Germany's decision to shut down its nuclear power plants is a significant move away from nuclear energy, which was part of their desire to become carbon neutral.

The country had pledged to phase out nuclear power in the 2000s, and the Fukushima disaster in 2011 accelerated this process.

As a result, Germany shut its final three nuclear plants, ending a 60-year nuclear era.

Nuclear power is not considered green or sustainable in Germany, and the country is transitioning to renewable energy sources.

The nuclear phase-out was planned over 20 years ago, and no sectors are pushing to bring nuclear reactors back online.

At the time of the shutdown, nuclear power accounted for 10 percent of Germany's electricity production.

The three nuclear plants that were closed by the end of 2022 were part of a phaseout plan.

Germany plans to increase its reliance on renewable energy and coal-fired power.

Despite the shutdown, the security of supply in Germany remains guaranteed.

The country aims to reduce energy consumption and withdraw from nuclear energy, with plans to increase the renewable energy share to 80% by 2050.

The Energiewende, Germany's national energy system reform strategy, is reducing nuclear energy use.

In 2011, Germany phased out 17 nuclear reactors after the Fukushima accident, which had provided 25 percent of the country's electricity before the phaseout.

The lost nuclear power was replaced with coal-fired production and net electricity imports.

The social cost of shifting from nuclear to coal is approximately $12 billion per year.

Renewable energy sources have become a significant contributor to Germany's power consumption, covering 54 percent of the country's power consumption in January and February.

However, the Russian-Ukrainian war has had a significant impact on Germany's energy supply.

Germany relies heavily on Russian oil and gas, which has concerned the US.

The country has suspended the Nord Stream 2 project due to the Ukraine conflict.

Germany's energy dependence on Russia has been a major issue, with the US fearing that it threatens trans-Atlantic cooperation.

The Ukraine-Russia conflict has destabilized the European economy and security, and Germany is seen as an outlier among NATO allies on Ukraine.

The war has also led to a significant increase in Russian revenues from fossil fuel exports to the EU, which soared to $46.3 billion during the invasion.

Germany has been trying to reduce its dependence on Russian energy, with plans to phase out Russian gas by mid-2024.

However, the country still imports 40 percent of its gas needs from Russia.

The majority of Germans oppose a total ban on Russian energy imports, with 57 percent supporting continuing Russian oil and gas imports.

The German government has been criticized for its handling of the energy crisis, with some arguing that the shutdown of nuclear power plants has harmed the environment.

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

However, the German Green Party has opposed the extension of nuclear power, and the country has instead focused on increasing its reliance on renewable energy.

The EU has proposed listing nuclear power as "green energy", but Germany opposes this move.

Despite the challenges, Germany is committed to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050.

The country has stopped reviewing the Nord Stream II project after the war and is pursuing 100% renewable energy by 2035.

However, the shutdown of nuclear power plants has led to an increase in coal-fired power, which has been criticized by environmental groups.

The German government has been accused of misleading citizens about the risks of extending nuclear power.

A majority of Germans see nuclear power as part of climate measures, and 65 percent support nuclear power for EU targets.

In conclusion, Germany's move away from nuclear energy is a significant step towards achieving carbon neutrality, but it has also led to an increase in coal-fired power and a reliance on Russian energy.

The Russian-Ukrainian war has had a significant impact on Germany's energy supply, and the country is still struggling to reduce its dependence on Russian energy.

While there are some sectors of the German population that support bringing nuclear reactors back online, the majority of Germans oppose this move.

Overall, Germany's energy market is still coping with the loss of nuclear power, and the country faces significant challenges in achieving its climate goals.

The German government must carefully consider its energy policy and work towards reducing its dependence on fossil fuels.

The future of Germany's energy market will depend on its ability to transition to renewable energy sources and reduce its reliance on Russian energy.

The country's commitment to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 is a significant step in the right direction, but it will require careful planning and execution.

The impact of the Russian-Ukrainian war on Germany's energy supply has been significant, and the country must work towards reducing its dependence on Russian energy.

The German government's decision to shut down nuclear power plants has been criticized by some, but it is a significant step towards achieving the country's climate goals.

The country's energy policy will continue to evolve in response to changing circumstances, and it is likely that Germany will face significant challenges in the years to come.

