Germany's move away from nuclear energy is a significant component of their desire to become carbon neutral, with the country aiming to limit electricity generation to renewable sources by 2035.

The German energy market is coping with the loss of nuclear energy, but it has raised concerns about the impact on the country's energy supply, particularly in the context of the Russian-Ukrainian war.

The war has exacerbated an already tense global fuel market, leading to increased electricity prices, with retail electricity prices rising by an average of 30% year-on-year in February 2022.

Germany's opposition leader has suggested that the country's three remaining nuclear power plants should remain in operation longer than planned to compensate for reduced Russian gas imports.

However, the German government has acknowledged that it will have to rely more on polluting coal and natural gas to meet its energy needs in the short term.

Despite this, experts such as Claudia Kemfert of the German Institute for Economic Research believe that the 5% share of German electricity currently coming from nuclear reactors can be easily replaced without risking power outages.

The German population is divided on the issue, with some pushing to bring nuclear reactors back online, while others remain opposed to nuclear energy due to safety concerns.

A poll in August 2022 found that 67% of Germans supported a five-year extension of the country's nuclear plants, while 41% supported the construction of new plants.

Overall, Germany's move away from nuclear energy is a complex issue, driven by a desire to become carbon neutral, but also influenced by the Russian-Ukrainian war and its impact on the country's energy supply.

Germany's move away from nuclear energy is a significant component of their desire to become carbon neutral, with the country aiming to limit electricity generation to renewable sources by 2035.

Title:

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

The German energy market is coping with the loss of nuclear energy, but it has raised concerns about the impact on the country's energy supply, particularly in the context of the Russian-Ukrainian war.

Title:

Content: Global Economic News
Germany is under constant threat of inflation.
Economic growth forecast reduced to 1.5%
German interest payments are expected to reach 30 billion euros in 2023.
German Chancellor Olaf Schulz has warned of a permanent inflationary spiral in Germany.
"This is exactly what we need to focus on right now," Schulz said during the German Industry Day event in Berlin, referring to the "focused campaign" announced by representatives of employers and workers on July 4, stressing that difficult problems can be better solved through cooperation rather than working against each other.
Schulz said former economy minister Carl Schiller called the "focused campaign" a "community table of rationality", adding that this is exactly what the next campaign is about.
The term "concentrated campaign" has been known since the time of the first coalition government between the Christian Alliance and the Social Democratic Party.
The economy minister at the time, Schiller, in 1967 invited representatives of the government, the central bank, employers' unions and trade unions to sit at the same table in order to face the first economic crisis in the history of the Federal Republic of Germany.
Referring to climate protection, digitization and the Russo-Ukrainian war, Schulz said Germany faces major challenges, explaining that the goal is for German industry to emerge stronger from this transformation, not with fewer jobs, but with more.
Schulz said the German government “rolled up its sleeves ”, referring to the promises he made a year ago on German Industry Day when he was a candidate for chancellor, adding that these promises were fulfilled, including the firm expansion of renewable energy sources and the abolition of the clean energy tax on the electricity bill.
What Schulz did not mention was that a year ago he said his goal was to lower the price of electricity for the industrial sector.
German Finance Minister Christian Lindner said inflation was eroding the fundamentals of the economy, two days after official data showed German producer prices jumped 33.6 percent year on year in May.
Lindner told the German Confederation of Industry: “Inflation erodes the economic basis of everything else. ”
He said Germany should expect interest payments of 30 billion euros ($31.65 billion) in 2023, compared with 4 billion euros in 2021.
Meanwhile, the Confederation of German Industries significantly cut its economic forecast for this year and announced that it expects the German economy to grow by only 1.5 percent.
The EU had forecast 3.5 percent growth this year before the start of the war in Ukraine.
Sigfried Rosform, president of the federation, said: "The double crisis of the war and the effects of the coronavirus pandemic are causing problems for the industry."
Rosform expects a recovery, in the sense of returning to the pre-crisis level of the coronavirus pandemic, at the end of the year at the earliest, provided that Russian gas continues to reach western Europe, he said, "The outage will have catastrophic effects on production industries and will inevitably lead to an economic recession."
Companies' orders are currently piling up at a record level, Rosform said, adding that production is partly being hit hard by supply bottlenecks, noting that uncertain economic prospects and increased uncertainty due to the war are hampering companies' ability to invest.
The war in Ukraine exposed the vulnerabilities of the industrialised country, Germany, in the security of the supply of energy, raw materials and basic technologies.
In light of the high inflation caused by the sharp rise in energy and raw material prices, Rosform said "cost burdens are increasingly suffocating companies" and called on the German government to significantly reduce electricity tax and grid fees.
Germany ’ s opposition leader said on Monday that the country ’ s three remaining nuclear power plants should remain in operation longer than planned to compensate for reduced Russian gas imports via the Nord Stream 1 pipeline.
Friedrich Meretz, head of the opposition Christian Democratic Party, has openly criticized Chancellor Olaf Scholz ’ s reaction to the war in Ukraine and subsequent efforts to reduce Germany ’ s dependence on Russian energy imports.
Experts say it is only a matter of time before Russia ’ s energy supplies to Germany are cut off – whether by their political decisions or by the will of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The response from Germany ’ s political circles was to flirt with other countries for supplies of liquefied natural gas (LNG), and to urge the German people to reduce domestic energy consumption.
Publish it.
More Economic News - Global

