happens

Greenpeace opposes nuclear energy. Young climate activists say that's 'old-fashioned'

Young climate activists in Europe are calling on Greenpeace to drop its stance against nuclear energy.

Scientists say the generational divide not surprising, as nuclear disasters are distant memories for some

Young climate activists in Europe are calling on Greenpeace to drop its "old-fashioned" stance against nuclear energy.

Activists from five EU countries have launched the Dear Greenpeace campaign, asking the well-established environmental organization to get on board with what they see as a necessary tool in the fight against climate change.

"It's a message of desperation from my generation to theirs," Ia Aanstoot, an 18-year-old Swedish climate activist, told As It Happens host Nil Köksal.

"We are really, really desperate to have them in the struggle against fossil fuels. And it feels like a betrayal for them to be going up against nuclear power."

Greenpeace and other critics of nuclear power, meanwhile, say it continues to be too dangerous, polluting, and cost-prohibitive to be a viable solution to the climate crisis.

EU 'greenwashing' lawsuit

The Dear Greenpeace campaign is financed by the Belgium-based environmental non-profit Replanet, which says it does not accept financing from political parties or industries.

At the heart of the debate is whether nuclear energy should be part of the European Union's classification system for sustainable finance — a guide for private investors looking to fund green projects.

Greenpeace and several other non-profits are suing the EU Commission over nuclear's inclusion in that system, calling it "greenwashing."

"They were born from the anti-nuclear movement," Aanstoot said of Greenpeace.

For several years, Aanstoot participated in climate activist Greta Thunberg's Friday school strikes. Now she has applied to the EU Court of Justice to become an "interested party" in Greenpeace's lawsuit, so she can make her case for nuclear development.

"The EU's decisions on what is green should be based on science and being carbon neutral, and it should not be technology-biased," she said.

Greenpeace says investment money would be better spent on safer and cheaper renewable energy sources like wind and solar.

"We have the greatest respect for folks who are worried about the climate crisis and want to throw everything we have at the problem, but building new nuclear plants just isn't a viable solution. The top priority is to cut carbon emissions as fast and, ideally, as cheaply as possible, and nuclear fails on both scores," Ariadna Rodrigo, Greenpeace's EU sustainable finance campaigner, told CBC in an email.

She pointed to nuclear plant projects in the U.K. and France that are "behind schedule and billions over budget."

"The good news is that we don't need new nuclear. Solar and wind technologies are a much cheaper and quicker way to cut emissions, and with modern storage tech, 100-per-cent renewable systems are perfectly possible," Rodrigo said.

"We don't have the luxury of endless time and resources, so we should focus them on the solutions with the best chance of delivering."

Risk versus reward

Daniel Kammen — a professor of energy at the University of California, Berkeley, who studies nuclear engineering — says he's not surprised by this seeming generational divide.

"Youth who are convinced — accurately so, in my opinion — that the older generation do not appreciate the climate crisis … are saying if we're going to fight for the climate, we have to use all tools at our disposal," he told CBC.

He says the biggest nuclear disasters throughout history — Fukushima, Chernobyl, Three Mile Island — are, at best, distant memories for younger activists.

But despite what nuclear proponents say, Kammen says risk of another such disaster "is real and it's big."

"It's reasonable to be optimistic, but the deeper you look, the more sceptical one should be of every nuclear option."

M.V. Ramana — a University of British Columbia professor of disarmament, global and human security — says "the probability of these accidents is small — but it is not zero."

"Which means that as you build more and more reactors, there's a higher likelihood of more such accidents happening," he told CBC.

Waste and weapons

Ramana says nuclear energy is neither a desirable nor a viable solution to climate change.

"All nuclear plants necessarily produce radioactive waste. That's just part and parcel of the process of producing energy from a nuclear reactor, and there is nothing you can do to escape that," he said.

"We have, so far, not found any demonstrated, proven way of dealing with [this] waste safely anywhere in the world."

What's more, he says it's impossible to fully divorce nuclear energy from the possibility of nuclear arms development. The more countries that launch nuclear programs, he says, the greater the risk of nuclear weaponization.

But for Aanstoot, the cost-benefit analysis is clear.

"The climate crisis is such a greater risk to take that I feel like I'm a lot happier ladening my generation and the coming generations with the burden of managing a well-regulated, well-maintained and well-researched nuclear waste than I am with us having to deal with runaway greenhouse effects and massive climate disasters," she said.

Cost and time

But perhaps the biggest impediment to nuclear power, Ramana and Kammen say, is cost and time.

There's a reason nuclear plants have a tendency to run over time and over budget. Nuclear power is a complex process that requires massive infrastructure, specific expertise, and much-needed safeguards.

And as nuclear power gets more expensive, Kammen says wind and solar have only gotten cheaper and better.

"Every dollar you spend on nuclear power or building a nuclear reactor is a dollar that you're not spending on some other more feasible climate solutions," he said.

Aanstoot and her colleagues argue that solar and wind power alone can't generate enough power to meet the demands of an electrified future.

"We're going to need electric transport, an electrified industry and everything. We need a lot of stable electricity, and wind and solar will not cut it," she said. "And that means nuclear."

Kammen says the idea that renewable sources like solar and wind can't meet demand is "nuclear propaganda."

"Whether you do big grids with renewables, or small grids, it's reliable, it's scalable, it's cheaper," he said.

Looking to the future

There are two types of nuclear power that do have potential, says Kammen.

One is the use of modular nuclear reactors. Smaller an cheaper than traditional reactors, they're seen as a stopgap measure during a broader transition to wind and solar power. There are several in the works in Canada, but experts remain divided about their benefits

The other, Kammen says, is nuclear fusion.

Currently nuclear reactors generate energy by separating heavy atoms in a process called fission. Fusion, by contrast, forces atoms together. Unlike fission, it doesn't create radioactive byproducts, has no risk of nuclear meltdown and cannot be used to make nuclear weapons.

But it's also a process scientists are just beginning to unravel, and experts say we're decades away — at best — from putting it to practical use.

"There is absolutely no chance that anybody alive today is going to see commercial nuclear fusion energy," Ramana said.

"So it's not going to be, I think, something which we should even think about in terms of dealing with climate change. The climate problem is here and now — not in 50 years or 60 years."

Interview with Ia Aanstoot produced by Kate Swoger

Add some “good” to your morning and evening.

A variety of newsletters you'll love, delivered straight to you.

Sign up now

now

Nuclear power plants take decades to build, hindering their feasibility in addressing climate change.

The risk of nuclear accidents, like Fukushima and Chernobyl, cannot be ruled out.

Nuclear energy is not a viable solution to climate change due to radioactive waste and nuclear weaponization risks.

Nuclear energy is not a viable solution to climate change due to radioactive waste and nuclear weaponization risks.

Nuclear energy is not a viable solution to climate change due to radioactive waste and nuclear weaponization risks.

Renewable energy sources like solar and wind can meet future demands, contrary to 'nuclear propaganda' claims.

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.

Title:

Content: U.S. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm hinted at her support for nuclear power this week in an interview with Reuters, suggesting that California officials could reconsider closing the state’s last nuclear power plant — whose current licenses will expire by 2025. Granholm’s remarks come as nuclear power is gaining momentum in Europe, while also creating divisions among policymakers.

Mary Nichols is a senior visiting fellow at the Cornell Atkinson Center for Sustainability and a former chair of the California Air and Resources Board. Under her leadership, CARB enacted the first comprehensive cap on industrial greenhouse gas emissions by any major regulatory agency in the world. Nichols says California is on track to meet its energy needs through “an array of renewable technologies” and that reversing plans to close the state’s last nuclear plant would not be simple.

Nichols says:

“It was the owner, PG&E, that initiated the shutdown process. The plant was already uneconomical to operate and has not improved. All regulatory agency, unions and neighboring communities signed off on the plan. The process took years, and reversing it would not be a simple action.

“The plant sits in a location that blocks grid modernization and interferes with plans to develop clean, renewable resources including offshore wind. Like coal interests, the nuclear industry and its front groups will not stop searching for openings to expand its share of the energy portfolio. But California is on track to meet its current and future needs through an array of renewable technologies.”

---

Mark Lynas is a visiting fellow at the Cornell Alliance for Science and author of “Nuclear 2.0: Why a Green Future Needs Nuclear Power.” Lynas says we’re reaching a stage where anti-nuclear attitudes are in “full retreat” and that nuclear shutdowns will be both reassessed and reversed.

Lynas says:

"For too long, public opinion and scientific knowledge on nuclear power have been out of step. Scientists know that nuclear generates little waste, is one of the safest energy technologies ever invented, and can make a major contribution to decarbonizing societies in response to the climate emergency.

“I believe we are approaching a tipping point, where anti-nuclear attitudes are in full retreat, and where premature nuclear shutdowns will be reassessed and reversed in the U.S. and elsewhere.

“There is abundant evidence that where nuclear plants are retired early they are replaced by fossil fuels. Nuclear can also help balance the grid with the scaling up of intermittent renewables, making these technologies partners in the new zero-carbon energy economy."

Cornell University has dedicated television and audio studios available for media interviews supporting full HD, ISDN and web-based platforms.

- 30 –

Modular reactors and nuclear fusion are potential alternatives to traditional nuclear power, still in early development.

Nuclear fusion is decades away from being practical and may not be a near-future solution to climate change.

The EU classifies nuclear energy as sustainable, which some see as 'greenwashing'.

Investing in nuclear power may divert funds from renewable energy.

Removing nuclear power from the grid could hinder the transition to sustainable sources, as it plays a pivotal role in the energy transition.

Removing nuclear power could negatively impact remote areas where small reactors provide power.

Nuclear power provides baseload low-carbon energy and on-demand load following that could be lost if removed.

The industrial sector, reliant on fossil fuels, could be negatively impacted by nuclear power removal, as nuclear provides clean, low-cost, high-temperature power.

High renewable penetration may require nuclear power to ensure system reliability.

Nuclear power costs should not be directly compared to wind and solar due to different use cases and needs.

Removing nuclear power could hinder climate change targets due to its low-carbon benefits and flexibility.

Nuclear power can utilise existing sites, which would be a lost opportunity if removed from the grid.

The Russian-Ukrainian war has accelerated Germany's energy crisis, highlighting the need for green energy to reduce prices.

