Germany's decision to phase out nuclear energy was primarily driven by safety concerns following the Fukushima disaster in 2011, which heightened public and political fears about the risks associated with nuclear power plants.

This policy shift was also influenced by Germany's long-standing anti-nuclear sentiment, rooted in historical events such as the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, which had a profound impact on public opinion and led to the establishment of stricter radiation monitoring and environmental policies.

The anti-nuclear movement in Germany gained momentum in the 1970s, driven by environmental concerns and opposition to nuclear waste storage, and was institutionalized with the rise of the Green Party, which made anti-nuclear policies a central part of its platform.

Chancellor Angela Merkel's decision to accelerate the nuclear phase-out after Fukushima marked a reversal of her earlier pro-nuclear stance, reflecting the influence of both domestic political movements and international events on Germany's energy policy.

Germany’s Energiewende strategy, aimed at transitioning to renewable energy and reducing carbon emissions, played a pivotal role in the decision to phase out nuclear power, prioritizing renewable energy as a safer and more sustainable alternative.

Prior to the phase-out, nuclear power accounted for approximately 12% of Germany's electricity generation in 2021, alongside 41% from renewables, 28% from coal, and 15% from natural gas, highlighting its significant role in the energy mix.

Since the closure of its nuclear plants, Germany has sought to fill the gap primarily through increased reliance on renewable energy sources like wind and solar, though intermittent production has necessitated greater use of coal and natural gas.

This shift has led to higher carbon emissions and energy costs, as coal-fired electricity production rose by 13.3% in the third quarter of 2022 compared to the previous year, with coal now accounting for over a third of Germany's electricity generation.

The environmental implications of this reliance on coal are significant, with greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants increasing from 209 million tons to 250 million tons annually since 2020, complicating Germany's climate goals.

Germany aims to meet 80% of its energy demand with renewables by 2030, but the transition has been complicated by challenges such as reduced sunlight for solar power and insufficient grid infrastructure to transmit wind energy from the north to the industrial south.

The Russian-Ukrainian war has further strained Germany's energy transition, as disruptions in Russian gas supplies have forced the country to explore alternative sources like liquefied natural gas and renewable energy, though these measures remain costly and complex.

Germany historically imported over 50% of its natural gas from Russia, making it heavily dependent on these supplies for industrial and residential energy needs, a vulnerability exposed by the war.

The suspension of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline project and the urgent construction of liquefied natural gas terminals are part of Germany's efforts to diversify its energy sources, though these solutions will take years to fully implement.

The energy crisis has led to soaring energy prices, with forecasts indicating a 40% increase in costs compared to pre-war levels, severely impacting Germany's energy-intensive industries and contributing to economic strain.

Public opinion in Germany has shifted significantly in recent years, with an August 2022 poll showing 67% of Germans supporting a five-year extension of nuclear plants and 41% favoring the construction of new ones.

A significant portion of the population, including 64% of citizens and even 40% of Green Party voters, now supports restarting nuclear power plants to address the energy crisis and reduce electricity costs.

Political parties such as the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the Free Democratic Party (FDP) have advocated for extending the operation of existing nuclear plants and exploring advanced nuclear technologies to stabilize energy supply and meet climate goals.

Proponents argue that restarting nuclear power could reduce Germany's carbon emissions by 25 to 30 million tons annually and mitigate the high electricity costs exacerbated by reliance on alternative energy sources.

Despite these debates, the German government has maintained its stance against nuclear energy, citing safety concerns and the unresolved issue of radioactive waste disposal as key reasons for its opposition.

Germany has initiated a nationwide search for a final repository for high-level radioactive waste, though the process has faced delays and is now projected to be completed by 2046 at the earliest.

Temporary storage facilities, such as the one in Gorleben, have been used to house nuclear waste, but these measures have been criticized for their vulnerability compared to deep geological storage.

The economic consequences of shutting down nuclear reactors include significant decommissioning costs, which are higher than international averages, and increased reliance on coal and natural gas, leading to higher social costs from air pollution and mortality risks.

Germany’s transition to renewable energy sources has required substantial investments, with plans to increase renewable energy supply to 80% by 2030, but this shift has also led to higher electricity prices for households, which are among the highest in Europe.

The closure of nuclear plants has necessitated costly upgrades to Germany’s power grid infrastructure, with a 10-year plan involving 26 transmission projects and an investment of €10 billion to ensure grid stability.

Germany’s stance on nuclear energy contrasts sharply with France, which relies on nuclear power for 70% of its electricity and views it as essential for achieving carbon neutrality by 2050.

While Germany prioritizes renewable energy and green hydrogen, France plans to modernize existing reactors and build new ones, highlighting divergent strategies within Europe for balancing energy security and carbon reduction.

The EU's proposal to classify nuclear energy as 'green' has deepened divisions, with Germany rejecting nuclear as unsafe and unsustainable, while France advocates for its inclusion as a transitional energy source.

Germany’s reliance on coal and natural gas to replace nuclear energy has raised concerns about its ability to meet carbon reduction targets under the Paris Agreement, as these fossil fuels emit significantly more greenhouse gases.

Critics argue that Germany’s nuclear phase-out undermines its climate goals, as nuclear energy provides stable, low-carbon electricity, and its absence has forced greater reliance on environmentally harmful fossil fuels.

Germany is exploring innovative technologies such as agrivoltaics, which combines solar power generation with agricultural land use, to enhance renewable energy efficiency and scalability.

The country is also advancing green hydrogen production, exemplified by projects like Leuna100, which aim to produce cost-efficient green methanol as a climate-neutral fuel alternative for industries like shipping and aviation.

Germany's experience underscores the geopolitical risks of energy dependence, as the Russian-Ukrainian war has reignited debates about extending nuclear plant operations to reduce reliance on imported natural gas.

Despite ongoing global interest in nuclear technologies like small modular reactors (SMRs), Germany has largely completed its nuclear phase-out, shutting down its last three reactors in April 2023.

While SMRs are gaining traction internationally, German research has raised concerns about their safety, environmental impact, and increased risks of nuclear proliferation, contributing to skepticism about their adoption.

Germany's decision to phase out nuclear energy was primarily driven by safety concerns following the Fukushima disaster in 2011, which heightened public and political fears about the risks associated with nuclear power plants.

Title:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More from ... Louise Guillot

This policy shift was also influenced by Germany's long-standing anti-nuclear sentiment, rooted in historical events such as the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, which had a profound impact on public opinion and led to the establishment of stricter radiation monitoring and environmental policies.

Title:

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

The anti-nuclear movement in Germany gained momentum in the 1970s, driven by environmental concerns and opposition to nuclear waste storage, and was institutionalized with the rise of the Green Party, which made anti-nuclear policies a central part of its platform.

Chancellor Angela Merkel's decision to accelerate the nuclear phase-out after Fukushima marked a reversal of her earlier pro-nuclear stance, reflecting the influence of both domestic political movements and international events on Germany's energy policy.

Germany’s Energiewende strategy, aimed at transitioning to renewable energy and reducing carbon emissions, played a pivotal role in the decision to phase out nuclear power, prioritizing renewable energy as a safer and more sustainable alternative.