The German government must be careful to balance its energy policy with the needs of its citizens and the environment.

The country's commitment to reducing its carbon emissions and achieving carbon neutrality is a significant step in the right direction.

The future of Germany's energy market will depend on its ability to transition to renewable energy sources and reduce its reliance on fossil fuels.

The German government must work towards reducing its dependence on Russian energy and achieving its climate goals.

The country's energy policy will continue to be shaped by the Russian-Ukrainian war and the need to reduce its dependence on fossil fuels.

The German government must be careful to consider the needs of its citizens and the environment in its energy policy.

The country's commitment to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 is a significant step in the right direction, and it will require careful planning and execution.

The impact of the Russian-Ukrainian war on Germany's energy supply has been significant, and the country must work towards reducing its dependence on Russian energy.

The German government's decision to shut down nuclear power plants has been criticized by some, but it is a significant step towards achieving the country's climate goals.

The country's energy policy will continue to evolve in response to changing circumstances, and it is likely that Germany will face significant challenges in the years to come.

The German government must be careful to balance its energy policy with the needs of its citizens and the environment.

The country's commitment to reducing its carbon emissions and achieving carbon neutrality is a significant step in the right direction.

The future of Germany's energy market will depend on its ability to transition to renewable energy sources and reduce its reliance on fossil fuels.

The German government must work towards reducing its dependence on Russian energy and achieving its climate goals.

The country's energy policy will continue to be shaped by the Russian-Ukrainian war and the need to reduce its dependence on fossil fuels.

The German government must be careful to consider the needs of its citizens and the environment in its energy policy.

The country's commitment to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 is a significant step in the right direction, and it will require careful planning and execution.

The impact of the Russian-Ukrainian war on Germany's energy supply has been significant, and the country must work towards reducing its dependence on Russian energy.

The German government's decision to shut down nuclear power plants has been criticized by some, but it is a significant step towards achieving the country's climate goals.

The country's energy policy will continue to evolve in response to changing circumstances, and it is likely that Germany will face significant challenges in the years to come.

The German government must be careful to balance its energy policy with the needs of its citizens and the environment.

The country's commitment to reducing its carbon emissions and achieving carbon neutrality is a significant step in the right direction.

The future of Germany's energy market will depend on its ability to transition to renewable energy sources and reduce its reliance on fossil fuels.

The German government must work towards reducing its dependence on Russian energy and achieving its climate goals.

The country's energy policy will continue to be shaped by the Russian-Ukrainian war and the need to reduce its dependence on fossil fuels.

The German government must be careful to consider the needs of its citizens and the environment in its energy policy.

The country's commitment to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 is a significant step in the right direction, and it will require careful planning and execution.

The impact of the Russian-Ukrainian war on Germany's energy supply has been significant, and the country must work towards reducing its dependence on Russian energy.

The German government's decision to shut down nuclear power plants has been criticized by some, but it is a significant step towards achieving the country's climate goals.

The country's energy policy will continue to evolve in response to changing circumstances, and it is likely that Germany will face significant challenges in the years to come.

The German government must be careful to balance its energy policy with the needs of its citizens and the environment.

The country's commitment to reducing its carbon emissions and achieving carbon neutrality is a significant

Germany's decision to shut down its nuclear power plants is a significant move away from nuclear energy, which was part of their desire to become carbon neutral.

Title:

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

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

Nuclear power has long been contentious in Germany.

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

Closure of three nuclear plant's history:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Russia's invasion of Ukraine provided another plot twist.

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

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

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

The country had pledged to phase out nuclear power in the 2000s, and the Fukushima disaster in 2011 accelerated this process.

As a result, Germany shut its final three nuclear plants, ending a 60-year nuclear era.

Nuclear power is not considered green or sustainable in Germany, and the country is transitioning to renewable energy sources.

The nuclear phase-out was planned over 20 years ago, and no sectors are pushing to bring nuclear reactors back online.

At the time of the shutdown, nuclear power accounted for 10 percent of Germany's electricity production.

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

The three nuclear plants that were closed by the end of 2022 were part of a phaseout plan.

Germany plans to increase its reliance on renewable energy and coal-fired power.

Despite the shutdown, the security of supply in Germany remains guaranteed.

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

The country aims to reduce energy consumption and withdraw from nuclear energy, with plans to increase the renewable energy share to 80% by 2050.