Title:

Content: Alert
The secret identity of Hu Ge 's wife is revealed, "spend 3.5 million to learn makeup to attract him"
Yeh Wu-yang-kuang has a new girlfriend! A friend reveals that she is popular 2 key "Message will be back immediately"
Lin Yihua finally took office as vice mayor, and Lan Ying was willing to be scolded, and Chu Lilun had three big plans.
How did the German model achieve an unbearable energy transition war across the sea?
【 By Fu Guanqi 】
Environmental awareness, green energy production has always been regarded as the world's superior Germany, but because of a Ukrainian-Russian war, let the bright achievements behind the unfinished business, exposed to the world.
Is this general review of energy security, ignited by war, a crisis or a turning point for Germany, which rose from the ashes of World War II? Can Germany break through the status quo and turn into a new model for a sustainable economy in the future?
Or is it a death on the road to transformation? How can Taiwan find its future direction from this “energy transition war ”?
Just after Christmas, for many Dodd families, the most wanted Christmas gift may be a heat pump to make the whole family better through the winter.
Unlike the tens of millions of domestic heating systems in Germany that still use natural gas or oil as fuel, heat pumps are powered by electricity, which can be seen as "reverse air conditioning", which has a higher thermal conversion efficiency and symbolizes energy access at a lower price.
The energy crisis caused by the Russo-Ukrainian War has become a watershed in the price of energy in Germany.
The past dependence on Russia to import a large amount of cheap energy can not be returned, and the international carbon pricing mechanism is increasingly complete, which has led Germany to realize that only green energy is the way to reduce energy prices again.
The "Vision" team traveled to Germany, in-depth interviews and observed that the consensus that permeates German society today is: "There is not much time for the energy transition, and we must accelerate progress."
German Green Party MP Till Steffen, who visited Taiwan in 2022, told Visionary that "this' energy crisis' has accelerated the 'energy transition' and become a priority for the government."
German Economy Accelerates Greening, Renewable Energy Becomes National Security Foundation
This is not just a matter of paper. At the end of 2022, Germany inaugurated the country ’ s first liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal.
Germany decided last spring to build it, and it could be completed in a few months. “This is super fast for Germany, ” Steffen said.“ We need to scale up renewable energy at the same rate. ”
If you make decisions at the slow pace of your past habits, you won ’ t be able to achieve the goals you set. ”
In the past, far less ambitious than the Green Party ’ s liberal finance minister, Christian Lindner, has also designated renewable energy as “free energy ”, emphasizing its function to enhance Germany ’ s energy security and economic independence.
In this context, the two pillars of the energy transition, "switching to renewable energy" and "improving energy efficiency", have also become the top priorities of enterprises in the country.
Even the German machine tool manufacturer MAG, a pioneer of Industry 4.0, has re-examined energy conservation and is preparing to install solar panels on its plant.
“Many investment plans are being reevaluated because of higher energy prices, ” explains Sebastian Schoning, MAG ’ s head of Europe & Americas.“ Many investments that were previously unprofitable are now justified. ”
Solar panels that can be used for their own use and can be sold for electricity have been greatly shortened, and with tax incentives, large and small businesses and families have been selling out; installation technicians are so hot that waiting in line has become a new normal in the last few months.
Yen Chien-ho, general manager of the German branch of FSP, which has been operating solar energy storage business for more than six years from Taiwan, revealed that the green energy product line is already the main revenue of the company, and it is estimated that by 2023, solar related products can grow by 50%.
Quanhan also saw the business opportunities of green energy vehicles in Europe and decided to set up a new R & D center in Germany to attack customized charging devices.
Another Taiwanese company that has been working in Germany for ten years, Servo Press Co., Ltd. is also favored by European customers due to the fact that the product consumes about 50% less power than traditional presses, and is expected to double its business performance in 2023.
Germany has been driving the energy transition for decades. The driving force of this energy crisis is mainly reflected in the change of mentality and the re-calculation of business interests.
First, in terms of mentality, Germany used to import about 60% of its energy, and is more heavily dependent on cheap fossil fuels from Russia.
However, when energy is no longer so readily available, it has also greatly changed the German society's view of energy: in the past, everyone saw renewable energy as a threat to the stability of electricity supply, and now it is an important basis for protecting national security.
Second, in the eyes of enterprises, green energy has become the only energy source that can maintain long-term competitiveness.
"We all know that there is no future for fossil fuels," said Markus Rosenthal, director of government relations at the German Association for Energy Storage Systems. He cited the withdrawal of Allianz, Germany 's largest insurance company, and the active investment of major banks in decarbonization technology as examples. The effect of greening the German economy is greater than anyone else. "
Many may have heard of Germany ’ s Energiewende vision after the Fukushima disaster.
But such a concept has taken root in Germany ’ s anti-nuclear movement since the 1970s.
Since then, the Green Party movement has developed with the greatest political influence in the world.
GREEN ENERGY GREEN ENERGY CHALLENGE 1: Lack of work, insufficient capacity of Northern Power South
The Renewable Energy Act (EEG), which came into force in 2000, made Germany the first major economy to promote renewable energy.
Over the next 20 years, the proportion of renewable energy supply has grown significantly from 6% to 46%, and this remarkable achievement has become an international model case for promoting energy transformation.
However, the model of the period of peace seems to be unable to withstand the test of war, and Germany still fell into the dilemma of energy crisis in the Russo-Ukrainian War.
Russia ’ s invasion of Ukraine and the weaponization of energy are certainly uncontrollable factors.
But the German society's caution against nuclear energy has also made Germany more dependent on relatively clean natural gas during the period of phasing out coal.
“We are over-reliant on fossil fuels and the development of renewable energy over the past few years has been too slow, ” said Malte Kuper, energy and climate policy researcher at the German Institute for Economic Research (IW).“ We must accelerate the correction of the structural errors of energy policy over the past decade. ”
Wilhelm Kiewitt, Director of Energy Economics at 50Hertz, a German power grid company, said: “We are vigorously promoting the construction of renewable energy, but we have not updated the grid infrastructure and have not ensured that the design of the electricity market is compatible.
As a result, the energy transition is not doing well. ”
Wind power located on the northern coast of Germany has so far been difficult to reach the industrial heartland of the south because the government has spent too much time coordinating with the residents of the south to accept high-voltage cables cutting through their beautiful landscapes.
The lack of capacity of Northern Power South has become a key missing piece in the German energy puzzle.
In addition, the political lobbying power of fossil fuel companies and strict regulations on onshore wind power have also slowed down the pace of transformation in Germany.
A few months ago, there was a demolition of nearby windmills to expand coal mines in North Wales. Although the efficiency of these windmills was low and they were expected to be rebuilt and upgraded, environmentalists criticized this as a retrograde policy in the midst of the energy crisis.
But the lack of urgency may be the key factor in Germany ’ s gradual deviation from its goal.
According to the German government ’ s 2021 forecast, all sectors, from energy, industry and agriculture, will not be able to meet the 2030 climate goals on the basis of current carbon reduction actions.
In terms of new technology, even if Germany began hydrogen energy research more than 30 years ago, it has not been able to enter the expansion.
Thomas Hilig, founder of THEnergy in Germany and a hydrogen energy consultant, pointed out that “we have studied hydrogen energy thoroughly and want to know everything. ”
But it may be possible to start expanding sooner.
Indeed, now is the time to launch the app. ”
The impact of high energy prices and increasingly extreme weather have become a reality in Germany, forcing the country, accustomed to sound and prudent action, to admit its mistakes and shortcomings and accelerate the progress of the energy transition.
The question is, is it in time?
Opening a recent German newspaper will find that a crisis is not necessarily a turning point.
Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), which account for 99% of the total number of German enterprises, are struggling, and many companies may not be able to survive.
A survey of companies released by the German Chamber of Commerce and Industry (DIHK) in the summer of 2022 shows that due to high energy prices, 1 / 4 of enterprises have completed the deployment of production reduction, 1 / 4 have reduced the scale of operations, and the remaining half have not yet begun to act, and are still thinking about the corresponding steps.
At present, the German government has finalized a nearly 100 billion euro energy bill subsidy plan, but Asha Maria Sharma, deputy director of digital services at the Foreign Trade and Investment Agency, believes that financial subsidies are only part of the solution, companies must think about how to use AI, data analysis and other technologies to save energy, in order to remain competitive in the future when energy prices are higher.
However, the resources and financial power of SMEs are not as good as those of multinational enterprises, and it is not easy to face inflation, interest rate hikes, the impact on the dollar exchange rate and energy prices, and to devote more efforts to long-term investment layout.
For example, when the Covid-19 pandemic spread, Alexander Krug, the public relations manager in charge of the Berlin Digital Center for SMEs, observed that about a third of SMEs were suspending or even cancelling strategic digital investments that would bear fruit in the medium to long term.
Moreover, in the global semiconductor shortage, many small and medium-sized enterprises are competing for similar chips with the government-supported renewable energy industry, as well as Germany ’ s powerful automotive industry.
In terms of money and resources, it is difficult to win.
Cooper said that in the long term, the energy crisis can be an accelerator of the energy transition.
But for an industrial powerhouse like Germany, which has a high proportion of energy-intensive industries, there is also a risk that “industry may decline before the green energy transition is complete. ”
Many homes waiting for solar panel technicians to install their doors also reveal another risk: lack of work.
“If you ask a business, what ’ s the biggest question about operations? Almost every time the answer is, ‘ We need people. ’ ”
Especially in the areas of green energy and digital technology, which are crucial to driving transformation, there is a particular lack of technical talent.
Many countries in Europe have a shortage of jobs.
However, in the manufacturing sector, more than 40% of enterprises in Germany are understaffed.
In comparison, France is less than 25%, and Italy and Spain are less than 10%.
Even the director of the German public broadcaster said recently: "We have to recruit people from all over the world... even the German level of the candidates is not so important."
As long as I work hard, I don ’ t worry too much that they can only speak a few words of German. ”
GREEN ENERGY GREEN ENERGY CHALLENGE 2: Higher energy costs, the United States proposed a bill to reduce inflation and siphon off international investment
The evolution of the international situation has also made the adverse situation worse.
The European war is still raging, the epidemic is still hazy, and the tensions between the United States and China have caused Germany, formerly the beneficiary of free trade and international supply chains, to reverse the situation and increase the pressure.
In particular, in August 2022, the United States passed the $369 billion Inflation Reduction Act, proposing a simpler and more attractive subsidy specification than the European Union, which is likely to siphon off more international investment at a time when Germany urgently needs to accelerate the expansion of renewable energy.
Some scholars wonder whether Germany will be able to complete the energy transition that it failed to achieve during a period of relative stability in the face of many challenges.
Only recently did Germany significantly expand public spending to help society weather the epidemic. To date, it has allocated more than 260 billion euros in response to the energy crisis.
This is almost 7% of national GDP, well above the EU average of 83 billion euros.
Meanwhile, Germany is still trying to boost its defense budget to 2% of GDP.
Even if the money is relatively abundant, it is also pressure.
Reinhard Biedermann, a professor in the Department of Global Political Economy at Tamkang University, pointed out that to develop enough renewable energy to replace traditional energy sources requires a lot of investment, manpower and even land, which Germany cannot do at the same time.
“The energy crisis is really an opportunity to expand renewable energy.
But turning the crisis into a turning point is not so simple.
Germany depends not only on imports of fossil fuels, but also on imports of renewable energy.
After the decline of the German solar industry, about 95% of the domestic solar cells are manufactured in China.
Nordex shut down Germany ’ s last wind turbine turnstile plant in June 2022, taking into account costs, causing observers to worry that the wind energy industry may be heading toward a fate similar to that of the solar industry.
Steffen said that due to competition from China, the German solar industry has lost a lot of intellectual and political power, and now is the time to reinvigorate the domestic solar value chain.
“We still have capacity in wind energy, but we can ’ t find a market in our country because Chinese products are cheaper, ” Steffen said.
In some ways, the energy crisis is just beginning.
As the Visionary team rode a high-speed rail at a speed of nearly 300 kilometers across the edge of Germany ’ s beloved forest, they were greeted by rotating fans, solar panels laid on the roof of the building, and high-voltage power towers that transmit electricity over a long distance.
This has gradually become a familiar daily scene in German society.
At this point, it may be seen as an important milestone in the final completion of Germany ’ s energy transition, but it may also be the starting point for the decline of German industry.
Looking back at the challenges of the pandemic, companies in Dodd all agree that agility, flexibility and flexibility are essential skills to survive in the current changing environment.
In particular, German industry contributes more than a quarter of the country ’ s GDP, which is higher than developed countries such as France, the United Kingdom and the United States.
But strengthening the high-priced “Made in Germany ” brand with performance, quality and stability is threatened by higher energy costs.
Steffen acknowledged that many Dodd companies use cheap Russian energy to produce and then sell their products at high prices to the U.S. and mid-market.
This is similar to the common pattern in Taiwan.
Taiwan 's green energy students > risk assessment first, transformation needs to think about the overall order
Sucheta Govil, chief commercial officer of Covestro, observed that energy is already a global issue and resource constraints are becoming the foreseeable future. “Even if you are in Asia, energy prices are still cheap, but price increases are reflected in the supply chain. ”
This advantage is diluted by rising raw material costs, even if Germany considers itself to be of excellent mechanical engineering quality. ”
Even if Germany has only recently begun to cope with the energy crisis, the effectiveness of the policy measures will have to wait for time to prove, and there are still lessons for Taiwan.
First, understand your energy security and independence and conduct a risk assessment.
Leonard believes that encouraging energy conservation by raising energy prices and using this income to invest more in renewable energy is worth considering.
“Explaining to people the higher energy costs they pay will help develop renewable energy and improve energy security. ”
Second, think about the sequence of measures for the energy transition as a whole, and put limited resources in the right place at the right time.
Hans-Joachim Ziesing, a former energy transition consultant for Germany ’ s Future Energy Plan, shared that one of Germany ’ s mistakes was to set a good goal and vision before developing policies to be achieved.
A better approach might be to take a practical approach, clarify the quantitative benefits that each policy can bring, and determine that cross-party consensus can be reached to move forward together.
It is also important to continuously monitor the performance of data and to be accountable to all departments.
Hiliger observed that Germany ’ s national hydrogen energy strategy in 2020 shows that officials have learned from the siting of renewable energy and energy transportation.
“Many projects take production and consumption into account as a whole, for example, by making good use of existing construction, refurbishing natural gas pipelines to become hydrogen pipelines, rather than placing electrolytic tanks next to wind power plants. ”
Preparing businesses and citizens to move away from fossil fuels
Finally, it is the continuation of the momentum of social change.
In the past, Germany saw natural gas as a “bridging energy ” to connect fossil fuels with renewable energy; now, losing its main source of natural gas imports, it has had to restart coal plants and lease liquid-gas receiving stations.
After doing so, it may be harder to get rid of them in the future.
Ideally, when the hydrogen energy market matures, Germany can renovate this batch of liquid natural gas receiving stations into hydrogen energy receiving stations.
But the two are different energy sources after all, and the renovation will be another expense.
Whether it can be developed according to the plan is still uncertain.
After the government finalizes the energy subsidy policy, from the beginning of 2023 to April 2024, 80% of the bill will be protected by the price cap, and users will only pay 20% of the current price.
This will change people ’ s interest.
How to make good use of the incentive mechanism to encourage society to continue to promote energy conservation and transformation at the household, business and infrastructure levels is also a big test.
Although Taiwan, which has a higher industrial share than Germany, has yet to personally feel the waves of the European energy crisis, it will be crucial to be as prepared and adapted as possible to the future of higher fossil fuel prices before the price protection umbrella for long-term contracts ends.
Read more articles from Visionary Magazine:
Green energy forward 1 〉 towards the "hydrogen republic" Germany still has to pass three points
CES Taiwan Factory Attack 〉 Honghai, Hongda Power Login, Meta Universe Welcomes God 's Teammates
Thunder Tiger shares rise 1.9 times a year! Dong Za reveals the 8-year transformation plan from toys to drones
Extended reading
2023 Taipei International Book Fair / German author Katrina shares with her children that "the one who is not afraid to lose is the winner"
Snooker / Lin Yun-ju confirmed to join the official website of the Japanese T League: Assassins from Taiwan
Q: You can also comment on the Chinese government?
Dictatorship is well known: Could Germany have prevented Hitler from coming to power?
Related News
Green energy forward 1 〉 towards the "hydrogen republic" Germany still has to pass three points
For a long time, hydrogen energy, which can achieve zero carbon emissions, has been called the “fuel of the future. ” With the increasing global climate change and the rising price of fossil fuels, hydrogen has become an urgent national agenda.
Is the future really coming?
Can Cryptocurrencies Become International Clearing Currencies After Gold and US Dollars?
Is Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies likely to become the currency of international settlement? After the many crashes in the currency circle in 2022, and the currency price has dropped sharply, many people will immediately shake their hands and say, absolutely not!
Perhaps you will be more aware of the significance of international clearing currencies, digital innovation, and cryptocurrencies in the new era.
CES Taiwan factory attack 〉 Honghai, Hongda Power Login to the Yuan universe to welcome God 's teammates
Taiwan 's mature and sophisticated electronic supply chain is not absent in the formation of the internal meta-universe. How can the two major companies advance the future of the car and the meta-universe of Honghai Group MIH?
Thunder Tiger shares rise 1.9 times a year! Dong Za reveals the 8-year transformation plan from toys to drones
Thunder Tiger Technology, which started out as a remote control model, actually jumped to become a popular military stock in recent days, and the stock price in 2022 increased by 1.9 times a year! Behind this, there is the transformation plan of Chairman Chen Guanru in the past 8 years.
Thunder Tiger accepted the "vision" interview, how on earth did they make toy models, gorgeous into the military defense industry?
Small children, a year of soldiers double hit the enterprise shortage worse
With the severe shortage of children in Taiwan, and the extension of military service, it can be predicted that the workforce will be greatly reduced in the future, and various industries will face the impact of job shortages.
How did the German model achieve an unbearable energy transition war across the sea?
Environmental awareness, green energy production has always been regarded as the world's superior Germany, but because of a Ukrainian-Russian war, let the bright achievements behind the unfinished business, exposed to the world.
Is this general review of energy security, ignited by war, a crisis or a turning point for Germany, which rose from the ashes of World War II? Can Germany break through the status quo and turn into a new model for a sustainable economy in the future?
Or is it a death on the road to transformation? How can Taiwan find its future direction from this “energy transition war ”?
Product recommendation
udn Forum