Title:

Content: 1.
Inhalt
2.
Navigation
3.
Weitere Inhalte
4.
Metanavigation
5.
Suche
6.
Choose from 30 Languages
Energy transition
Germany ’ s Energiewende is a national energy system reform strategy aimed at reducing the country ’ s total energy consumption and eventually withdrawing from the use of nuclear energy.
The German “Energiewende ” energy transition has become a new term widely quoted in the English-language media, and Germany plans to increase the share of renewable energy to 80% by 2050.
Show more articles

Prior to the phase-out, nuclear power accounted for approximately 12% of Germany's electricity generation in 2021, alongside 41% from renewables, 28% from coal, and 15% from natural gas, highlighting its significant role in the energy mix.

Title:

Content: World

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Source link

James Reno

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

Related Articles

Back to top button

Since the closure of its nuclear plants, Germany has sought to fill the gap primarily through increased reliance on renewable energy sources like wind and solar, though intermittent production has necessitated greater use of coal and natural gas.

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

This shift has led to higher carbon emissions and energy costs, as coal-fired electricity production rose by 13.3% in the third quarter of 2022 compared to the previous year, with coal now accounting for over a third of Germany's electricity generation.

Title:

Content: Germany is reviving coal power because security is more important than climate goals
Germany is reviving coal power because security is more important than climate goals
Germany plans to increase its reliance on coal to combat an unprecedented energy crisis, and this comes at the expense of its ambitious climate goals, Bloomberg writes.
According to data compiled by Bloomberg, Europe ’ s largest economy is burning this fossil fuel at the fastest rate in six years.
Germany is also one of the few countries to increase coal imports next year.
Energy company Uniper SE has announced that it will extend the operation of two coal-fired power plants in Germany until March 2024 to save natural gas in the coming winters.
Relatively cheap coal is returning around the world, which is highly polluting as countries try to avoid an economic depression caused by rising energy prices.
In Europe, the crisis is acute because Russia has limited gas supplies.
Germany is currently trying to strike a balance between the short-term priority of improving energy security and the long-term goal of near-zero emissions by 2045.
“Everyone is sticking to their climate goals, but it ’ s true that when you ’ re faced with the dilemma of leaving the lights on or cutting carbon emissions, you ’ re choosing the first option, ” said Carlos Fernández Alvarez, acting head of the International Energy Agency ’ s Department of Gas, Coal and Energy.
Germany plans to phase out coal by 2038, but the ruling coalition insists on an even earlier target of 2030.
In order to survive the current crisis, the country temporarily restarted some of the power plants that had previously been shut down.
According to the Federal Statistical Office Destatis, Germany currently produces more than a third of its electricity from coal-fired power plants.
In the third quarter, electricity production using this fuel was 13.3% higher than in the same period a year earlier, the agency said.
There are two main reasons for the revival of coal use in Germany: the transition from expensive natural gas and the growing demand for electricity in France, where power generation is hampered by the shutdown of nuclear reactors.
Electricity in Germany this month became as polluting as in South Africa and India, as lower wind speeds limited renewable generation and coal consumption rose.
Key words
Back to top

The environmental implications of this reliance on coal are significant, with greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants increasing from 209 million tons to 250 million tons annually since 2020, complicating Germany's climate goals.

Title:

Content: Germany will go to an unpopular measure for the sake of heat in the winter
The German authorities will return to work coal thermal power plants for the sake of uninterrupted power supply in the winter
The German government has decided to return to work several coal-fired thermal power plants (TPPs) in order to ensure uninterrupted power supply during peak periods of demand in the coming winter.
This is reported by Bloomberg.
We are talking about the permission to resume work at the stations owned by the energy companies RWE and LEAG.
As specified in the Ministry of economy and climate protection, this unpopular in the context of the desire of the German authorities to achieve zero carbon emissions measure should help the country to save natural gas and prevent interruptions in energy supplies during the heating season.
At the same time, experts warn that the decision of the Bundestag to return to work “dirty ” TPPs risks complicating the achievement of the country ’ s climate goals, including a complete abandonment of coal generation by 2030.
Since 2020, such energy facilities began to emit much more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.
So, according to the Federal Agency for Environmental Protection, by the end of 2022, the volume of emissions of harmful substances approached the mark of 250 million tons, although a few years ago they were at the level of 209 million.
The return to operation of several German coal-fired power plants is associated with a sharp reduction in the supply of Russian energy resources, including pipeline gas.
This forced the German government to rely on burning coal to produce electricity.
The situation with the stability of power supply in the country is also affected by the phased decommissioning of the remaining nuclear reactors in Germany.
In the first half of July, Reuters reported on a number of challenges that the German authorities are at risk of facing on the way to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050.
For a more active transition to hydrogen energy, the country needs to lay 1,800 kilometers of converted and new pipelines, which will require significant financial support from the German and European authorities.
However, even after that, Germany will have to import at least half of the required consumption rate of this type of fuel from abroad.
The good tape is deactivated.
Welcome to the real world.

Germany aims to meet 80% of its energy demand with renewables by 2030, but the transition has been complicated by challenges such as reduced sunlight for solar power and insufficient grid infrastructure to transmit wind energy from the north to the industrial south.

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

The Russian-Ukrainian war has further strained Germany's energy transition, as disruptions in Russian gas supplies have forced the country to explore alternative sources like liquefied natural gas and renewable energy, though these measures remain costly and complex.

Title:

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

Germany historically imported over 50% of its natural gas from Russia, making it heavily dependent on these supplies for industrial and residential energy needs, a vulnerability exposed by the war.

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

The suspension of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline project and the urgent construction of liquefied natural gas terminals are part of Germany's efforts to diversify its energy sources, though these solutions will take years to fully implement.

The energy crisis has led to soaring energy prices, with forecasts indicating a 40% increase in costs compared to pre-war levels, severely impacting Germany's energy-intensive industries and contributing to economic strain.

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

Public opinion in Germany has shifted significantly in recent years, with an August 2022 poll showing 67% of Germans supporting a five-year extension of nuclear plants and 41% favoring the construction of new ones.

Title:

Content: “There is no excuse for the rich West to be oblivious to the global debt crisis. ” – The Guardian
We start with an opinion piece by Larry Elliott, the Guardian ’ s economic editor, entitled “The wealthy West has little excuse for finally waking up to the global debt crisis. ”
“After a decade or more of their obsession with their own problems, countries in the wealthy West have begun to pay attention to the threat of a looming debt crisis in the poorer parts of the world, ” he says at a meeting of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in Washington this week.
The good news is that debt has risen to the highest level on the policy agenda and is seen as a problem that needs to be regulated, IMF Managing Director Kristalina Georgieva said about the need for distressed countries to help: “Help them deal with the debt burden, which has made the shocks of past years more difficult; and help ensure that the IMF can continue to support them in the years to come. ”
The bad news, according to Elliott, is that Georgieva ’ s appeal has not yet been heeded, as rich countries are still primarily interested in their own problems.
The geopolitical rivalry between the United States and China is also not helping.
Creditor countries may wake up to the idea that there is a debt problem but it is far from a solution.
Talk is not like work. ”
Achim Steiner, director of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), said: “There are more than 50 countries on his radar that can default very quickly. ”
Steiner believes that the UN has no chance of meeting its ambitious 2030 development goals, unless there is urgent action.
The volume of lending by the private sector has made attempts to restructure or write off debt more complex than in the past.
At the time of the HIPC initiative, creditors tended to be either individual governments or multilateral organizations such as the World Bank.
Skip the podcast and keep reading.
Podcast
BBC Extra
A weekly podcast that presents humanitarian stories about the Arab world and its youth.
Loops
Podcast End
“But since the global financial crisis, many countries, especially middle-income countries, have borrowed heavily in financial markets, taking advantage of very low interest rates to finance domestic projects. ”
After the setback of the COVID-19 epidemic, low- and middle-income countries have since been hit by two other undesirable shocks: the war in Ukraine, which led to higher food and fuel prices, and the sharp increase in central bank interest rates in large Western economies.
The result is that debt servicing has become much more expensive, with many countries now frozen out of financial markets altogether.
Steiner said: "The issue is not financial but political.
The United States has mobilized $400 billion to secure Silicon Valley Bank deposits.
This is more than the developing world has received in three years.
It took the Swiss government less than 48 hours to find 100 billion Swiss francs to secure the rescue of one of its banks.
“The lesson of the recent banking crises is clear.
Rich countries can act fast enough when they want to, ” the writer concludes.
Fears of Macron ’ s politics
We turn to another Financial Times opinion piece by Alain Beatty, a trade writer, entitled “The Risks of Emmanuel Macron ’ s Strategic Insistence. ”
Macron ’ s focus on keeping a distance from both Washington and Beijing in pursuit of the EU ’ s vague “strategic autonomy ” is not an innovation among European policymakers, but geopolitical Europe enthusiasts need to recognize that the lack of unity and trust within the EU, rather than the sinister manipulation by Washington and Beijing, is the main obstacle.
“We ’ ve already seen this happen in trade policy, which is one area where the EU has long had the ability to act collectively.
In the same way that there is nothing stopping European governments from increasing military spending and playing a greater geopolitical role, the bloc can certainly increase its ability to use trade to project its strategic influence.
But while France has been keen to create new tools for intervening in trade and investment, other member states recognize that the views and interests of Paris are not necessarily those of the bloc as a whole.
“In recent years, the European Commission has carefully designed a range of trade instruments to confirm the bloc ’ s geo-economic weight.
The most politically salient is the anti-coercion tool ECI, which will allow the EU to use a wide range of trade and investment measures to retaliate against the bullying of trading partners.
France has strongly supported all this activity, and has also called for the creation of new EU central funds to pursue industrial policy.
“But the Commission will struggle to use this set of tools if there is opposition from other member states that are mindful of their export interests or distrust in using trade tools to manage a centralized strategic policy.
A few days before Macron ’ s trip, the Commission succumbed to pressure from some EU governments, including Germany, and gave member states a major role in determining the use of ECI.
Berlin instinctively avoids confrontation that could damage German exports and investments abroad.
There have also been more principled objections from liberal member states including Sweden and the Czech Republic, sceptical of attempts to politicize trade policy and the likelihood that it will be overly influenced by certain governments.
Macron inadvertently contributed to these concerns, especially as he unnerved some other EU governments two years ago with a clear orientation toward a major investment deal with China, “leaving a legacy of caution. ”
“Attempting to push a union with divergent views to adopt a single approach to a specific global issue is unlikely to produce long-term results. ”
German split on energy policy
We remain with an article by Laura Bettel, the Financial Times correspondent in Berlin, entitled “Germany is being torn apart by energy policy with the closure of nuclear plants. ”
Bethel said Germany ’ s last remaining nuclear power plants were shut down on Saturday, “marking a watershed moment in a country that has long had deep doubts about atomic energy. ”
Anti-nuclear activists hailed the shutdown of three reactors as a victory after a temporary delay following the start of the Russian-Ukrainian war that forced Berlin to look for alternatives to Russian gas.
Critics see the shutdown as an act of madness at a time when Europe ’ s energy supply remains precarious and the world is struggling to stop using fossil fuels.
After decades of anti-nuclear protests, the decisive moment came in 2011 when Chancellor Angela Merkel reversed an earlier decision to extend the life of the country ’ s nuclear plants until 2036, bringing the phase-out date to 2022.
The anti-nuclear movement in former West Germany dates back to the 1970s, when a popular campaign succeeded in stopping the construction of a nuclear power plant in the southwestern village of Weil.
The nuclear accidents at Three Mile Island in the United States in 1979 and at Chernobyl in 1986 fuelled that movement.
But German public opinion shifted after the Russo-Ukrainian War: an August 2022 poll from Der Spiegel found that 67 percent of Germans supported a five-year extension of the country ’ s nuclear plants.
41% supported the construction of new plants.
In a similar poll three decades ago, only 3% said yes.
But the German Green Party, now part of the three-way coalition government led by Olaf Schulz, only agreed to postpone the shutdown for a few months to fill any gap caused by the winter energy crisis.
“The way in which Germany has chosen to phase out nuclear power, and step back from fossil fuels as a bridging gap even as renewables increase dramatically, has been highly controversial. ”

A significant portion of the population, including 64% of citizens and even 40% of Green Party voters, now supports restarting nuclear power plants to address the energy crisis and reduce electricity costs.

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

Political parties such as the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the Free Democratic Party (FDP) have advocated for extending the operation of existing nuclear plants and exploring advanced nuclear technologies to stabilize energy supply and meet climate goals.

Title:

Content: MOSCOW, June 24 — PRIME.
According to a survey by ARD-Deutschlandtrend, almost two-thirds of Germans are in favor of extending the life of nuclear power plants, and the majority support more large-scale use of coal power.
The poll was conducted for ARD on June 21-22 among 1,248 German voters, with a statistical error of 2 to 3%.
56% of respondents support an increase in the load on coal-fired power plants, 36% disapprove of this measure proposed by the German Energy Ministry as part of an emergency plan for gas conservation.
Of the respondents, 61% supported the initiative of a number of politicians from the former ruling faction of the CDU / CSU and the liberal democratic FDP to continue operating nuclear power plants after the end of the year, when it was planned to completely abandon nuclear energy, 32% of respondents opposed.

Proponents argue that restarting nuclear power could reduce Germany's carbon emissions by 25 to 30 million tons annually and mitigate the high electricity costs exacerbated by reliance on alternative energy sources.

Despite these debates, the German government has maintained its stance against nuclear energy, citing safety concerns and the unresolved issue of radioactive waste disposal as key reasons for its opposition.

Title:

Content: Nuclear research and development: sustainable investment or a “green drift ” scam?
Photo Credit: AP / Tachih Images
What we want you to know is
In the past few decades, nuclear power has already declined, but the sunset industry is now repackaging itself with “green energy ” and trying to return to the market with the image of“ climate savior. ”
Text: Ho Wai Hoon (Project Director, Centre for Greater China Studies, The Education University of Hong Kong), Lo Chin-yi (Co-Director, Centre for Greater China Studies, The Education University of Hong Kong)
At the beginning of the year 2022, nuclear energy has become the focus of international debate on energy strategy.
A few hours before the start of the New Year, the European Commission proposed a draft to classify natural gas and nuclear energy investment projects as “green investments ”, arguing that they are a means to help the transition to a future based on renewable energy and help Europe reduce carbon emissions, so they can be included in the“ Sustainable Finance Classification ” – a “Classification ” that will be introduced in 2020 to integrate environmental, social and governance factors into the investment decision-making system. Relevant economic investment and financing activities provide a set of standards, on the one hand, to promote the sustainable financial development of the market, and at the same time to eliminate the company's" green drift "behavior, is the first case of a global international organization.
Differences within the European Union
However, whether nuclear energy is “green investment ” has been divided in the EU.
In the context of the international community ’ s emphasis on sustainable development and climate change, green finance has become an important strategic tool, and proponents of nuclear energy believe that it is the most effective, stable and cheapest option to generate electricity without emitting greenhouse gases.
Under the pressure of carbon reduction, many countries need to reduce the proportion of coal and fossil fuel power generation, and nuclear power is the best alternative energy source.
As a result, France, which generates more than 70% of its electricity from nuclear power, announced last November that it would restart the construction of new nuclear reactors.
President Emmanuel Macron has stressed that nuclear energy will help France achieve its energy independence and its goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2050.
Some developing countries in Eastern Europe that are still highly dependent on coal and fossil fuels for power generation, such as Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria and Romania, are hoping to develop nuclear power in order to meet the requirements of rising electricity demand and carbon reduction, and it is clear that carbon neutrality cannot be achieved without nuclear energy.
The anti-nuclear faction, led by Germany, plus Austria, Denmark, Luxembourg and Portugal, strongly opposed the EU's proposal to include nuclear energy in the "classification law", arguing that it does not comply with the principle of "no major harm" and is only "greenwashing".
Since the 1986 Chernobyl nuclear accident and the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident, many countries have witnessed the huge and far-reaching consequences of nuclear accidents for people and the environment, and have proposed energy policies to completely abolish nuclear energy.
In Germany, for example, after the Fukushima nuclear accident, it decided to close all nuclear power plants by 2022 and vigorously develop renewable energy.
Germany ’ s last nuclear power plants are set to close by the end of this year.
In fact, the global share of total nuclear power generation has steadily declined from nearly 20% in 1996 to 10% in 2020.
In the past few decades, nuclear power has already declined, but the sunset industry is now repackaging with “green energy ” and trying to return to the market with the image of“ climate savior ”.
The focus of the debate on nuclear energy has shifted from the most basic safety issues and how to properly dispose of nuclear waste to the agenda on climate change, energy supply security and economic impact.
Is nuclear energy worth investing in?
When we talk about nuclear energy, how can safety not be at the root of our concern?
Even if security issues are put aside first, will it solve climate change in time?
Is it really worth investing in?
One of the main reasons for the decline of the global nuclear energy industry is that it takes too long to build.
Of the 53 aircraft currently under construction around the world, the average construction time is 7 years, and 31 of them have project delays, the longest is even more than 36 years.
EDF announced this month that the construction of a new generation of nuclear power plant, which was expected to be completed by the end of this year, is being postponed to the second quarter of next year due to “yet another delay ” due to the epidemic.
Say “again ” because it has been postponed many times; the nuclear power plant started as early as 2007, when it was claimed that it could be completed in five years, and the result has been delayed for more than a decade, and it has not been finished.
The second reason why nuclear power is deterring investors is the rising cost of construction.
The estimated cost of a nuclear power plant in France was €3.3 billion, but it has since risen to almost four times, and now stands at €12.7 billion.
Thierry Breton, executive director of internal market affairs of the European Union, pointed out that from now to 2030, the existing nuclear power plants alone need 50 billion euros of investment; the new generation of nuclear power plants need 500 billion euros.
When we thought that technological progress could reduce costs, the truth turned out to be the opposite.
Investing in nuclear energy to save the planet?
As we all know, Microsoft founder Bill Gates has been obsessed with climate investment in recent years, and Breakthrough Energy Ventures, one of the founders, hopes to bring “breakthrough ” green energy technology.
He believes nuclear power is the ultimate solution to the climate problem. He has invested in Terra Power ’ s “new generation of nuclear energy ” for many years, and called on the U.S. government to invest in the“ advanced ” nuclear energy industry, “provide new funding, update relevant regulations, and show investors that it is serious. ”
Bill Gates has repeatedly applied to Congress for research funding, and has received more than $250 million in research grants from the Department of Energy.
Of course, the cost of construction of TerraPower ’ s new generation nuclear reactor is estimated to be as high as $1 billion, and congressional sponsorship is a big deal.
However, this nuclear power technology has not been successfully developed, whether it is "breakthrough" or just heard the sound of the staircase; close to the fire, looking at distant water to save, the earth can wait how many more decades?
“All investments involve risk, and the price of investment products can go up or down, or even become worthless.
Bill Gates, the business wizard, has certainly not forgotten to provide you with investment risk tips and disclaimers. He recently claimed at the SOSV “Climate Technology Summit ” that he does not need climate technology to make money, emphasizing that new technology requires a lot of investment but is not sure of a return.
So, is investing in nuclear energy really saving the planet, or is it just another “WeChat woman ” investment scam?
Editorial responsibility: Alvin
Edited by: Alex
(Join the critical review network member) Daily wonderful articles sent directly to your mailbox, each week exclusive editorial selection, current affairs selection, art weekly newspaper and other special electronic newspapers.
You can also leave comments with authors, journalists, and editors to discuss the content of the article.
Join now for free!
Guess you like it.
Tags:

Germany has initiated a nationwide search for a final repository for high-level radioactive waste, though the process has faced delays and is now projected to be completed by 2046 at the earliest.

Title:

Content: German official: The search for a final repository of nuclear waste must be completed until 2046 - Sunrise Gate
Sun 23 Jul 2023 1: 51 PM Cairo Cairo 24 °
Most Read
You might like it, too.
Share your opinion
Do you think it ’ s a good way to strengthen the community?
German official says search for final nuclear waste repository must be completed by 2046
Munich / Berlin (dpa)
Published on: Sunday 23 July 2023 - 1: 36 PM | Last updated on Sunday 23 July 2023 - 1: 36 PM
The problems and dangers of nuclear power were not avoided even after the German nuclear reactors were shut down.
The head of the Federal Authority for the Safety of Nuclear Waste Disposal said he believes that the search for a final repository of high-activity nuclear waste should be completed until 2046.
Wolfram Koenig told the German news agency dpa in the southern German city of Munich: "We have to treat 2046, the time point that the Federal Waste Disposal Society assumes is the fastest time point, as a reference point."
Stressing the need to avoid further delays, he said: "Security is a priority, but when it comes to radioactive waste, security is inseparable from time as well.
If the issue is postponed for a long time, time itself will become an element of safety, "he said, stressing the importance of having a realistic and ambitious time plan at the same time.
It was announced in November that the target date for a waste disposal site by 2031 could no longer be met.
The German Waste Disposal Association predicts that at best this will be done in 2046, but another scenario envisages a timetable extending to 2068.
The complex search for a final repository of such waste shows that Germany had taken the path of nuclear energy without thinking about all the consequences to the end, König said, stressing that in the end the use of nuclear energy is only complete if radioactive waste is securely buried underground and future generations no longer have to worry about it.
You might like it, too.
Share your comment

Temporary storage facilities, such as the one in Gorleben, have been used to house nuclear waste, but these measures have been criticized for their vulnerability compared to deep geological storage.

Title:

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

The economic consequences of shutting down nuclear reactors include significant decommissioning costs, which are higher than international averages, and increased reliance on coal and natural gas, leading to higher social costs from air pollution and mortality risks.

Title:

Content: 'Sustainability challenges' What Big Oil, green movement conceal from us

The US funds its military aid to Ukraine with tax dollars and some of America’s allies fund Putin’s military with purchases of his oil and gas exports. And that’s the absurdity that has come to define the Russian invasion
Representative image

NEW YORK: It has long been said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. By that definition, we’re the ones detached from reality if we keep accepting what the oil industry and the green movement keep telling us over and over again and expecting a different result. The greens keep saying that because the price of wind and solar is now as cheap as, or cheaper than, fossil fuels, they’ve won the energy war. Game, set, match — welcome to the green planet.

The oil companies say — as they have in each previous energy crisis since 1973 — that the only answer to this energy crisis is the one they’ve offered for the past 49 years: drill, baby, drill. Welcome to reality. Well, they’re both wrong, and accepting the repetition of either of these tired shibboleths is hurting us economically, environmentally and geopolitically — especially, of late, geopolitically.