The war has exacerbated an already tense global fuel market, leading to increased electricity prices, with retail electricity prices rising by an average of 30% year-on-year in February 2022.

Title:

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

Germany's opposition leader has suggested that the country's three remaining nuclear power plants should remain in operation longer than planned to compensate for reduced Russian gas imports.

However, the German government has acknowledged that it will have to rely more on polluting coal and natural gas to meet its energy needs in the short term.

Despite this, experts such as Claudia Kemfert of the German Institute for Economic Research believe that the 5% share of German electricity currently coming from nuclear reactors can be easily replaced without risking power outages.

The German population is divided on the issue, with some pushing to bring nuclear reactors back online, while others remain opposed to nuclear energy due to safety concerns.

Title:

Content: You are here
Home > News > Germany lied about nuclear energy: expert

Germany lied about nuclear energy: expert

The German government misled its citizens about the possible extension of nuclear power plants, Jakub Wiech, deputy Editor-in-Chief of Energetyka24.com, wrote on Saturday. According to him, all indications are that Berlin’s aim was to close the units regardless of the risks.

He cited Simon Wakter, a Swedish nuclear engineer, who presented a series of materials on his social media showing that Berlin’s narrative on the nuclear issue was getting the truth wrong. As the journalist pointed out, Mr Wakter “has collected statements by German politicians and energy scientists from recent months, juxtaposing them.”

“In his reasoning, Mr Wakter cites, among other things, the German government’s key argument regarding nuclear fuel. Berlin claimed that extending the operation of the nuclear power plants was impossible due to the lack of contracted fuel rod supplies. However, according to Die Welt, there was a confidential meeting between ruling coalition politicians and representatives of nuclear plant operators in March 2022,” Mr Wiech wrote.

As he continued, at the meeting the latter stated that they were able to organise deliveries within a “reasonable timeframe,” however, Berlin took no action in this regard, going further into the narrative of being unable to provide fuel input.

“On exactly 8 March, the German government published a report listing the reasons why nuclear power plants can no longer operate. However, at the same time, those in power met with representatives of nuclear industry operators, who indicated solutions to the allegations made by the report,” Mr Wakter was quoted as saying by the journalist.

“As additional evidence, he points to a statement by a spokesman for Preussen Elektra, who says that the Isar nuclear power plant, one of the last three units of its type in Germany, can continue to operate beyond 31 December 2022 – and without additional supplies of nuclear fuel. Berlin’s argument in this regard has been shown to be a simple lie,” Mr Wiech wrote.

As he added, according to an opinion poll from spring 2022, the majority of Germans (65 percent) see nuclear power as part of measures aimed at meeting EU climate targets.

“So, as it turns out, the German government’s key arguments for shutting down nuclear power (lack of fuel and public opposition) turned out to be lies. One may wonder why Berlin is pushing so desperately to extinguish these units – despite the energy crisis,” Mr Wiech concluded.