Germany has finalized a nearly 100 billion euro energy subsidy plan.

In Germany, high energy prices are affecting SMEs, with a quarter reducing production and another quarter scaling back operations.

Reducing German purchase of Russian energy could be a significant lever against Russian aggression in the Russian-Ukrainian war.

Title:

Content: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was an intolerable horror from the start. It has escalated into a genocide in what amounts to a terror campaign to subdue a people.

President Joe Biden was correct to call Russian atrocities a genocide, and even if the declaration is not yet official policy, it raises the moral urgency for all free governments to engage in meaningful and even painful steps to defeat a nihilistic and murderous dictator.

The U.S. is again leading the world in confronting a European crisis that threatens to become a global war. U.S. security aid to Ukraine during the Biden administration is now greater than $2 billion. Total European funds to the Ukrainian military forces now total about $1.6 billion.

It’s important that our European allies deepen their commitment to providing direct military aid. But the reality is that Europe’s greatest lever against Russian aggression has yet to be pulled, and that is dramatically reducing the German purchase of Russian energy.

There is no question that this would amount to a great sacrifice for the German people. Cutting off all Russian gas supply would send the German economy into recession. There would also be an impact on the way of life for Germans who rely on Russian gas to heat their homes and power their places of work.

But the corresponding effect on the Russian economy and the Russian war machine would likely be far more impactful.

Alina Polyakova, chief executive of the Center for European Policy Analysis, told us during a recent visit to Dallas that a German decision to stop purchasing Russian energy would alter the course of history.

“It would end the war,” she said. “They would just run out of money.”

The Russian war machine relies on direct payments for energy. Cut off the payments, and you cut off the money.

It’s simple in theory and excruciating in practice because of its real and immediate impact on people’s lives and nations’ economies.

Nevertheless, Germany has a moral imperative to take clear, positive steps toward sharply reducing its purchase of Russian energy, such as reversing a decision to shut off nuclear plants by year’s end. We are talking about ending a genocide, and, as Germany has recognized in its own laws and culture, the nation has an enhanced responsibility in this regard.

Ukrainians have fought bravely and have shown the world that they can defend their nation. But they cannot hold on forever.

Free nations everywhere will have to make sacrifices. We urge Europe to act now to support Ukraine, to help end the war and to benefit all of humanity.

— Tribune News Service

Trending Food Videos

Cutting off Russian gas would send Germany into recession.

Title:

Content: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was an intolerable horror from the start. It has escalated into a genocide in what amounts to a terror campaign to subdue a people.

President Joe Biden was correct to call Russian atrocities a genocide, and even if the declaration is not yet official policy, it raises the moral urgency for all free governments to engage in meaningful and even painful steps to defeat a nihilistic and murderous dictator.

The U.S. is again leading the world in confronting a European crisis that threatens to become a global war. U.S. security aid to Ukraine during the Biden administration is now greater than $2 billion. Total European funds to the Ukrainian military forces now total about $1.6 billion.

It’s important that our European allies deepen their commitment to providing direct military aid. But the reality is that Europe’s greatest lever against Russian aggression has yet to be pulled, and that is dramatically reducing the German purchase of Russian energy.

There is no question that this would amount to a great sacrifice for the German people. Cutting off all Russian gas supply would send the German economy into recession. There would also be an impact on the way of life for Germans who rely on Russian gas to heat their homes and power their places of work.

But the corresponding effect on the Russian economy and the Russian war machine would likely be far more impactful.

Alina Polyakova, chief executive of the Center for European Policy Analysis, told us during a recent visit to Dallas that a German decision to stop purchasing Russian energy would alter the course of history.

“It would end the war,” she said. “They would just run out of money.”

The Russian war machine relies on direct payments for energy. Cut off the payments, and you cut off the money.

It’s simple in theory and excruciating in practice because of its real and immediate impact on people’s lives and nations’ economies.

Nevertheless, Germany has a moral imperative to take clear, positive steps toward sharply reducing its purchase of Russian energy, such as reversing a decision to shut off nuclear plants by year’s end. We are talking about ending a genocide, and, as Germany has recognized in its own laws and culture, the nation has an enhanced responsibility in this regard.

Ukrainians have fought bravely and have shown the world that they can defend their nation. But they cannot hold on forever.

Free nations everywhere will have to make sacrifices. We urge Europe to act now to support Ukraine, to help end the war and to benefit all of humanity.

— Tribune News Service

Trending Food Videos

A reduction in Russian energy purchases by Germany would impact Germans who rely on Russian gas for heating and power.

Title:

Content: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was an intolerable horror from the start. It has escalated into a genocide in what amounts to a terror campaign to subdue a people.

President Joe Biden was correct to call Russian atrocities a genocide, and even if the declaration is not yet official policy, it raises the moral urgency for all free governments to engage in meaningful and even painful steps to defeat a nihilistic and murderous dictator.

The U.S. is again leading the world in confronting a European crisis that threatens to become a global war. U.S. security aid to Ukraine during the Biden administration is now greater than $2 billion. Total European funds to the Ukrainian military forces now total about $1.6 billion.

It’s important that our European allies deepen their commitment to providing direct military aid. But the reality is that Europe’s greatest lever against Russian aggression has yet to be pulled, and that is dramatically reducing the German purchase of Russian energy.

There is no question that this would amount to a great sacrifice for the German people. Cutting off all Russian gas supply would send the German economy into recession. There would also be an impact on the way of life for Germans who rely on Russian gas to heat their homes and power their places of work.

But the corresponding effect on the Russian economy and the Russian war machine would likely be far more impactful.

Alina Polyakova, chief executive of the Center for European Policy Analysis, told us during a recent visit to Dallas that a German decision to stop purchasing Russian energy would alter the course of history.

“It would end the war,” she said. “They would just run out of money.”

The Russian war machine relies on direct payments for energy. Cut off the payments, and you cut off the money.

It’s simple in theory and excruciating in practice because of its real and immediate impact on people’s lives and nations’ economies.

Nevertheless, Germany has a moral imperative to take clear, positive steps toward sharply reducing its purchase of Russian energy, such as reversing a decision to shut off nuclear plants by year’s end. We are talking about ending a genocide, and, as Germany has recognized in its own laws and culture, the nation has an enhanced responsibility in this regard.

Ukrainians have fought bravely and have shown the world that they can defend their nation. But they cannot hold on forever.

Free nations everywhere will have to make sacrifices. We urge Europe to act now to support Ukraine, to help end the war and to benefit all of humanity.