Because our continued addiction to fossil fuels is bolstering Vladimir Putin’s petrodictatorship and creating a situation where we in the West are — yes, say it with me now — funding both sides of the war. We fund our military aid to Ukraine with our tax dollars and some of America’s allies fund Putin’s military with purchases of his oil and gas exports.

And if that’s not the definition of insanity, then I don’t know what is. Have no illusion — these sins of the green movement and the oil industry are not equal. The greens are trying to fix a real, planet-threatening problem, even if their ambition exceeds their grasp. The oil and coal companies know that what they are doing is incompatible with a stable, healthy environment. Yes, they are right that without them there would be no global economy today. But unless they use their immense engineering talents to become energy companies, not just fossil fuel companies, there will be no livable economy tomorrow.

Let’s look at both. For too long, too many in the green movement have treated the necessary and urgent shift we need to make from fossil fuels to renewable energy as though it were like flipping a switch — just get off oil, get off gasoline, get off coal and get off nuclear — and do it NOW, without having put in place the kind of transition mechanisms, clean energy sources and market incentives required to make such a massive shift in our energy system.

It’s Germany in 2011, suddenly deciding after the Fukushima accident to phase out its 17 relatively clean and reliable nuclear reactors, which provided some 25 percent of the country’s electricity. This, even though Germany had nowhere near enough solar, wind, geothermal or hydro to replace that nuclear power. So now it’s burning more coal and gas.

A 2019 working paper for the U.S. National Bureau of Economic Research found that in Germany “the lost nuclear electricity production due to the phaseout was replaced primarily by coal-fired production and net electricity imports. The social cost of this shift from nuclear to coal is approximately $12 billion per year. Over 70 percent of this cost comes from the increased mortality risk associated with exposure to the local air pollution emitted when burning fossil fuels.”

Today, the European Union is drawing up a plan to break its addiction to Russian oil and gas by 2027, but, in the meantime, Putin is laughing all the way to the bank. As CNN reported in April, citing a report by the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air: “Russian revenues from fossil fuel exports to the European Union soared during the first two months of the Ukraine invasion” — to $46.3 billion. That was more than double the value of Russian energy imported by the E.U. during the same two-month period a year earlier.

That was not because the E.U.’s volume of imports doubled. Higher oil and gas prices accounted for most of that increase. In other words, Putin starts a war that creates instability, which drives up oil prices, so he makes twice as much money exporting roughly the same amount of oil.

While Germany jumped off nuclear before it had a safety net of sufficient clean alternatives, at least it has been on a serious, path-defining quest to get them. Indeed, the whole world owes Germany a huge debt for driving down the price of solar panels and wind turbines through the subsidies and tax incentives it created. In Germany, wind turbines, solar panels and other renewables covered 54 percent of power consumption this past January and February — which is AMAZING. In 2021, renewable energy sources accounted for only about 12 percent of total U.S. energy that was consumed.

Still, the most important delusion of the green movement today — of which I am a proud, if grouchy, member — is telling itself that because the price of wind and solar technology has fallen so low now that it can beat coal and natural gas in most markets, often even without subsidies, it’s “game over” for fossil fuels. I wish. Price is only half the story.

If you can’t install the transmission lines — to get that sun and wind power from the vast open spaces where it is generated to the big urban areas where it is needed — and if you cannot set aside more land to install the scale of solar and wind farms you need to replace coal, gas or nuclear, it doesn’t matter that your renewables are cheaper on a per-kilowatt-hour basis.

And today transmission is a huge problem in the U.S. and Europe, where many people don’t want wind farms, solar fields, electricity lines — or natural gas pipelines — in their backyard. I wish this were not the case, but there is no immaculate pathway from brown energy to green energy. The road is paved with cruel trade-offs. Pick your poison — but grow up. Meanwhile, ever since the 1973 Arab oil embargo, the big oil companies have basically said in each successive crisis: Sure, we need more clean energy, but you have to understand — it doesn’t scale. Right now, we’re in an emergency, so we just need to drill more. You hear the same refrain today, which is why we’re in danger of wasting yet another oil crisis and never breaking our fossil fuel addiction.

For those oil companies sitting on large natural gas deposits — which are needed in this transition because gas is cleaner than coal — it means tapping those deposits but doing so with zero methane leakage; otherwise gas becomes as bad as coal. But it also means thinking much more seriously about how fossil fuel companies truly make the transition to become “energy companies,” not just oil companies, so they can leverage their amazing pools of engineering talent to provide more energy solutions that save the planet, not warm it.

Friedman is an Opinion Columnist with NYT©2022

The New York Times

Related Stories

No stories found.

Germany’s transition to renewable energy sources has required substantial investments, with plans to increase renewable energy supply to 80% by 2030, but this shift has also led to higher electricity prices for households, which are among the highest in Europe.

Title:

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

The closure of nuclear plants has necessitated costly upgrades to Germany’s power grid infrastructure, with a 10-year plan involving 26 transmission projects and an investment of €10 billion to ensure grid stability.

Title:

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

Germany’s stance on nuclear energy contrasts sharply with France, which relies on nuclear power for 70% of its electricity and views it as essential for achieving carbon neutrality by 2050.

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

While Germany prioritizes renewable energy and green hydrogen, France plans to modernize existing reactors and build new ones, highlighting divergent strategies within Europe for balancing energy security and carbon reduction.

The EU's proposal to classify nuclear energy as 'green' has deepened divisions, with Germany rejecting nuclear as unsafe and unsustainable, while France advocates for its inclusion as a transitional energy source.

Title:

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

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

Link copied

Macron wields 'tools to set EU agenda'

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But it is not Berlin who disapproves of the proposal.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Germany’s reliance on coal and natural gas to replace nuclear energy has raised concerns about its ability to meet carbon reduction targets under the Paris Agreement, as these fossil fuels emit significantly more greenhouse gases.

Critics argue that Germany’s nuclear phase-out undermines its climate goals, as nuclear energy provides stable, low-carbon electricity, and its absence has forced greater reliance on environmentally harmful fossil fuels.

Germany is exploring innovative technologies such as agrivoltaics, which combines solar power generation with agricultural land use, to enhance renewable energy efficiency and scalability.

Title:

Content: INTERSOLAR EUROPE 2022: INNOVATIVE AGRICULTURAL PHOTOVOLTAIC PROJECTS AND TECHNOLOGY

One of the key advantages of agrivoltaics is that it prevents land usage conflicts with agriculture by increasing solar power production using ground mounted PV systems. This can be seen in many European countries.

Munich/Pforzheim, March 31, 2022: Agricultural PV (or agrivoltaics) is the simultaneous use of land for both agriculture and solar power generation. This efficient approach is ever evolving and generating increasing amounts of interest. Long gone are the days when agricultural PV was considered a niche solution. According to Fraunhofer ISE, more than 14 gigawatts (GW) of capacity were installed globally back in 2020, with China leading the way. But agricultural PV is gaining traction in Europe too. Germany has put out innovation tenders to promote this technology, Italy is planning a major funding package and France has founded the world's first association dedicated to the promotion of agricultural PV. Progress is also being made towards greater standardization, which is vital for improved market ramp-up. Further experience in this area, innovative projects and agricultural PV technology are all set to be presented at Intersolar Europe, taking place from May 11-13, 2022, as part of The smarter E Europe at Messe München. Players in the industry will also have the opportunity to exchange ideas on the broad range of agrivoltaics services at the Intersolar Europe Conference on May 10, one day before the start of the exhibition.