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /var/www/warsawpoint/data/www/warsawpoint.com/wp-content/themes/accesspress-mag/content-single.php on line 69
Top

A poll in August 2022 found that 67% of Germans supported a five-year extension of the country's nuclear plants, while 41% supported the construction of new plants.

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. ”

Overall, Germany's move away from nuclear energy is a complex issue, driven by a desire to become carbon neutral, but also influenced by the Russian-Ukrainian war and its impact on the country's energy supply.

Title:

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


Germany's decision to move away from nuclear energy was a significant step towards becoming carbon neutral, but it has also posed challenges for the country's energy market.

The phase-out of nuclear power plants was accelerated after the Fukushima disaster in 2011, and by 2022, Germany had shut down its last three nuclear reactors.

This move was part of the country's Energiewende, or energy transition, which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase the share of renewable energy sources.

However, the loss of nuclear power has left a significant gap in Germany's energy supply, which has been exacerbated by the Russian-Ukrainian war.

The war has led to a reduction in Russian gas imports, which has forced Germany to rely more heavily on coal and other fossil fuels, undermining its climate goals.

According to the German Confederation of Industry, the country's economic growth forecast has been reduced to 1.5% due to the energy crisis, and interest payments are expected to reach 30 billion euros in 2023.

The opposition leader, Friedrich Meretz, has called for the remaining nuclear power plants to be kept online for longer to compensate for the reduced Russian gas imports.

Some experts argue that Germany's decision to shut down its nuclear power plants was based on flawed assumptions, and that the country's energy market is not yet ready to rely solely on renewable energy sources.

A report by the German government claimed that extending the operation of nuclear power plants was impossible due to a lack of contracted fuel rod supplies, but this claim has been disputed by nuclear industry operators.

In fact, a confidential meeting between government officials and nuclear plant operators in March 2022 revealed that the operators were able to organize deliveries of fuel rods within a reasonable timeframe.

Despite these challenges, the German government remains committed to its goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2045, and is investing heavily in renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power.

However, the Russian-Ukrainian war has highlighted the need for Germany to diversify its energy supply and reduce its dependence on imported fossil fuels.

The war has also led to a re-evaluation of the role of nuclear power in Germany's energy mix, with some arguing that it could play a crucial role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and improving energy security.

According to a poll conducted in spring 2022, 65% of Germans see nuclear power as part of the solution to meeting EU climate targets.

Overall, Germany's move away from nuclear energy has been driven by a desire to become carbon neutral, but it has also posed significant challenges for the country's energy market.

The Russian-Ukrainian war has exacerbated these challenges, and has highlighted the need for Germany to diversify its energy supply and reduce its dependence on imported fossil fuels.

While some sectors of the German population are pushing to bring nuclear reactors back online, the government remains committed to its goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2045, and is investing heavily in renewable energy sources.

The impact of the Russian-Ukrainian war on Germany's energy supply has been significant, with a reduction in Russian gas imports forcing the country to rely more heavily on coal and other fossil fuels.

However, the war has also led to a re-evaluation of the role of nuclear power in Germany's energy mix, and has highlighted the need for the country to diversify its energy supply and reduce its dependence on imported fossil fuels.

In conclusion, Germany's move away from nuclear energy has been driven by a desire to become carbon neutral, but it has also posed significant challenges for the country's energy market.

The Russian-Ukrainian war has exacerbated these challenges, and has highlighted the need for Germany to diversify its energy supply and reduce its dependence on imported fossil fuels.

As the country continues to navigate these challenges, it is likely that the debate over the role of nuclear power in Germany's energy mix will continue.

Germany's decision to move away from nuclear energy was a significant step towards becoming carbon neutral, but it has also posed challenges for the country's energy market.

The phase-out of nuclear power plants was accelerated after the Fukushima disaster in 2011, and by 2022, Germany had shut down its last three nuclear reactors.

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 move was part of the country's Energiewende, or energy transition, which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase the share of renewable energy sources.

Title:

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

However, the loss of nuclear power has left a significant gap in Germany's energy supply, which has been exacerbated by the Russian-Ukrainian war.