— Tribune News Service

Trending Food Videos

Reducing Russian energy purchases would likely have a far more significant impact on the Russian economy and war machine.

Title:

Content: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was an intolerable horror from the start. It has escalated into a genocide in what amounts to a terror campaign to subdue a people.

President Joe Biden was correct to call Russian atrocities a genocide, and even if the declaration is not yet official policy, it raises the moral urgency for all free governments to engage in meaningful and even painful steps to defeat a nihilistic and murderous dictator.

The U.S. is again leading the world in confronting a European crisis that threatens to become a global war. U.S. security aid to Ukraine during the Biden administration is now greater than $2 billion. Total European funds to the Ukrainian military forces now total about $1.6 billion.

It’s important that our European allies deepen their commitment to providing direct military aid. But the reality is that Europe’s greatest lever against Russian aggression has yet to be pulled, and that is dramatically reducing the German purchase of Russian energy.

There is no question that this would amount to a great sacrifice for the German people. Cutting off all Russian gas supply would send the German economy into recession. There would also be an impact on the way of life for Germans who rely on Russian gas to heat their homes and power their places of work.

But the corresponding effect on the Russian economy and the Russian war machine would likely be far more impactful.

Alina Polyakova, chief executive of the Center for European Policy Analysis, told us during a recent visit to Dallas that a German decision to stop purchasing Russian energy would alter the course of history.

“It would end the war,” she said. “They would just run out of money.”

The Russian war machine relies on direct payments for energy. Cut off the payments, and you cut off the money.

It’s simple in theory and excruciating in practice because of its real and immediate impact on people’s lives and nations’ economies.

Nevertheless, Germany has a moral imperative to take clear, positive steps toward sharply reducing its purchase of Russian energy, such as reversing a decision to shut off nuclear plants by year’s end. We are talking about ending a genocide, and, as Germany has recognized in its own laws and culture, the nation has an enhanced responsibility in this regard.

Ukrainians have fought bravely and have shown the world that they can defend their nation. But they cannot hold on forever.

Free nations everywhere will have to make sacrifices. We urge Europe to act now to support Ukraine, to help end the war and to benefit all of humanity.

— Tribune News Service

Trending Food Videos

Russia's war machine relies on energy payments, which fund it.

Title:

Content: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was an intolerable horror from the start. It has escalated into a genocide in what amounts to a terror campaign to subdue a people.

President Joe Biden was correct to call Russian atrocities a genocide, and even if the declaration is not yet official policy, it raises the moral urgency for all free governments to engage in meaningful and even painful steps to defeat a nihilistic and murderous dictator.

The U.S. is again leading the world in confronting a European crisis that threatens to become a global war. U.S. security aid to Ukraine during the Biden administration is now greater than $2 billion. Total European funds to the Ukrainian military forces now total about $1.6 billion.

It’s important that our European allies deepen their commitment to providing direct military aid. But the reality is that Europe’s greatest lever against Russian aggression has yet to be pulled, and that is dramatically reducing the German purchase of Russian energy.

There is no question that this would amount to a great sacrifice for the German people. Cutting off all Russian gas supply would send the German economy into recession. There would also be an impact on the way of life for Germans who rely on Russian gas to heat their homes and power their places of work.

But the corresponding effect on the Russian economy and the Russian war machine would likely be far more impactful.

Alina Polyakova, chief executive of the Center for European Policy Analysis, told us during a recent visit to Dallas that a German decision to stop purchasing Russian energy would alter the course of history.

“It would end the war,” she said. “They would just run out of money.”

The Russian war machine relies on direct payments for energy. Cut off the payments, and you cut off the money.

It’s simple in theory and excruciating in practice because of its real and immediate impact on people’s lives and nations’ economies.

Nevertheless, Germany has a moral imperative to take clear, positive steps toward sharply reducing its purchase of Russian energy, such as reversing a decision to shut off nuclear plants by year’s end. We are talking about ending a genocide, and, as Germany has recognized in its own laws and culture, the nation has an enhanced responsibility in this regard.

Ukrainians have fought bravely and have shown the world that they can defend their nation. But they cannot hold on forever.

Free nations everywhere will have to make sacrifices. We urge Europe to act now to support Ukraine, to help end the war and to benefit all of humanity.

— Tribune News Service

Trending Food Videos

Germany must reduce its purchase of Russian energy to help end the war.

Title:

Content: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was an intolerable horror from the start. It has escalated into a genocide in what amounts to a terror campaign to subdue a people.

President Joe Biden was correct to call Russian atrocities a genocide, and even if the declaration is not yet official policy, it raises the moral urgency for all free governments to engage in meaningful and even painful steps to defeat a nihilistic and murderous dictator.

The U.S. is again leading the world in confronting a European crisis that threatens to become a global war. U.S. security aid to Ukraine during the Biden administration is now greater than $2 billion. Total European funds to the Ukrainian military forces now total about $1.6 billion.

It’s important that our European allies deepen their commitment to providing direct military aid. But the reality is that Europe’s greatest lever against Russian aggression has yet to be pulled, and that is dramatically reducing the German purchase of Russian energy.

There is no question that this would amount to a great sacrifice for the German people. Cutting off all Russian gas supply would send the German economy into recession. There would also be an impact on the way of life for Germans who rely on Russian gas to heat their homes and power their places of work.

But the corresponding effect on the Russian economy and the Russian war machine would likely be far more impactful.

Alina Polyakova, chief executive of the Center for European Policy Analysis, told us during a recent visit to Dallas that a German decision to stop purchasing Russian energy would alter the course of history.

“It would end the war,” she said. “They would just run out of money.”

The Russian war machine relies on direct payments for energy. Cut off the payments, and you cut off the money.

It’s simple in theory and excruciating in practice because of its real and immediate impact on people’s lives and nations’ economies.

Nevertheless, Germany has a moral imperative to take clear, positive steps toward sharply reducing its purchase of Russian energy, such as reversing a decision to shut off nuclear plants by year’s end. We are talking about ending a genocide, and, as Germany has recognized in its own laws and culture, the nation has an enhanced responsibility in this regard.

Ukrainians have fought bravely and have shown the world that they can defend their nation. But they cannot hold on forever.

Free nations everywhere will have to make sacrifices. We urge Europe to act now to support Ukraine, to help end the war and to benefit all of humanity.

— Tribune News Service

Trending Food Videos

Reversing the nuclear plant shutdown could reduce Germany's reliance on Russian energy.

Title:

Content: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was an intolerable horror from the start. It has escalated into a genocide in what amounts to a terror campaign to subdue a people.

President Joe Biden was correct to call Russian atrocities a genocide, and even if the declaration is not yet official policy, it raises the moral urgency for all free governments to engage in meaningful and even painful steps to defeat a nihilistic and murderous dictator.

The U.S. is again leading the world in confronting a European crisis that threatens to become a global war. U.S. security aid to Ukraine during the Biden administration is now greater than $2 billion. Total European funds to the Ukrainian military forces now total about $1.6 billion.

It’s important that our European allies deepen their commitment to providing direct military aid. But the reality is that Europe’s greatest lever against Russian aggression has yet to be pulled, and that is dramatically reducing the German purchase of Russian energy.

There is no question that this would amount to a great sacrifice for the German people. Cutting off all Russian gas supply would send the German economy into recession. There would also be an impact on the way of life for Germans who rely on Russian gas to heat their homes and power their places of work.

But the corresponding effect on the Russian economy and the Russian war machine would likely be far more impactful.

Alina Polyakova, chief executive of the Center for European Policy Analysis, told us during a recent visit to Dallas that a German decision to stop purchasing Russian energy would alter the course of history.

“It would end the war,” she said. “They would just run out of money.”

The Russian war machine relies on direct payments for energy. Cut off the payments, and you cut off the money.

It’s simple in theory and excruciating in practice because of its real and immediate impact on people’s lives and nations’ economies.

Nevertheless, Germany has a moral imperative to take clear, positive steps toward sharply reducing its purchase of Russian energy, such as reversing a decision to shut off nuclear plants by year’s end. We are talking about ending a genocide, and, as Germany has recognized in its own laws and culture, the nation has an enhanced responsibility in this regard.

Ukrainians have fought bravely and have shown the world that they can defend their nation. But they cannot hold on forever.

Free nations everywhere will have to make sacrifices. We urge Europe to act now to support Ukraine, to help end the war and to benefit all of humanity.

— Tribune News Service

Trending Food Videos

64% of Germans support restarting nuclear power to address the energy crisis.

Title:

Content: World Vision: Restarting nuclear power, dragging the German government into crisis
November 06, 2022 00: 03
Eastern Network Television
More News Clips
With Germany following the NATO sanctions against Russia, the German energy crisis is deepening and leading to serious political instability.
The gold-painted sign “Made in Germany ” has been peeled off. First, the business community complained about the high price of electricity in Germany, averaging 0.37 euros per kilowatt-hour (kWh), compared with 0.18 euros in France, 0.24 euros in the United Kingdom and 0.10 euros in Hungary.
Even if the German government proposed energy subsidies, but other European governments such as Britain and France will do so, German companies still can not compete. The result is that more and more industrial products that Germany was proud of in the past, either set up factories in foreign countries or import some foreign parts to complete in Germany.
In addition, some townships began to have problems with the opening up and strengthening of thermal power generation and transmission, and now there are rare power outages, which have caused great dissatisfaction among the public.
The Minister of Economy and Deputy Prime Minister Hajbek have become the target of attacks by the industrial sector, the German opposition, and the Liberal and Social Democrats in the government, focusing on Habek, who has no economic expertise but is responsible for the environmental ideology, and the government ’ s lack of understanding and compassion for industry, and has been deceiving the three nuclear power plants.
Halbek has always stressed that the German people have long been the majority of anti-nuclear power, but the latest poll shows that 64% of the people support restarting nuclear power to increase supply and reduce electricity prices due to the energy crisis, with 40% of the Green Party voters.
In addition, the Green Party has spoken out in favor of improving climate change, but has been hiding experts ’ suggestions that turning on nuclear power could cut Germany ’ s carbon emissions by 25 million to 30 million tons a year.
In addition, Halbek stressed that the nuclear fuel rods needed for the nuclear power plant may not be available by early next year, but the expert opinion is that the old nuclear fuel rods can also be used and the nuclear power plant can be gradually opened.
Halbek stressed that it would take a long time to open the safety inspection of nuclear power, but the world-famous German Technical Supervision Association immediately hit the face, claiming that they did a comprehensive inspection in March, all three nuclear power plants are normal, as long as limited further testing and monitoring, restart is not a problem at all.
The opposition party also criticized the three-party coalition government for delaying the setting of a gas price cap until March next year. At that time, the weather in Germany has begun to warm up. As a result, the opposition party and the public demand that Habaker resign, which can be regarded as the ruling coalition's biggest crisis to date.
Ph.D., Freie Universität Berlin

40% of the Green Party voters support restarting nuclear power.