One of the key advantages of agrivoltaics is that it prevents land usage conflicts with agriculture by increasing solar power production using ground mounted PV systems. This can be seen in many European countries. Italy has already pledged EUR 1.1 billion to promote agrivoltaics, including installing 2 GW of agricultural PV capacity. France, meanwhile, has been promoting agricultural PV since 2017 through a series of innovation tenders, launching 48 projects in 2020 alone. According to Christian Dupraz, a senior researcher at the French National Research Institute For Agriculture, Food and Environment (INRAE), most of these projects include tracking systems, which are the big trend in France.

Innovation tenders and new standards usher in a wave of development
Innovation tenders will likely boost agrivoltaics development in Germany.
In April 2021, industry representatives from agriculture, the PV sector, and research and certification bodies agreed on DIN SPEC 91434, which will serve as the basis for developing a full DIN standard. The specification covers the key aspects of agricultural PV, including scope of application, terminology, criteria and requirements for the technology, planning, installation, operation and maintenance. In October 2021, the German Federal Network Agency (BNetzA) used this specification to define the agricultural PV requirements for its innovation tenders - scheduled for spring 2022 - which aim to generate 150 megawatts (MW) of capacity in line with Germany's amended Renewable Energy Act. In its coalition agreement, Germany's new federal government announced that it plans to promote greater use of agrivoltaics as part of its 200 GW solar target. hence the original tender plans for 50 MW have been increased to 150 MW. The definition of suitable land has also been expanded to include perennial and permanent crops, including fruit production. Read the Trend Paper For Intersolar Europe: Agricultural PV to find out more about the developments sweeping through Europe.

Agricultural PV has even greater potential in regions with a desert climate or pronounced periods of drought, where water conservation plays a vital role in agriculture. International research projects such as WATERMED4.0 and APV-MaGa - Agriphotovoltaics for Mali and Gambia are investigating and implementing solutions aimed at using the land in three different ways - from food production and solar power generation to rain water collection and storage using the solar modules.

Enormous potential for orchards, berry farms and vineyards
In the village of Babberich in the Netherlands, raspberries are being grown on a 3.3 hectare farm under a 2.67 MW agri-PV-installation - and successfully so. This method has increased the net yield at harvest by around six percent compared with conventional raspberry-growing techniques that use polytunnels. Max Tegtmeyer from BayWa r.e. reports on this experience in a webinar on agricultural PV held by the International Solar Energy Society (ISES) and the Global Solar Council (GSC), which have been partners of Intersolar Europe for many years. The project was even awarded The smarter E AWARD in the Outstanding Solar Projects category in 2021. Moreover, in September last year, a 258 kW test plant was installed at an apple orchard in the German district of Rhineland-Palatinate in order to demonstrate the potential of agricultural PV and optimize its use in the fruit farming industry. Another five agricultural PV demonstration plants, with a total capacity of at least 1,650 kW, are also planned for fruit and berry farms in Baden-Württemberg, Germany. The plans were announced by the Baden-Württemberg Ministry of the Environment in mid-January 2022, along with a EUR 2.5 million funding package for the projects.

Image source: © Solar Promotion GmbH
Intersolar Europe 2022 promotes agricultural PV technology
Intersolar Europe 2022 is committed to providing a global platform for sharing information and experience in the field of agricultural PV, with the aim of driving forward the comparatively young technology. The exhibition is set to take place from May 11-13, 2022, in Munich as part of The smarter E Europe. Companies like BayWa r.e. AG and SunFarming GmbH are set to showcase projects, while others like Axial Structural Solutions S.L, IDEEMATEC GmbH and Premium Mounting Technologies Systems (PMT) will present the technology needed to get these projects off the ground. Goldbeck Solar GmbH - which won the Intersolar AWARD in 2021 for its fmodular arcs, creating a system that can be moved flexibly - will also present its products, and Next2Sun GmbH and STEAG Solar Energy Solutions GmbH will likewise be represented at the exhibition. Other exhibitors include research institutions such as the AIT Austrian Institute of Technology GmbH and the Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems (ISE). See the current trend paper on agrivoltaics for information on where you can find each of the exhibitors at Intersolar Europe 2022.

Intersolar Europe Conference - a focus on agricultural PV
The Intersolar Europe Conference, taking place on May 10, 2022, promises to be another highlight. In addition to sessions on floating solar and BIPV applications, the conference will host two events dedicated to the topic of agricultural PV. Alongside realistic ways of tapping into the potential of agricultural PV, the session How to Benefit most from Solar & Farming will present current market developments as well as a product overview and innovative solutions. This will be immediately followed by a session entitled Understanding the Versatility of Combining Solar Power with the Agribusiness. The speakers will present a range of agricultural PV applications and discuss the benefits for farmers and developments in the farming industry. Lastly, the conference will provide insights into how solar energy and urban farming work together.

Upcoming event: Agrivoltaics conference organized by Conexio
Conexio-PSE, a subsidiary of Solar Promotion GmbH, is organizing international hybrid conference AgriVoltaics2022, which is set to take place online and in person in the Italian city of Piacenza in the Emilia Romagna region from June 15-17. The conference underlines the importance of stepping up the exchange of information and experience on agricultural PV at the European and international level for getting this comparatively young technology off the ground.

Intersolar Europe will be held from May 11-13, 2022, as part of The smarter E Europe 2022 at Messe München.

For more information, please visit:
www.Intersolar.de
www.TheSmarterE.de

Intersolar Europe
Intersolar Europe is the world's leading exhibition for the solar industry. It takes place as part of The smarter E Europe - the continent's largest platform for the energy industry - and focuses on the photovoltaic, solar thermal technology and solar power plant sectors. Under the motto "Connecting solar business," manufacturers, suppliers, distributors, service providers, project planners and developers as well as start-ups from around the world meet in Munich every year to discuss the latest developments and trends, explore innovations firsthand and meet potential new customers. Intersolar Europe is taking place from May 11-13, 2022, at Messe München.

It is held in parallel to three more energy exhibitions as part of the innovation hub for new energy solutions: ees Europe, Europe's largest and most international exhibition for batteries and energy storage systems, Power2Drive Europe, the international exhibition for charging infrastructure and e-mobility, and EM-Power Europe, the international exhibition for energy management and integrated energy solutions.

At the accompanying Intersolar Europe Conference, renowned experts shed light on hot topics in the international solar industry.

After three decades of working towards a sustainable energy supply for the future, Intersolar celebrated its 30th anniversary in 2021. Having started off as the local "Solar '91" exhibition, Intersolar has evolved to become the most important solar industry platform in the world. The exhibition brings together pioneers and drivers of innovation within the solar industry, since 2018 under the umbrella of The smarter E Europe innovative platform.

For more information on Intersolar Europe, please visit: www.Intersolar.de

Intersolar Europe is organized by Solar Promotion GmbH, Pforzheim, and Freiburg Wirtschaft Touristik und Messe GmbH & Co. KG (FWTM).

Featured Product

S-5!® PVKIT™ 2.0 Solar Rooftop Solutions

The concept of combining PV arrays with standing seam metal roofing is growing-for good reasons. Metal roofs have a life expectancy of more than 40 years. Shouldn't the mounting system last as long? With S-5! zero-penetration attachment technology and PVKIT 2.0, the solarized metal roof is the most sustainable system available -and without compromising roof warranties! PVKIT 2.0 is the also the best solution for attaching PV modules directly to any exposed fastener metal roof.