Title:

Content: Global Economic News
Germany is under constant threat of inflation.
Economic growth forecast reduced to 1.5%
German interest payments are expected to reach 30 billion euros in 2023.
German Chancellor Olaf Schulz has warned of a permanent inflationary spiral in Germany.
"This is exactly what we need to focus on right now," Schulz said during the German Industry Day event in Berlin, referring to the "focused campaign" announced by representatives of employers and workers on July 4, stressing that difficult problems can be better solved through cooperation rather than working against each other.
Schulz said former economy minister Carl Schiller called the "focused campaign" a "community table of rationality", adding that this is exactly what the next campaign is about.
The term "concentrated campaign" has been known since the time of the first coalition government between the Christian Alliance and the Social Democratic Party.
The economy minister at the time, Schiller, in 1967 invited representatives of the government, the central bank, employers' unions and trade unions to sit at the same table in order to face the first economic crisis in the history of the Federal Republic of Germany.
Referring to climate protection, digitization and the Russo-Ukrainian war, Schulz said Germany faces major challenges, explaining that the goal is for German industry to emerge stronger from this transformation, not with fewer jobs, but with more.
Schulz said the German government “rolled up its sleeves ”, referring to the promises he made a year ago on German Industry Day when he was a candidate for chancellor, adding that these promises were fulfilled, including the firm expansion of renewable energy sources and the abolition of the clean energy tax on the electricity bill.
What Schulz did not mention was that a year ago he said his goal was to lower the price of electricity for the industrial sector.
German Finance Minister Christian Lindner said inflation was eroding the fundamentals of the economy, two days after official data showed German producer prices jumped 33.6 percent year on year in May.
Lindner told the German Confederation of Industry: “Inflation erodes the economic basis of everything else. ”
He said Germany should expect interest payments of 30 billion euros ($31.65 billion) in 2023, compared with 4 billion euros in 2021.
Meanwhile, the Confederation of German Industries significantly cut its economic forecast for this year and announced that it expects the German economy to grow by only 1.5 percent.
The EU had forecast 3.5 percent growth this year before the start of the war in Ukraine.
Sigfried Rosform, president of the federation, said: "The double crisis of the war and the effects of the coronavirus pandemic are causing problems for the industry."
Rosform expects a recovery, in the sense of returning to the pre-crisis level of the coronavirus pandemic, at the end of the year at the earliest, provided that Russian gas continues to reach western Europe, he said, "The outage will have catastrophic effects on production industries and will inevitably lead to an economic recession."
Companies' orders are currently piling up at a record level, Rosform said, adding that production is partly being hit hard by supply bottlenecks, noting that uncertain economic prospects and increased uncertainty due to the war are hampering companies' ability to invest.
The war in Ukraine exposed the vulnerabilities of the industrialised country, Germany, in the security of the supply of energy, raw materials and basic technologies.
In light of the high inflation caused by the sharp rise in energy and raw material prices, Rosform said "cost burdens are increasingly suffocating companies" and called on the German government to significantly reduce electricity tax and grid fees.
Germany ’ s opposition leader said on Monday that the country ’ s three remaining nuclear power plants should remain in operation longer than planned to compensate for reduced Russian gas imports via the Nord Stream 1 pipeline.
Friedrich Meretz, head of the opposition Christian Democratic Party, has openly criticized Chancellor Olaf Scholz ’ s reaction to the war in Ukraine and subsequent efforts to reduce Germany ’ s dependence on Russian energy imports.
Experts say it is only a matter of time before Russia ’ s energy supplies to Germany are cut off – whether by their political decisions or by the will of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The response from Germany ’ s political circles was to flirt with other countries for supplies of liquefied natural gas (LNG), and to urge the German people to reduce domestic energy consumption.
Publish it.
More Economic News - Global

The war has led to a reduction in Russian gas imports, which has forced Germany to rely more heavily on coal and other fossil fuels, undermining its climate goals.

According to the German Confederation of Industry, the country's economic growth forecast has been reduced to 1.5% due to the energy crisis, and interest payments are expected to reach 30 billion euros in 2023.

The opposition leader, Friedrich Meretz, has called for the remaining nuclear power plants to be kept online for longer to compensate for the reduced Russian gas imports.

Some experts argue that Germany's decision to shut down its nuclear power plants was based on flawed assumptions, and that the country's energy market is not yet ready to rely solely on renewable energy sources.