Title:

Content: World Vision: Restarting nuclear power, dragging the German government into crisis
November 06, 2022 00: 03
Eastern Network Television
More News Clips
With Germany following the NATO sanctions against Russia, the German energy crisis is deepening and leading to serious political instability.
The gold-painted sign “Made in Germany ” has been peeled off. First, the business community complained about the high price of electricity in Germany, averaging 0.37 euros per kilowatt-hour (kWh), compared with 0.18 euros in France, 0.24 euros in the United Kingdom and 0.10 euros in Hungary.
Even if the German government proposed energy subsidies, but other European governments such as Britain and France will do so, German companies still can not compete. The result is that more and more industrial products that Germany was proud of in the past, either set up factories in foreign countries or import some foreign parts to complete in Germany.
In addition, some townships began to have problems with the opening up and strengthening of thermal power generation and transmission, and now there are rare power outages, which have caused great dissatisfaction among the public.
The Minister of Economy and Deputy Prime Minister Hajbek have become the target of attacks by the industrial sector, the German opposition, and the Liberal and Social Democrats in the government, focusing on Habek, who has no economic expertise but is responsible for the environmental ideology, and the government ’ s lack of understanding and compassion for industry, and has been deceiving the three nuclear power plants.
Halbek has always stressed that the German people have long been the majority of anti-nuclear power, but the latest poll shows that 64% of the people support restarting nuclear power to increase supply and reduce electricity prices due to the energy crisis, with 40% of the Green Party voters.
In addition, the Green Party has spoken out in favor of improving climate change, but has been hiding experts ’ suggestions that turning on nuclear power could cut Germany ’ s carbon emissions by 25 million to 30 million tons a year.
In addition, Halbek stressed that the nuclear fuel rods needed for the nuclear power plant may not be available by early next year, but the expert opinion is that the old nuclear fuel rods can also be used and the nuclear power plant can be gradually opened.
Halbek stressed that it would take a long time to open the safety inspection of nuclear power, but the world-famous German Technical Supervision Association immediately hit the face, claiming that they did a comprehensive inspection in March, all three nuclear power plants are normal, as long as limited further testing and monitoring, restart is not a problem at all.
The opposition party also criticized the three-party coalition government for delaying the setting of a gas price cap until March next year. At that time, the weather in Germany has begun to warm up. As a result, the opposition party and the public demand that Habaker resign, which can be regarded as the ruling coalition's biggest crisis to date.
Ph.D., Freie Universität Berlin

Nuclear power could cut Germany's carbon emissions by 25-30 million tons annually.

Title:

Content: World Vision: Restarting nuclear power, dragging the German government into crisis
November 06, 2022 00: 03
Eastern Network Television
More News Clips
With Germany following the NATO sanctions against Russia, the German energy crisis is deepening and leading to serious political instability.
The gold-painted sign “Made in Germany ” has been peeled off. First, the business community complained about the high price of electricity in Germany, averaging 0.37 euros per kilowatt-hour (kWh), compared with 0.18 euros in France, 0.24 euros in the United Kingdom and 0.10 euros in Hungary.
Even if the German government proposed energy subsidies, but other European governments such as Britain and France will do so, German companies still can not compete. The result is that more and more industrial products that Germany was proud of in the past, either set up factories in foreign countries or import some foreign parts to complete in Germany.
In addition, some townships began to have problems with the opening up and strengthening of thermal power generation and transmission, and now there are rare power outages, which have caused great dissatisfaction among the public.
The Minister of Economy and Deputy Prime Minister Hajbek have become the target of attacks by the industrial sector, the German opposition, and the Liberal and Social Democrats in the government, focusing on Habek, who has no economic expertise but is responsible for the environmental ideology, and the government ’ s lack of understanding and compassion for industry, and has been deceiving the three nuclear power plants.
Halbek has always stressed that the German people have long been the majority of anti-nuclear power, but the latest poll shows that 64% of the people support restarting nuclear power to increase supply and reduce electricity prices due to the energy crisis, with 40% of the Green Party voters.
In addition, the Green Party has spoken out in favor of improving climate change, but has been hiding experts ’ suggestions that turning on nuclear power could cut Germany ’ s carbon emissions by 25 million to 30 million tons a year.
In addition, Halbek stressed that the nuclear fuel rods needed for the nuclear power plant may not be available by early next year, but the expert opinion is that the old nuclear fuel rods can also be used and the nuclear power plant can be gradually opened.
Halbek stressed that it would take a long time to open the safety inspection of nuclear power, but the world-famous German Technical Supervision Association immediately hit the face, claiming that they did a comprehensive inspection in March, all three nuclear power plants are normal, as long as limited further testing and monitoring, restart is not a problem at all.
The opposition party also criticized the three-party coalition government for delaying the setting of a gas price cap until March next year. At that time, the weather in Germany has begun to warm up. As a result, the opposition party and the public demand that Habaker resign, which can be regarded as the ruling coalition's biggest crisis to date.
Ph.D., Freie Universität Berlin

The German Technical Supervision Association found the three nuclear power plants normal in a March inspection, and restart is possible with limited further testing.

Title:

Content: World Vision: Restarting nuclear power, dragging the German government into crisis
November 06, 2022 00: 03
Eastern Network Television
More News Clips
With Germany following the NATO sanctions against Russia, the German energy crisis is deepening and leading to serious political instability.
The gold-painted sign “Made in Germany ” has been peeled off. First, the business community complained about the high price of electricity in Germany, averaging 0.37 euros per kilowatt-hour (kWh), compared with 0.18 euros in France, 0.24 euros in the United Kingdom and 0.10 euros in Hungary.
Even if the German government proposed energy subsidies, but other European governments such as Britain and France will do so, German companies still can not compete. The result is that more and more industrial products that Germany was proud of in the past, either set up factories in foreign countries or import some foreign parts to complete in Germany.
In addition, some townships began to have problems with the opening up and strengthening of thermal power generation and transmission, and now there are rare power outages, which have caused great dissatisfaction among the public.
The Minister of Economy and Deputy Prime Minister Hajbek have become the target of attacks by the industrial sector, the German opposition, and the Liberal and Social Democrats in the government, focusing on Habek, who has no economic expertise but is responsible for the environmental ideology, and the government ’ s lack of understanding and compassion for industry, and has been deceiving the three nuclear power plants.
Halbek has always stressed that the German people have long been the majority of anti-nuclear power, but the latest poll shows that 64% of the people support restarting nuclear power to increase supply and reduce electricity prices due to the energy crisis, with 40% of the Green Party voters.
In addition, the Green Party has spoken out in favor of improving climate change, but has been hiding experts ’ suggestions that turning on nuclear power could cut Germany ’ s carbon emissions by 25 million to 30 million tons a year.
In addition, Halbek stressed that the nuclear fuel rods needed for the nuclear power plant may not be available by early next year, but the expert opinion is that the old nuclear fuel rods can also be used and the nuclear power plant can be gradually opened.
Halbek stressed that it would take a long time to open the safety inspection of nuclear power, but the world-famous German Technical Supervision Association immediately hit the face, claiming that they did a comprehensive inspection in March, all three nuclear power plants are normal, as long as limited further testing and monitoring, restart is not a problem at all.
The opposition party also criticized the three-party coalition government for delaying the setting of a gas price cap until March next year. At that time, the weather in Germany has begun to warm up. As a result, the opposition party and the public demand that Habaker resign, which can be regarded as the ruling coalition's biggest crisis to date.
Ph.D., Freie Universität Berlin

Thierry Breton says Germany's three remaining nuclear plants should stay open for now.

Title:

Content: According to EurActiv on July 20, in response to the gas shortage, the EU Commission has proposed a natural gas conservation plan, which will be careful to avoid blaming any EU country when it comes to delaying the “phase-out ” of nuclear power plants, a particularly sensitive issue for Germany.
Germany ’ s nuclear program was first planned in the early 2000s, when the Social Democrats (SPD) and the Green Party coalition decided to phase out nuclear power.
Japan ’ s 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster led then-pro-nuclear Prime Minister Angela Merkel, who was pushing for the withdrawal of plans to phase out nuclear power, to end nuclear power under pressure and plan to shut down all nuclear plants by 2022.
However, in early July, Thierry Breton, the European Union ’ s executive member for internal markets, said bluntly: “It ’ s important that the three German nuclear plants still in operation continue to operate for a while. ” Energy comes with a problem.
Even Elon Musk, CEO of US electric car maker Tesla, tweeted: “They should keep running. ”
“If the government wants, we can keep the NPP Isar 2 nuclear power plant running longer than the end of the year, ” says plant operator Preussen Electra. In addition, previous reports by safety certification body TÜV Süd indicate that the plant ’ s continued operation does not pose a safety risk.
A poll of Germans conducted by ARD on 24 June showed that 61% of Germans would support the extension of nuclear power plant operations.
But Sascha Müller-Kraenner, director of the German environmental NGO Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH), said in a statement on July 19.
“If the duration of the nuclear power plant exceeds December 31, 2022, we will prevent this from happening through the courts if necessary. ”
Under pressure: the push to keep German nuclear plants running
# Germany # Nuclear Power Plant # Nuclear Waste # Denuclearization # Natural Gas

Elon Musk supports keeping German nuclear plants running.

Title:

Content: According to EurActiv on July 20, in response to the gas shortage, the EU Commission has proposed a natural gas conservation plan, which will be careful to avoid blaming any EU country when it comes to delaying the “phase-out ” of nuclear power plants, a particularly sensitive issue for Germany.
Germany ’ s nuclear program was first planned in the early 2000s, when the Social Democrats (SPD) and the Green Party coalition decided to phase out nuclear power.
Japan ’ s 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster led then-pro-nuclear Prime Minister Angela Merkel, who was pushing for the withdrawal of plans to phase out nuclear power, to end nuclear power under pressure and plan to shut down all nuclear plants by 2022.
However, in early July, Thierry Breton, the European Union ’ s executive member for internal markets, said bluntly: “It ’ s important that the three German nuclear plants still in operation continue to operate for a while. ” Energy comes with a problem.
Even Elon Musk, CEO of US electric car maker Tesla, tweeted: “They should keep running. ”
“If the government wants, we can keep the NPP Isar 2 nuclear power plant running longer than the end of the year, ” says plant operator Preussen Electra. In addition, previous reports by safety certification body TÜV Süd indicate that the plant ’ s continued operation does not pose a safety risk.
A poll of Germans conducted by ARD on 24 June showed that 61% of Germans would support the extension of nuclear power plant operations.
But Sascha Müller-Kraenner, director of the German environmental NGO Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH), said in a statement on July 19.
“If the duration of the nuclear power plant exceeds December 31, 2022, we will prevent this from happening through the courts if necessary. ”
Under pressure: the push to keep German nuclear plants running
# Germany # Nuclear Power Plant # Nuclear Waste # Denuclearization # Natural Gas

Preussen Electra says the Isar 2 NPP can run beyond year's end if the government wishes.

Title:

Content: According to EurActiv on July 20, in response to the gas shortage, the EU Commission has proposed a natural gas conservation plan, which will be careful to avoid blaming any EU country when it comes to delaying the “phase-out ” of nuclear power plants, a particularly sensitive issue for Germany.
Germany ’ s nuclear program was first planned in the early 2000s, when the Social Democrats (SPD) and the Green Party coalition decided to phase out nuclear power.
Japan ’ s 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster led then-pro-nuclear Prime Minister Angela Merkel, who was pushing for the withdrawal of plans to phase out nuclear power, to end nuclear power under pressure and plan to shut down all nuclear plants by 2022.
However, in early July, Thierry Breton, the European Union ’ s executive member for internal markets, said bluntly: “It ’ s important that the three German nuclear plants still in operation continue to operate for a while. ” Energy comes with a problem.
Even Elon Musk, CEO of US electric car maker Tesla, tweeted: “They should keep running. ”
“If the government wants, we can keep the NPP Isar 2 nuclear power plant running longer than the end of the year, ” says plant operator Preussen Electra. In addition, previous reports by safety certification body TÜV Süd indicate that the plant ’ s continued operation does not pose a safety risk.
A poll of Germans conducted by ARD on 24 June showed that 61% of Germans would support the extension of nuclear power plant operations.
But Sascha Müller-Kraenner, director of the German environmental NGO Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH), said in a statement on July 19.
“If the duration of the nuclear power plant exceeds December 31, 2022, we will prevent this from happening through the courts if necessary. ”
Under pressure: the push to keep German nuclear plants running
# Germany # Nuclear Power Plant # Nuclear Waste # Denuclearization # Natural Gas

TÜV Süd reports the plant's continued operation poses no safety risk.