The country is also advancing green hydrogen production, exemplified by projects like Leuna100, which aim to produce cost-efficient green methanol as a climate-neutral fuel alternative for industries like shipping and aviation.

Title:

Content: World’s first cost-efficient green methanol pilot plant inaugurated in Germany

The German research consortium has inaugurated the world’s first pilot plant for the cost-efficient production of green methanol in the Leuna Chemical Park.

The pilot plant was inaugurated on November 20 as part of the Leuna100 project which was launched in the Leuna Chemical Park in August 2023 and is set to run for three years. It is being funded with a total of €10.4 million by the German Federal Ministry for Digital and Transport (BMDV) as part of the Renewable Fuels Funding Program.

The consortium behind the project consists of climate tech start-up C1 Green Chemicals, Fraunhofer Institute for Wind Energy Systems IWES, Fraunhofer Institute for Environmental, Safety and Energy Technology UMSICHT, DBI – Gastechnologisches Institut gGmbH Freiberg, and the Technical University of Berlin (TU Berlin).

The goal is to utilize a fundamentally new production process to enable the cost-efficient market ramp-up of green methanol and thus offer the container shipping industry a climate-neutral alternative fuel.

The Leuna100 project encompasses green methanol production in three steps: synthesis gas production, methanol production, and purification of the crude methanol produced.

For this project, C1 developed a technology that enables efficient low-temperature and low-pressure-based methanol production.

Furthermore, two different technologies coupled for the CO2-based production of synthesis gas are employed. Fraunhofer UMSICHT is providing low-temperature co-electrolysis, while DBI – Gastechnologisches Institut gGmbH Freiberg utilizes a reverse water gas shift (RWGS) unit.

C1 is delivering the catalyst as well as a reactor developed in-house for the homogeneous catalysis of methanol. Fraunhofer IWES is providing the location and infrastructure at the Hydrogen Lab Leuna and evaluating the load flexibility. TU Berlin is developing an efficient, load-flexible operating concept on the basis of a dynamic overall process model.

Attending the inauguration, Minister for Transport, Volker Wissing, said: “Industry history is being written today in Leuna. This project represents a milestone for the post-fossil fuel era in the shipping and aviation industries. We are proud to support this ‘made in Germany’ research project with funds from the Renewable Fuels Funding Program. With its funding program, the BMDV is supporting the further development and market ramp-up of renewable fuels and thus also the achievement of climate goals in the transport sector.”

Christian Vollmann, CEO of C1 Green Chemicals AG, commented: “Our innovative process offers the potential to produce green methanol more cost-effectively. We are delighted to have the opportunity to take our technology to the next level in the scope of the pilot plant and take a decisive step towards the market launch.”

Andreas Reuter, Managing Director Fraunhofer IWES, added: “With our many years of scientific expertise and a complex research infrastructure for renewable energies, including the Hydrogen Lab Leuna, Fraunhofer IWES is the ideal partner for the successful realization of projects for the production of green fuels for the shipping and aviation industries.”

The shipping industry is said to be currently responsible for almost 3% of global annual CO2 emissions. The new climate strategy adopted by the International Maritime Organization this summer envisages reaching the goal of climate neutrality by around 2050. Emissions should be reduced by at least a fifth compared with 2008 by 2030 and even by at least 70% by 2040. Large shipping companies such as Maersk have already ordered methanol-compatible vessels, the first of which are already in use.

October 2023 saw a total of 14 orders for methanol-powered ships recorded as demand for alternative fuels in the maritime industry continues to rise in line with the ever-stringent regulatory landscape, data from DNV’s Alternative Fuel Insights (AFI) database showed.

Related Article

Germany's experience underscores the geopolitical risks of energy dependence, as the Russian-Ukrainian war has reignited debates about extending nuclear plant operations to reduce reliance on imported natural gas.

Despite ongoing global interest in nuclear technologies like small modular reactors (SMRs), Germany has largely completed its nuclear phase-out, shutting down its last three reactors in April 2023.

Title:

Content: In a stark revelation, the World Nuclear Industry Status Report (WNISR) has outlined the severe challenges faced by the global nuclear power sector in recent years. The report, covering developments up to mid-2023, highlights a significant decline in nuclear production, with its share dropping to the lowest point in four decades. This decline is attributed to a combination of factors including national policy shifts, economic pressures and the rapid growth of renewable energy alternatives.

Global nuclear production and generation reaches new low

The WNISR points out that global nuclear power generation experienced a notable 4% decline, reaching a level not seen since the mid-1990s. Outside of China, the decrease was even more pronounced, at 5%, taking the global nuclear energy share of commercial gross electricity generation in 2022 down to 9.2%. This marks the most substantial drop since the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster in 2012 and a record low in the past four decades. It is noteworthy that this share is now little more than half of its peak of 17.5% in 1996.

Several major nuclear-producing nations faced significant challenges in 2022 and mid-2023, contributing to the overall hit on the global nuclear landscape.

The US saw its nuclear share of commercial electricity generation drop to 18.2%, the lowest level in 25 years. France experienced a drop in nuclear generation below its 1990 level, turning into a net importer of electricity for the first time since 1980. However, the country seems motivated to rectify the situation, recently leading a group of 20 countries in declaring to “triple nuclear energy capacity from 2020 by 2050” at COP28 in Dubai.

Belgium witnessed the closure of two reactors, in September 2022 and January 2023, with three more slated for closure by 2025. Germany saw the closure of its last three operating reactors on 15 April 2023, completing the phase-out policy initiated in 2011.

The report notes that the number of closed power reactors reached 212 units as of mid-2023, with 22 fully decommissioned and 11 released from regulatory control. With this, the report indicates that 407 reactors with a total capacity of 365GW were operational worldwide – a decrease of four reactors compared with the previous year and 31 units below the peak observed in 2002.

How well do you really know your competitors?

Access the most comprehensive Company Profiles on the market, powered by GlobalData. Save hours of research. Gain competitive edge.

Company Profile – free sample

Thank you!

Your download email will arrive shortly

Not ready to buy yet? Download a free sample

We are confident about the unique quality of our Company Profiles. However, we want you to make the most beneficial decision for your business, so we offer a free sample that you can download by submitting the below form

By GlobalData

Economic challenges and renewable competition

Nuclear power faces increasing economic challenges, with Lazard modelling indicating that, at discount rates over 5.4%, it becomes the most expensive generator in terms of the levelized cost of energy (LCOE).

National developments of major nuclear-producing countries reflect this reality. The report highlights massive subsidies in the US, with state-level taxpayer-funded subsidies estimated to exceed $15bn by 2030. The UK, now operating only nine nuclear units, has seen cost estimates for the two Hinkley Point C reactors soar to $44bn (£34.98bn) and grid connection delayed until June 2027. South Korea’s state-owned utility, KEPCO, recently faced a record loss of $25bn (33.01trn won), with a 32% rise in net debt to an unprecedented $149bn.

The report also underscores the underestimated hidden costs associated with nuclear power, including decommissioning expenses and liabilities for accidents. Decommissioning costs in Germany, Italy and Lithuania, all nuclear phase-out countries, were estimated to be orders of magnitude higher than international estimates. Meanwhile, the Japanese Government estimated the cost of the 2011 Fukushima accidents at an astonishing $223bn (Y32.62trn) – the largest in the world.