Title:

Content: You are here
Home > News > Germany lied about nuclear energy: expert

Germany lied about nuclear energy: expert

The German government misled its citizens about the possible extension of nuclear power plants, Jakub Wiech, deputy Editor-in-Chief of Energetyka24.com, wrote on Saturday. According to him, all indications are that Berlin’s aim was to close the units regardless of the risks.

He cited Simon Wakter, a Swedish nuclear engineer, who presented a series of materials on his social media showing that Berlin’s narrative on the nuclear issue was getting the truth wrong. As the journalist pointed out, Mr Wakter “has collected statements by German politicians and energy scientists from recent months, juxtaposing them.”

“In his reasoning, Mr Wakter cites, among other things, the German government’s key argument regarding nuclear fuel. Berlin claimed that extending the operation of the nuclear power plants was impossible due to the lack of contracted fuel rod supplies. However, according to Die Welt, there was a confidential meeting between ruling coalition politicians and representatives of nuclear plant operators in March 2022,” Mr Wiech wrote.

As he continued, at the meeting the latter stated that they were able to organise deliveries within a “reasonable timeframe,” however, Berlin took no action in this regard, going further into the narrative of being unable to provide fuel input.

“On exactly 8 March, the German government published a report listing the reasons why nuclear power plants can no longer operate. However, at the same time, those in power met with representatives of nuclear industry operators, who indicated solutions to the allegations made by the report,” Mr Wakter was quoted as saying by the journalist.

“As additional evidence, he points to a statement by a spokesman for Preussen Elektra, who says that the Isar nuclear power plant, one of the last three units of its type in Germany, can continue to operate beyond 31 December 2022 – and without additional supplies of nuclear fuel. Berlin’s argument in this regard has been shown to be a simple lie,” Mr Wiech wrote.

As he added, according to an opinion poll from spring 2022, the majority of Germans (65 percent) see nuclear power as part of measures aimed at meeting EU climate targets.

“So, as it turns out, the German government’s key arguments for shutting down nuclear power (lack of fuel and public opposition) turned out to be lies. One may wonder why Berlin is pushing so desperately to extinguish these units – despite the energy crisis,” Mr Wiech concluded.

Warning: Invalid argument supplied for foreach() in /var/www/warsawpoint/data/www/warsawpoint.com/wp-content/themes/accesspress-mag/content-single.php on line 69
Top

A report by the German government claimed that extending the operation of nuclear power plants was impossible due to a lack of contracted fuel rod supplies, but this claim has been disputed by nuclear industry operators.

In fact, a confidential meeting between government officials and nuclear plant operators in March 2022 revealed that the operators were able to organize deliveries of fuel rods within a reasonable timeframe.

Despite these challenges, the German government remains committed to its goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2045, and is investing heavily in renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power.

Title:

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

However, the Russian-Ukrainian war has highlighted the need for Germany to diversify its energy supply and reduce its dependence on imported fossil fuels.

Title:

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

The war has also led to a re-evaluation of the role of nuclear power in Germany's energy mix, with some arguing that it could play a crucial role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and improving energy security.

According to a poll conducted in spring 2022, 65% of Germans see nuclear power as part of the solution to meeting EU climate targets.

Overall, Germany's move away from nuclear energy has been driven by a desire to become carbon neutral, but it has also posed significant challenges for the country's energy market.

The Russian-Ukrainian war has exacerbated these challenges, and has highlighted the need for Germany to diversify its energy supply and reduce its dependence on imported fossil fuels.

While some sectors of the German population are pushing to bring nuclear reactors back online, the government remains committed to its goal of becoming carbon neutral by 2045, and is investing heavily in renewable energy sources.

The impact of the Russian-Ukrainian war on Germany's energy supply has been significant, with a reduction in Russian gas imports forcing the country to rely more heavily on coal and other fossil fuels.

However, the war has also led to a re-evaluation of the role of nuclear power in Germany's energy mix, and has highlighted the need for the country to diversify its energy supply and reduce its dependence on imported fossil fuels.

In conclusion, Germany's move away from nuclear energy has been driven by a desire to become carbon neutral, but it has also posed significant challenges for the country's energy market.

As the country continues to navigate these challenges, it is likely that the debate over the role of nuclear power in Germany's energy mix will continue.