Title:

Content: According to EurActiv on July 20, in response to the gas shortage, the EU Commission has proposed a natural gas conservation plan, which will be careful to avoid blaming any EU country when it comes to delaying the “phase-out ” of nuclear power plants, a particularly sensitive issue for Germany.
Germany ’ s nuclear program was first planned in the early 2000s, when the Social Democrats (SPD) and the Green Party coalition decided to phase out nuclear power.
Japan ’ s 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster led then-pro-nuclear Prime Minister Angela Merkel, who was pushing for the withdrawal of plans to phase out nuclear power, to end nuclear power under pressure and plan to shut down all nuclear plants by 2022.
However, in early July, Thierry Breton, the European Union ’ s executive member for internal markets, said bluntly: “It ’ s important that the three German nuclear plants still in operation continue to operate for a while. ” Energy comes with a problem.
Even Elon Musk, CEO of US electric car maker Tesla, tweeted: “They should keep running. ”
“If the government wants, we can keep the NPP Isar 2 nuclear power plant running longer than the end of the year, ” says plant operator Preussen Electra. In addition, previous reports by safety certification body TÜV Süd indicate that the plant ’ s continued operation does not pose a safety risk.
A poll of Germans conducted by ARD on 24 June showed that 61% of Germans would support the extension of nuclear power plant operations.
But Sascha Müller-Kraenner, director of the German environmental NGO Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH), said in a statement on July 19.
“If the duration of the nuclear power plant exceeds December 31, 2022, we will prevent this from happening through the courts if necessary. ”
Under pressure: the push to keep German nuclear plants running
# Germany # Nuclear Power Plant # Nuclear Waste # Denuclearization # Natural Gas

61% of Germans support extending nuclear power plant operations, an ARD poll found.

Title:

Content: According to EurActiv on July 20, in response to the gas shortage, the EU Commission has proposed a natural gas conservation plan, which will be careful to avoid blaming any EU country when it comes to delaying the “phase-out ” of nuclear power plants, a particularly sensitive issue for Germany.
Germany ’ s nuclear program was first planned in the early 2000s, when the Social Democrats (SPD) and the Green Party coalition decided to phase out nuclear power.
Japan ’ s 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster led then-pro-nuclear Prime Minister Angela Merkel, who was pushing for the withdrawal of plans to phase out nuclear power, to end nuclear power under pressure and plan to shut down all nuclear plants by 2022.
However, in early July, Thierry Breton, the European Union ’ s executive member for internal markets, said bluntly: “It ’ s important that the three German nuclear plants still in operation continue to operate for a while. ” Energy comes with a problem.
Even Elon Musk, CEO of US electric car maker Tesla, tweeted: “They should keep running. ”
“If the government wants, we can keep the NPP Isar 2 nuclear power plant running longer than the end of the year, ” says plant operator Preussen Electra. In addition, previous reports by safety certification body TÜV Süd indicate that the plant ’ s continued operation does not pose a safety risk.
A poll of Germans conducted by ARD on 24 June showed that 61% of Germans would support the extension of nuclear power plant operations.
But Sascha Müller-Kraenner, director of the German environmental NGO Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH), said in a statement on July 19.
“If the duration of the nuclear power plant exceeds December 31, 2022, we will prevent this from happening through the courts if necessary. ”
Under pressure: the push to keep German nuclear plants running
# Germany # Nuclear Power Plant # Nuclear Waste # Denuclearization # Natural Gas

Sascha Müller-Kraenner, director of Deutsche Umwelthilfe, opposes extending nuclear power plant operations and may take legal action.

Title:

Content: According to EurActiv on July 20, in response to the gas shortage, the EU Commission has proposed a natural gas conservation plan, which will be careful to avoid blaming any EU country when it comes to delaying the “phase-out ” of nuclear power plants, a particularly sensitive issue for Germany.
Germany ’ s nuclear program was first planned in the early 2000s, when the Social Democrats (SPD) and the Green Party coalition decided to phase out nuclear power.
Japan ’ s 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster led then-pro-nuclear Prime Minister Angela Merkel, who was pushing for the withdrawal of plans to phase out nuclear power, to end nuclear power under pressure and plan to shut down all nuclear plants by 2022.
However, in early July, Thierry Breton, the European Union ’ s executive member for internal markets, said bluntly: “It ’ s important that the three German nuclear plants still in operation continue to operate for a while. ” Energy comes with a problem.
Even Elon Musk, CEO of US electric car maker Tesla, tweeted: “They should keep running. ”
“If the government wants, we can keep the NPP Isar 2 nuclear power plant running longer than the end of the year, ” says plant operator Preussen Electra. In addition, previous reports by safety certification body TÜV Süd indicate that the plant ’ s continued operation does not pose a safety risk.
A poll of Germans conducted by ARD on 24 June showed that 61% of Germans would support the extension of nuclear power plant operations.
But Sascha Müller-Kraenner, director of the German environmental NGO Deutsche Umwelthilfe (DUH), said in a statement on July 19.
“If the duration of the nuclear power plant exceeds December 31, 2022, we will prevent this from happening through the courts if necessary. ”
Under pressure: the push to keep German nuclear plants running
# Germany # Nuclear Power Plant # Nuclear Waste # Denuclearization # Natural Gas

Germany has shut down its last three nuclear power plants as part of its plan to use only renewables by 2035.

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.

German Environment Minister Stevie Lemke calls the nuclear renaissance a myth, citing shrinking atomic energy shares in global electricity production.

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.

Experts say Germany's 5% nuclear electricity share can be easily replaced, eliminating the need to restart reactors.

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.

German Economy Minister Robert Habeck ruled out extending the life of the country's last three nuclear plants, citing a potential gas savings of only up to 2 percent.

Title:

Content: German Economy Minister Robert Habeck ruled out renewing the country ’ s last three nuclear plants to save gas, saying the plant would only save up to 2 percent of natural gas use.
In a public discussion with the public on the government ’ s Open Day, Haberk said such savings would not be enough to reopen the debate on decommissioning nuclear power because there was a consensus on the issue.
After the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, with the support of a majority of the German people, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel issued a bill to stop using nuclear power by the end of the year; but due to the reduction of natural gas supply in Russia, people are worried about the energy crisis this winter, attitudes have changed, and the three-party coalition is also divided on the issue.
"It was the wrong decision to do so because there was not much savings," said Mr Harbaugh.
In the 1970s and 1980s, Harburg's Green Party began as an anti-nuclear movement.
On the other hand, Finance Minister Christian Lindner of the Free Democratic Party reiterated his position that extending the life of nuclear power plants for a limited period of time would be better than reusing coal-fired power.
“We shouldn ’ t be too critical, we should keep all possibilities open, ” Lindner said, adding that in the current situation, he was open to extending nuclear power“ for a few years. ”
In addition to the debate over gas-saving measures, Haberke said he was open to extending the life of one of Bavaria ’ s nuclear plants if stress tests showed that it was necessary to ensure grid stability and power supply in winter.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said the results of the stress tests should be available by the end of the month or early next month, when a decision will be made.
(Translator: Zheng Shiyun / Authored by: Lu Yingzi) 1110822
# Hubble # Save # Nuclear Power Plant # Natural Gas # People

The coalition is divided on nuclear power.

Title:

Content: German Economy Minister Robert Habeck ruled out renewing the country ’ s last three nuclear plants to save gas, saying the plant would only save up to 2 percent of natural gas use.
In a public discussion with the public on the government ’ s Open Day, Haberk said such savings would not be enough to reopen the debate on decommissioning nuclear power because there was a consensus on the issue.
After the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, with the support of a majority of the German people, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel issued a bill to stop using nuclear power by the end of the year; but due to the reduction of natural gas supply in Russia, people are worried about the energy crisis this winter, attitudes have changed, and the three-party coalition is also divided on the issue.
"It was the wrong decision to do so because there was not much savings," said Mr Harbaugh.
In the 1970s and 1980s, Harburg's Green Party began as an anti-nuclear movement.
On the other hand, Finance Minister Christian Lindner of the Free Democratic Party reiterated his position that extending the life of nuclear power plants for a limited period of time would be better than reusing coal-fired power.
“We shouldn ’ t be too critical, we should keep all possibilities open, ” Lindner said, adding that in the current situation, he was open to extending nuclear power“ for a few years. ”
In addition to the debate over gas-saving measures, Haberke said he was open to extending the life of one of Bavaria ’ s nuclear plants if stress tests showed that it was necessary to ensure grid stability and power supply in winter.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said the results of the stress tests should be available by the end of the month or early next month, when a decision will be made.
(Translator: Zheng Shiyun / Authored by: Lu Yingzi) 1110822
# Hubble # Save # Nuclear Power Plant # Natural Gas # People

Finance Minister Christian Lindner is open to temporarily extending the life of nuclear power plants.

Title:

Content: German Economy Minister Robert Habeck ruled out renewing the country ’ s last three nuclear plants to save gas, saying the plant would only save up to 2 percent of natural gas use.
In a public discussion with the public on the government ’ s Open Day, Haberk said such savings would not be enough to reopen the debate on decommissioning nuclear power because there was a consensus on the issue.
After the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, with the support of a majority of the German people, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel issued a bill to stop using nuclear power by the end of the year; but due to the reduction of natural gas supply in Russia, people are worried about the energy crisis this winter, attitudes have changed, and the three-party coalition is also divided on the issue.
"It was the wrong decision to do so because there was not much savings," said Mr Harbaugh.
In the 1970s and 1980s, Harburg's Green Party began as an anti-nuclear movement.
On the other hand, Finance Minister Christian Lindner of the Free Democratic Party reiterated his position that extending the life of nuclear power plants for a limited period of time would be better than reusing coal-fired power.
“We shouldn ’ t be too critical, we should keep all possibilities open, ” Lindner said, adding that in the current situation, he was open to extending nuclear power“ for a few years. ”
In addition to the debate over gas-saving measures, Haberke said he was open to extending the life of one of Bavaria ’ s nuclear plants if stress tests showed that it was necessary to ensure grid stability and power supply in winter.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said the results of the stress tests should be available by the end of the month or early next month, when a decision will be made.
(Translator: Zheng Shiyun / Authored by: Lu Yingzi) 1110822
# Hubble # Save # Nuclear Power Plant # Natural Gas # People

Lindner prefers extending nuclear power to reusing coal-fired power.

Title:

Content: German Economy Minister Robert Habeck ruled out renewing the country ’ s last three nuclear plants to save gas, saying the plant would only save up to 2 percent of natural gas use.
In a public discussion with the public on the government ’ s Open Day, Haberk said such savings would not be enough to reopen the debate on decommissioning nuclear power because there was a consensus on the issue.
After the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, with the support of a majority of the German people, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel issued a bill to stop using nuclear power by the end of the year; but due to the reduction of natural gas supply in Russia, people are worried about the energy crisis this winter, attitudes have changed, and the three-party coalition is also divided on the issue.
"It was the wrong decision to do so because there was not much savings," said Mr Harbaugh.
In the 1970s and 1980s, Harburg's Green Party began as an anti-nuclear movement.
On the other hand, Finance Minister Christian Lindner of the Free Democratic Party reiterated his position that extending the life of nuclear power plants for a limited period of time would be better than reusing coal-fired power.
“We shouldn ’ t be too critical, we should keep all possibilities open, ” Lindner said, adding that in the current situation, he was open to extending nuclear power“ for a few years. ”
In addition to the debate over gas-saving measures, Haberke said he was open to extending the life of one of Bavaria ’ s nuclear plants if stress tests showed that it was necessary to ensure grid stability and power supply in winter.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said the results of the stress tests should be available by the end of the month or early next month, when a decision will be made.
(Translator: Zheng Shiyun / Authored by: Lu Yingzi) 1110822
# Hubble # Save # Nuclear Power Plant # Natural Gas # People

German Economy Minister Robert Habeck may extend the life of a Bavarian nuclear plant if necessary for grid stability.