Nuclear finances are even more alarming when compared with renewable alternatives. Renewable energy continues to outpace nuclear power, with total investment in non-hydro renewable electricity capacity reaching a record $495bn in 2022, 14-times the investment in nuclear power plant construction. Wind and solar facilities alone generated 28% more electricity than their nuclear counterparts, accounting for 11.7% of global electricity generation, compared with nuclear’s 9.2%.

In terms of LCOE, the report highlights that nuclear power can be nearly four-times the LCOE of onshore wind at a discount rate of 10%. In the US, unsubsidised solar and wind, with rapidly declining firming costs, have a combined cost of $45–140 per megawatt-hour (MWh) in comparison with new nuclear at a mean $180/MWh.

Uncertain future for global nuclear industry

The global nuclear industry confronts an uncertain future, paired with concerning new developments in the sector.

In the report, one country stood out for going against the current as it continues to dominate the global nuclear market – Russia.

While China leads in the domestic number of reactors under construction with 23 ongoing, Russia dominates the international market with 24 units under construction, including 19 in seven other countries. Russia has also brought on new technology, notably developing the first and only floating nuclear power plant in the world.

However, according to the report, construction delays plague many Russian projects, with 93% of ongoing constructions taking place in Nuclear Weapon States (NWS) or by NWS-controlled companies abroad.

In addition, both China and Russia have been tied to recent revelations about cyberattacks on Sellafield, a nuclear site located on the Cumbrian coast in the UK, by groups with close ties to the two countries. The investigation raised eyebrows about the state of cybersecurity for nuclear sites.

The report also notes that Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) have not seen significant progress in the past year, with no units under construction in the western world. The most advanced project, based in the US and involving NuScale, terminated in November 2023 due to a 75% increase in the cost estimate. Canada, nevertheless, plans to build four SMRs in Ontario, arguing that they will contribute C$15.3bn ($11.25bn) to Canada’s gross domestic product.

In conclusion, the WNISR paints a sobering picture for the global nuclear power industry as it grapples with economic challenges, national policy shifts and the dominance of renewable energy alternatives. As the world transitions towards cleaner and more economically viable energy sources, nuclear power finds itself at a crossroads.

Despite all this, recent announcements at the COP28 summit demonstrate the industry’s efforts to turn things around. While the US, Canada, France, Japan and UK backed the global nuclear supply chain, planning investments to improve uranium enrichment and conversion capacity, US Special Climate Envoy John Kerry launched an international engagement plan to advance nuclear fusion, saying the technology will become vital in the energy transition.

There have also been new developments in international cooperation with the UK and US signing a partnership to develop nuclear fusion technology and the UK and South Korea agreeing to strengthen their cooperation on civil nuclear power including large-scale, small-scale and advanced reactors, decommissioning and waste management, and supply chains.

While SMRs are gaining traction internationally, German research has raised concerns about their safety, environmental impact, and increased risks of nuclear proliferation, contributing to skepticism about their adoption.

Title:

Content: Hong Ming-lung / Challenges to overcome in building SMR nuclear power in Taiwan
Hung Ming-lung / Head of Energy Policy and Promotion Unit, Green Energy Institute, ITRI
Small Modular Reactor (SMR) has recently attracted attention in China.
In the face of the global trend of net zero emissions and Taiwan ’ s progress in the direction of energy transformation, in addition to the need to constantly pay attention to new energy technologies with potential, it is also necessary to assess the challenges that may be brought by a multi-faceted pragmatic assessment, in order to be stable on the road to net zero sustainability.
SMR is less than 300 MWe of the reactor, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) statistics, currently 19 countries in the world to invest in SMR design and development and construction, but so far there has not been any commercial field, the first commercial SMR is expected to be realized as soon as 2028.
The international implementation of SMR mainly considers four aspects: "regulatory readiness", "operational safety", "environmental impact", and "economic competitiveness".
At present, there are some specifications in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom, but the complete specifications and standards for light and non-light water design are still being established, and there is no actual performance of SMR to complete all processes.
In the operational safety part, operators believe that SMR is relatively safe compared to traditional large-scale nuclear power plants due to factors such as small power and compact structure, passive safety design, and so on.
However, in the report of the German research institute in 2021, it was proposed that the SMR was set at different sites and the number of reactors increased, which represented an increase in the risk of nuclear proliferation and an increase in social costs; in the environmental impact part, most of the research believes that there is an opportunity to reduce the generation of nuclear waste, but some of the research also believes that more nuclear waste will be generated. In a few cases, the construction cost has exceeded the original plan.
If Taiwan wants to build SMR, it must overcome five major challenges, such as regulations, technology, talent, site selection, and nuclear waste.
First, there is still a lack of exclusive regulatory regulations and norms.
Although Taiwan has general rules for light water reactors, there are still differences with light water SMR that have yet to be revised. In addition, non-light water SMR needs to be formulated for SMR because the reactor type, structure, and materials are different from the existing light water reactors.
Even the United States, which is currently the world ’ s most technologically advanced, continues to establish applicable norms and standards, so Taiwan still needs to refer to international information for careful consideration in the revision and establishment of regulations.
Second, the technology is not yet mature. SMR is still in the early stage of development. At present, only NuScale pressurized SMR in the United States has obtained the "design certification" of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. There are no commercial operation success cases. If Taiwan wants to build SMR, it needs to wait until there is a relatively mature form of SMR.
Third, there is no supply chain support for talent development. SMR professionals need to be nurtured by schools or imported internationally, and there is a sound industrial chain support to have a good talent environment. At present, there are no SMR talents and complete supply chain in China.
Fourth, the social dispute over the location of the factory has not been resolved.
If Taiwan is to build a nuclear power plant, it is necessary to properly communicate with local governments, civil society organizations, and the general public.
However, most people in Taiwan do not want even the power plant to be built near the community, and there are still doubts about the use of nuclear energy, so it is very challenging to build a nuclear power plant site to gather social consensus.
Fifth, nuclear waste is difficult to find a place to dispose of.
Although there is still controversy about the amount of SMR nuclear waste generated, as long as there is a nuclear waste generation needs to have a disposal site and disposal plan, Taiwan is currently facing many difficulties in the final disposal of nuclear waste have not been able to solve, want to introduce SMR agencies, groups, must have a proper disposal of the nuclear waste generated after construction.
In the face of the above five challenges, Taiwan can continue to pay attention to international SMR and other advanced nuclear technology, regulatory development, and design and construction progress, including understanding the international SMR type, reviewing domestic SMR control procedures and relevant regulations, and taking into account factors such as Taiwan's small population, geographical characteristics and diverse opinions.
At present, the global SMR industry is still at an embryonic stage, and there are still many things to learn and clarify in the promotion. Because there are no successful cases of business transformation, Taiwan should not rush forward, and it is necessary to carefully evaluate the feasibility of promoting implementation in a responsible manner.
No need to smoke, no need to grab, now use the APP to watch the news, guarantee the daily winning point I download the APP
"The Free Republic".
Please attach your real name, identity card number, occupation, correspondence address and household address (including neighborhood), night telephone number, bank account number (with branch name) and e-mail account.
In the month after publication, the fee will be paid directly to the author ’ s bank account and notified by e-mail.
Please note that if you do not wish to change the text, please leave your manuscript and do not return it. If you do not use it, it is not subject to notice.
Articles and comics published in the Free Republic will be used in the "Free Electronic Newspaper" without extra pay.
Email ： republic @ libertytimes.com.tw
I've added friends, thank you.
Welcome to [Free Commentary]
It's a compliment. Good.
It has been praised, thank you.
Editor 's Choice