Title:

Content: German Economy Minister Robert Habeck ruled out renewing the country ’ s last three nuclear plants to save gas, saying the plant would only save up to 2 percent of natural gas use.
In a public discussion with the public on the government ’ s Open Day, Haberk said such savings would not be enough to reopen the debate on decommissioning nuclear power because there was a consensus on the issue.
After the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, with the support of a majority of the German people, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel issued a bill to stop using nuclear power by the end of the year; but due to the reduction of natural gas supply in Russia, people are worried about the energy crisis this winter, attitudes have changed, and the three-party coalition is also divided on the issue.
"It was the wrong decision to do so because there was not much savings," said Mr Harbaugh.
In the 1970s and 1980s, Harburg's Green Party began as an anti-nuclear movement.
On the other hand, Finance Minister Christian Lindner of the Free Democratic Party reiterated his position that extending the life of nuclear power plants for a limited period of time would be better than reusing coal-fired power.
“We shouldn ’ t be too critical, we should keep all possibilities open, ” Lindner said, adding that in the current situation, he was open to extending nuclear power“ for a few years. ”
In addition to the debate over gas-saving measures, Haberke said he was open to extending the life of one of Bavaria ’ s nuclear plants if stress tests showed that it was necessary to ensure grid stability and power supply in winter.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said the results of the stress tests should be available by the end of the month or early next month, when a decision will be made.
(Translator: Zheng Shiyun / Authored by: Lu Yingzi) 1110822
# Hubble # Save # Nuclear Power Plant # Natural Gas # People

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz will decide on extending nuclear power after reviewing stress test results due out by early next month.

Title:

Content: German Economy Minister Robert Habeck ruled out renewing the country ’ s last three nuclear plants to save gas, saying the plant would only save up to 2 percent of natural gas use.
In a public discussion with the public on the government ’ s Open Day, Haberk said such savings would not be enough to reopen the debate on decommissioning nuclear power because there was a consensus on the issue.
After the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, with the support of a majority of the German people, former German Chancellor Angela Merkel issued a bill to stop using nuclear power by the end of the year; but due to the reduction of natural gas supply in Russia, people are worried about the energy crisis this winter, attitudes have changed, and the three-party coalition is also divided on the issue.
"It was the wrong decision to do so because there was not much savings," said Mr Harbaugh.
In the 1970s and 1980s, Harburg's Green Party began as an anti-nuclear movement.
On the other hand, Finance Minister Christian Lindner of the Free Democratic Party reiterated his position that extending the life of nuclear power plants for a limited period of time would be better than reusing coal-fired power.
“We shouldn ’ t be too critical, we should keep all possibilities open, ” Lindner said, adding that in the current situation, he was open to extending nuclear power“ for a few years. ”
In addition to the debate over gas-saving measures, Haberke said he was open to extending the life of one of Bavaria ’ s nuclear plants if stress tests showed that it was necessary to ensure grid stability and power supply in winter.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said the results of the stress tests should be available by the end of the month or early next month, when a decision will be made.
(Translator: Zheng Shiyun / Authored by: Lu Yingzi) 1110822
# Hubble # Save # Nuclear Power Plant # Natural Gas # People

Germany's top forecasters warned of an economic downturn in 2023 if Russian gas imports are stopped.

Title:

Content: Institutes: Germany is threatened with severe deflation if it imposes a ban on Russian gas | DW Arab News | Breaking news and views from around the world | DW | 13.04.2022
1.
Inhalt
2.
Navigation
3.
Weitere Inhalte
4.
Metanavigation
5.
Suche
6.
Choose from 30 Languages
Announcement
NEWS
Germany threatened with severe deflation if Russian gas embargo
In forecasts supporting the German government ’ s position, six influential German institutes have warned against an immediate ban on Russian gas imports because, in their view, it would cause a sharp economic contraction.
A poll also showed that a majority of Germans reject such a ban.
Nord Stream pipe in Lubmen, Germany.
Archive
Germany ’ s leading economic forecasters warned on Wednesday that the country would face an economic downturn in 2023 if imports of Russian gas were stopped immediately in the context of sanctions imposed on Moscow for invading Ukraine.
According to the six influential institutes, GDP in Europe ’ s top economic power will fall by 2.2 percent in 2023 if gas supplies, on which Germany is particularly dependent, are cut.
The cumulative decline for 2022 and 2023 will amount to about 220 billion euros, or 6.5 percent of annual wealth, according to the institutes.
Stefan Coats, vice president of one of the institutes, said in a statement: "If gas supplies stop, the German economy is threatened with a severe contraction."
The GDP decline could reach 5% in the second quarter of 2023, before the economy rebounds late in the year.
Tough discussions are taking place among EU countries over the possibility of a ban on Russian gas, and Berlin is one of the main opponents of an immediate halt to imports, saying the country ’ s economic and social peace is at stake.
Economists are debating the consequences of such a decision and Germany ’ s ability to find alternative sources of energy in the near term.
Before the attack on Ukraine, Berlin had been importing more than 55 percent of its needs from Russia, but it has reduced that share to 40 percent and is trying to find other suppliers.
Germany does not expect to phase out Russian gas until the middle of 2024 and at the end of March launched the first phase of its emergency plan to ensure supplies of natural gas in the face of the risk of halting Russian supplies.
Overall, the institutes noted that the German economy was "passing through a period of volatility" at a time when the lifting of restrictions against the epidemic allowed economic activity to revive.
Supply chains "remain under pressure" at a time when China is imposing new restrictions and the war in Ukraine is having "negative effects on the economy both in terms of supply and in terms of demand," she said.
The aftermath of the war forced the institutes to cut their growth forecast for 2022 to 2.7 percent from 4.8 percent in October.
This is reflected in the inflation rate, which is expected to reach 6.1% this year and perhaps even 7.3% if the gas supply is stopped, which will be “the highest rate since the establishment of the Federal Republic. ”
In 2023, the figure will be 5.0% if supplies stop and 2.8% if they continue.
Watch the video 03: 20
Can the gas supply be stopped?
A majority of Germans are against the ban.
A majority of Germans oppose a total ban on Russian energy imports, according to a poll conducted by the "Demoskopi Alnsbach" institute for the German newspaper "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung" published on Wednesday (13.04.2022).
The results showed that 57% of those polled support the continuation of oil and gas imports from Russia, while 30% support a complete ban on Russian energy imports.
The survey was conducted between March 25 and April 6, meaning most of them were surveyed before the atrocities were discovered in the Ukrainian town of Bucha on April 3.
Many Germans believe that the war in Ukraine has had significant economic effects for them, with 68% of respondents saying the effects are higher heating costs and 51% saying the effects are higher fuel prices.
Forty-seven percent of respondents said they were turning down heating in their homes for this reason, 37 percent said they were using less of their cars for this reason, and 54 percent said they were taking prices more seriously when shopping.
A / B / B (D / A)

Germany's GDP will fall by 2.2 percent in 2023 if gas supplies are cut.

The cumulative decline for 2022 and 2023 will be around 220 billion euros, or 6.5% of annual wealth.

The GDP decline could reach 5% in Q2 2023, before a late-year rebound.

Berlin has reduced its Russian imports from over 55 percent to 40 percent and is seeking alternative suppliers.

Germany will not phase out Russian gas until mid-2024.

The war in Ukraine is negatively impacting the economy in terms of supply and demand.

The inflation rate is expected to reach 6.1% this year and perhaps even 7.3% if the gas supply is stopped.

In 2023, the inflation rate will be 5.0% if supplies stop and 2.8% if they continue.

Most Germans, 57%, oppose a total ban on Russian energy imports.

The war in Ukraine has disrupted Europe's energy, particularly Germany's supply.

Title:

Content: The war in Ukraine.
A watershed moment in Germany | DW News | DW | 24.08.2022
1.
Inhalt
2.
Navigation
3.
Weitere Inhalte
4.
Metanavigation
5.
Suche
6.
Choose from 30 Languages
DW News
The war in Ukraine.
A Moment in Germany
Three decades of relative peace since the dissolution of the Soviet Union have allowed friendly relations with Moscow.
This has even developed into a heavy dependence on energy imports from Russia.
But Russia ’ s invasion of Ukraine has turned Europe upside down, not least in energy.
READ ALSO

Germany has developed a heavy dependence on Russian energy imports over three decades.

Title:

Content: The war in Ukraine.
A watershed moment in Germany | DW News | DW | 24.08.2022
1.
Inhalt
2.
Navigation
3.
Weitere Inhalte
4.
Metanavigation
5.
Suche
6.
Choose from 30 Languages
DW News
The war in Ukraine.
A Moment in Germany
Three decades of relative peace since the dissolution of the Soviet Union have allowed friendly relations with Moscow.
This has even developed into a heavy dependence on energy imports from Russia.
But Russia ’ s invasion of Ukraine has turned Europe upside down, not least in energy.
READ ALSO

Russia's invasion of Ukraine has impacted Germany's energy supply.

Title:

Content: The war in Ukraine.
A watershed moment in Germany | DW News | DW | 24.08.2022
1.
Inhalt
2.
Navigation
3.
Weitere Inhalte
4.
Metanavigation
5.
Suche
6.
Choose from 30 Languages
DW News
The war in Ukraine.
A Moment in Germany
Three decades of relative peace since the dissolution of the Soviet Union have allowed friendly relations with Moscow.
This has even developed into a heavy dependence on energy imports from Russia.
But Russia ’ s invasion of Ukraine has turned Europe upside down, not least in energy.
READ ALSO

The Russian-Ukrainian war is expected to cost Germany's economy around 4% of its GDP, or 160 billion euros, by year's end.

Title:

Content: Global Economic News
160 billion euros in expected losses to the German economy due to the war
4% of output
According to economic forecasts, the war in Ukraine will cost the German economy about 160 billion euros ($171 billion), equivalent to 4 percent of GDP by the end of this year.
Peter Adrian, head of the Federation of German Chambers of Industry and Commerce, said in comments on Monday that the gross domestic product per capita of Europe's largest economy would be 2,000 euros less than it would have been without the war.
Industry accounts for a larger share of the German economy than many other countries, and the sector is mostly energy-intensive, meaning German companies have been hit hard by soaring energy prices, which last year hit the highest levels in Europe.
According to a study by Allianz Trade last month, industry is set to pay about 40 percent more for energy in 2023 than it did in 2021 before the crisis caused by the Russian-Ukrainian war on Feb. 24 last year.
"Therefore, the outlook for future growth in 2023 and 2024 is lower than in many other countries," Adrian said, adding that this was also the case last year, according to Reuters.
Energy prices in Germany, which for decades relied on relatively cheap Russian pipeline gas, are higher than in the United States, which has its own reserves of natural gas, while France has abundant nuclear power.
"The price of gas is three to five times higher than in the United States," he said, adding that electricity was four times more expensive than in France.
"The Russian-Ukrainian war has caused, along with irreparable human suffering, losses related to economic prosperity," Adrian said.
Many companies in sectors of the economy have recorded a strong increase in their costs for gas and electricity, he said, noting that this still affects some companies severely.
It is noteworthy that the Chamber expects a recession in economic output this year.
The chamber ’ s chief executive, Martin Vansleben, said a week ago that while some things had been calmed down, nothing had yet been stimulated.
A year after the Russo-Ukrainian war, Germany ’ s Federal Employment Agency predicted a clear breakthrough in the German labor market thanks to Ukrainian refugees.
Daniel Tarzenbach, a board member of the Federal Employment Agency, said the number of Ukrainian women and Ukrainians employed in social security jobs in Germany was 65,000 higher than before the war began.
There are also about 21,000 Ukrainians and Ukrainians working in small jobs, he said, adding that they all contribute to the fight against underemployment in the German economy.
"The German labour market is capable of assimilation," he said.
The number of Ukrainian workers in Germany is expected to increase significantly in the coming weeks and months, when both women and men have completed integration and vocational language courses at the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees.
In particular, starting in the second quarter of this year, there will be more graduates of these courses with good language skills.
“We consciously tried to make people ’ s qualifications visible and usable, ” he said, explaining that the goal was for refugees not to be immediately employed as assistants, but to be hired according to their potential.
Terzenbach noted that during the refugee wave between 2014 and 2016, the goal was to have 50 per cent of people employed five to six years after they came, noting that this was achieved despite the difficulties and hardship faced by the coronavirus epidemic.
It turned out that a large part of the refugees were willing to stay in Germany for a long time to learn German and to work.
Hans-Eckhard Zomer, president of the Federal Authority for Migration and Refugees, announced that integration and language courses have been attended better than ever, and explained that more than 500,000 migrants have enrolled in such courses over the past year, pointing out that the number has almost doubled compared to 2021.
Within days, Olaf Schulz announced a strategic shift in post-war Germany a year ago, at a juncture that remains difficult to implement.
Remarks by the German chancellor at this weekend ’ s Munich Security Conference reveal the extent of the change.
Publish it.
More Economic News - Global

Germany's industry is expected to pay 40% more for energy in 2023 than in 2021 due to the war.

German companies are struggling with high energy prices, particularly gas, which is three to five times higher than in the US.

German electricity prices are four times higher than France's, which has ample nuclear power.

The Federation of German Chambers of Industry and Commerce expects a recession this year due to the war's impact on energy prices.

The war has caused irreparable human suffering and economic losses in Germany.

Many German companies have seen a strong increase in their energy costs.

Germany's reliance on Russian pipeline gas has made it vulnerable to high energy prices.

Russia's war on Ukraine prompted Germany to restart construction of two abandoned LNG terminals.

Title:

Content: Geopolitics / Ukraine
The Ukraine War Affects Germany ’ s Energy Strategy
Russia ’ s war on Ukraine forced Germany to overhaul its energy strategy.
Berlin has urgently started the construction of two previously abandoned LNG terminals.
This is the subject of a field interview published by our RFI correspondent in the French "Chronique Reportage International" column on Thursday, March 3rd.
Advertisement
In an interview published on Thursday, March 03, 2022 in Chronique Reportage International, correspondent Julien Méchaussie reported from Berlin that Germany, which imports more than 50% of its natural gas and relies on Russian supplies, is now forced to review its energy strategy from the bottom up.
In the face of the inevitable price increase, the people are very worried.
The original title of this RFI column in French was: [Guerre en Ukraine: les conséquences sur l'appropriationnement en gaz russe pour l'Allemagne].
The war in Ukraine: consequences of Russian gas supplies for Germany.
Below is a brief summary for information.
The German people are upset -
In a live interview from Berlin published Thursday in Chronique Reportage International, RFI ’ s French-language network, a passer-by said in German on his way to work that the outbreak of the war in Ukraine had caused a decades-old energy policy to collapse in a matter of days.
Rising energy prices are not good for anyone.
This is not good for the job market, which automatically leads to price increases for all products.
People will be afraid of huge inflation, and the impact on the economy is tragic.
Here, the RFI French correspondent pointed out that the fear of the passer-by interviewed represents many German people.
In Germany, which has a long history of importing Russian gas, Prime Minister Olaf Scholz announced the suspension of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project.
The pipeline linking northern Germany to Russia via the Baltic Sea was completed in September 2021.
The project has now come to a halt. Nord Stream 2 declared bankruptcy this week and more than 100 of its collaborators lost their jobs.
There were signs before the war -
A well-known professor of environmental and resource economics called Germany naive.
He said that at the beginning of this winter, the wind has turned around.
Before the war, Russian gas exports to Germany had dropped to their lowest level in months.
Despite the record price, it is now good to see that this is clearly part of the overall strategy of the Russian side.
German Deputy Prime Minister and Federal Minister for Economy and Climate Robert Habeck plans to increase coal imports.
The German Federation of Small and Medium Enterprises has called for an extension of the deadline for coal abandonment, which was decided at the end of last year.
Germany, now seeking to diversify its energy supply, will turn to countries like the United States and Qatar.
But the problem is that these countries are now exporting liquefied natural gas, and Germany has no corresponding terminal to be docked.
Experts interviewed pointed out that Germany is in urgent need of new liquefied natural gas terminals.
However, it takes three to four years to build a terminal.
Of course people can do it as quickly as possible, but this new strategy is not a very short-term solution.
We need to rely on existing infrastructure.
Once the new terminal is put into use, the sky should clear up.
Germany launches old project -
Abandoned two years ago due to a lack of political support, two projects to build LNG terminals in the North Sea have now been urgently launched at a cost of around €1 billion.
... and...
Email News Headlines In Your Daily News Letter
Download the Guangdong-France app to track international current events

Germany relies heavily on Russian natural gas imports, making it vulnerable to disruptions.

The war in Ukraine has led to increased energy prices, causing concern in Germany and potentially impacting its economy.

Germany will seek liquefied natural gas from countries like the US and Qatar to diversify its energy supply.

Germany lacks terminals to receive liquefied natural gas and new ones will take three to four years to build.

Germany is reviving abandoned LNG terminal projects in the North Sea.

Germany plans to increase coal imports and may delay its coal phase-out.

Germany still relies on Russian oil and gas despite vowing to end imports.

Title:

Content: Why do the four major NATO allies have different views and what do some cases tell us about the future of the organisation?

On April 4, amid Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine, NATO turned 73. An old man guarding liberty and democracy in a world at war.

Over the past several weeks, the Ukraine conflict has seen the 30-nation security alliance come together—especially the US, UK, France and Germany—against a common “enemy” in Russian President Vladimir Putin.

But on closer look, no one can miss the bandages that are holding the grouping together. The ravages of time and age appear to be catching up with NATO.

French President Emmanuel Macron’s 2019 description of NATO as “braindead” is ringing through the visible signs of divisions within the grouping as the Ukraine conflict drags on.

Despite the show of unity, it will be quite challenging for the NATO powers to stay on the same diplomatic page through the crisis.

The 2021 AUKUS deal between the US and UK, which broke the submarine contract between France and Australia, had incurred Paris's wrath. French officials accused Australia, the US, and the UK of behaving in a duplicitous manner that betrayed and humiliated France. According to France, the AUKUS deal was far more than just a diplomatic spat; it was a complete failure of trust between allies and doubted what NATO exists for.

For NATO, the Ukraine conflict was seen as the best hope for the allies to mend fences.

For example, the UK — which was charting a new course since Brexit — is now standing shoulder-to-shoulder with its old allies in the EU in supporting Ukraine over Russia.

However, the issue is whether the conflict in Ukraine will have a long-lasting gluing effect on the Western NATO allies. Put differently, it is a primary concern of Washington whether the conflict will serve as a backdrop to strengthen trans-Atlantic cooperation.

The divergent individual interests of the four major NATO powers have been visible through the Ukraine conflict.

 Germany is a case in point. Despite the bold declaration of “Zeitenwende” — which means a turning point in its foreign policy — that led to suspension of the Nord Stream 2 project, a massive boost in defence spending, and a promised end to Russian energy imports, Germany continues to rely on Russian oil and gas.

 From Washington's perspective, Germany's dependence on Russian energy would always put Germans at the mercy of Russia. The US’ fears were threefold. Firstly, it was apprehensive that Germany’s dependence on Russian oil and gas would enhance Moscow’s regional importance at the expense of Berlin’s relations with Washington when the US became the world's largest gas producer and a global player in gas markets.

 Second, Germany's improving energy relations with Russia would threaten trans-Atlantic cooperation. Third, Germany and France’s hesitancy over sanctions on Russia and their reluctance to provide Ukraine with heavy weaponry could deepen the diverging interests among NATO allies.

 The worst-case scenario for Germany and France is a prolonged Ukraine-Russia conflict — with the US and UK making more and more provocative statements against Putin and waging a proxy war by sending heavy artillery, ammunition, and drones to Ukraine to bring about a "grinding war" that nobody wins.

 Such a war of attrition would spill across borders and automatically threaten the European continent rather than the US, whose main aim is to keep Russia busy in Ukraine and thus lessen the Kremlin's military influence in Syria, the East Mediterranean and Libya.

Is Germany an outlier?

Speaking at a joint news conference with European Parliament President Roberta Metsola in Berlin, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said European countries should carefully assess the sanctions on the Kremlin.

Warning that “sanctions should have an effect on the aggressor, but at the same time, we should make sure that they have minimal repercussions for our economies, and we should be able to uphold them," Scholz drew attention to the fact that the ongoing conflict in Ukraine could destabilise European economy and security.

Interestingly, Scholz's refusal to travel to Ukraine after President Zelensky rebuked German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier clearly shows that Germany is seen as an outlier than the others, including Boris Johnson, who paid a visit to Kiev.

The UK's ability to use "democracy” as a bargaining chip to pressure Germany and France to serve Anglo-Saxon interests is also noteworthy. For example, the UK has seized the opportunity to raise its voice as a defender of democracy and freedom and reaffirm the role of a “great power” that Britain has been looking to play since World War II.

Much more realistic and threatening is the UK and US’s policy of holding democracy and human rights as the Damocles sword over these two pivot countries; Germany and France.

Both have no choice but to make a preference between the two alternatives. One is to support Washington's policy of moving weapons and equipment to Ukraine at "record speed" and applying sanctions on Russia to rescue Ukrainian civilians from Russia's assaults.

The second is to continue energy relations with Russia under Putin, prioritising their economic interests at the expense of being stigmatised as an outlier, anti-democratic at a time when the Bucha incident has put an end to the prospect of a peaceful resolution — the first steps of which were taken in Istanbul, Türkiye — to the war in Ukraine.

The differing views in Berlin, Washington, Paris and London on dealing with Putin's aspiration to rebuild a sphere of influence in ex-Soviet territories have always been in flux, with different capitals taking different views at various points.

The Ukraine conflict is not only a part of the general western perception of Russia, which fulfils the role of being the "other" but is also a severe test to understanding the durability of the unity of the West or NATO.

 In a nutshell, leaving aside futurology, two points should be stressed: first, NATO has not been designed to withstand proxy conflicts — Germany against the Russian Federation, France against the AUKUS, Ukraine against Belarus and the Russian Federation. All these have severely weakened the alliance and endangered world peace.

 Second, NATO is in a risky situation because of differences in security or foreign relations issues between member states and because of their domestic compulsions. After all, every country rides out the rough on a simple principle: safety first.

Disclaimer: The viewpoints expressed by the authors do not necessarily reflect the opinions, viewpoints and editorial policies of TRT World.

We welcome all pitches and submissions to TRT World Opinion – please send them via email, to opinion.editorial@trtworld.com

Source: TRT World

The US fears Germany's dependence on Russian energy will compromise its relations with Washington and boost Moscow's influence.

Germany's energy ties with Russia may harm trans-Atlantic cooperation.

A prolonged Ukraine-Russia conflict could threaten the European continent and Germany's energy supply.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz warned that sanctions on the Kremlin should have minimal repercussions for European economies, particularly Germany's energy supply.

Germany's refusal to cut off energy ties with Russia has made it an outlier among NATO allies, potentially threatening its energy supply and security.

Some Germans are protesting the return of nuclear reactors, with recent demonstrations in several cities, including Berlin, Düsseldorf, and Frankfurt.

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

Germany is restarting work on two nuclear reactors set to be shut down this year, amid public and Green Party opposition.

The