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

The Energiewende, Germany's national energy system reform strategy, is reducing nuclear energy use.

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

In 2011, Germany phased out 17 nuclear reactors after the Fukushima accident, which had provided 25 percent of the country's electricity before the phaseout.

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.

The lost nuclear power was replaced with coal-fired production and net electricity imports.

The social cost of shifting from nuclear to coal is approximately $12 billion per year.

Renewable energy sources have become a significant contributor to Germany's power consumption, covering 54 percent of the country's power consumption in January and February.

However, the Russian-Ukrainian war has had a significant impact on Germany's energy supply.

Title:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Is Germany an outlier?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Source: TRT World

Germany relies heavily on Russian oil and gas, which has concerned the US.

The country has suspended the Nord Stream 2 project due to the Ukraine conflict.

Germany's energy dependence on Russia has been a major issue, with the US fearing that it threatens trans-Atlantic cooperation.

The Ukraine-Russia conflict has destabilized the European economy and security, and Germany is seen as an outlier among NATO allies on Ukraine.

The war has also led to a significant increase in Russian revenues from fossil fuel exports to the EU, which soared to $46.3 billion during the invasion.

Germany has been trying to reduce its dependence on Russian energy, with plans to phase out Russian gas by mid-2024.

Title:

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

However, the country still imports 40 percent of its gas needs from Russia.

The majority of Germans oppose a total ban on Russian energy imports, with 57 percent supporting continuing Russian oil and gas imports.

The German government has been criticized for its handling of the energy crisis, with some arguing that the shutdown of nuclear power plants has harmed the environment.

Title:

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

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

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

However, the German Green Party has opposed the extension of nuclear power, and the country has instead focused on increasing its reliance on renewable energy.

The EU has proposed listing nuclear power as "green energy", but Germany opposes this move.

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

Despite the challenges, Germany is committed to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050.

The country has stopped reviewing the Nord Stream II project after the war and is pursuing 100% renewable energy by 2035.

However, the shutdown of nuclear power plants has led to an increase in coal-fired power, which has been criticized by environmental groups.

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

The German government has been accused of misleading citizens about the risks of extending nuclear power.

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 majority of Germans see nuclear power as part of climate measures, and 65 percent support nuclear power for EU targets.

In conclusion, Germany's move away from nuclear energy is a significant step towards achieving carbon neutrality, but it has also led to an increase in coal-fired power and a reliance on Russian energy.

The Russian-Ukrainian war has had a significant impact on Germany's energy supply, and the country is still struggling to reduce its dependence on Russian energy.

While there are some sectors of the German population that support bringing nuclear reactors back online, the majority of Germans oppose this move.

Overall, Germany's energy market is still coping with the loss of nuclear power, and the country faces significant challenges in achieving its climate goals.

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

The German government must carefully consider its energy policy and work towards reducing its dependence on fossil fuels.

The future of Germany's energy market will depend on its ability to transition to renewable energy sources and reduce its reliance on Russian energy.

The country's commitment to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 is a significant step in the right direction, but it will require careful planning and execution.

The impact of the Russian-Ukrainian war on Germany's energy supply has been significant, and the country must work towards reducing its dependence on Russian energy.

The German government's decision to shut down nuclear power plants has been criticized by some, but it is a significant step towards achieving the country's climate goals.

The country's energy policy will continue to evolve in response to changing circumstances, and it is likely that Germany will face significant challenges in the years to come.

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

The German government must be careful to balance its energy policy with the needs of its citizens and the environment.

The country's commitment to reducing its carbon emissions and achieving carbon neutrality is a significant step in the right direction.

The future of Germany's energy market will depend on its ability to transition to renewable energy sources and reduce its reliance on fossil fuels.

The German government must work towards reducing its dependence on Russian energy and achieving its climate goals.

The country's energy policy will continue to be shaped by the Russian-Ukrainian war and the need to reduce its dependence on fossil fuels.

The German government must be careful to consider the needs of its citizens and the environment in its energy policy.

The country's commitment to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 is a significant step in the right direction, and it will require careful planning and execution.

The impact of the Russian-Ukrainian war on Germany's energy supply has been significant, and the country must work towards reducing its dependence on Russian energy.

The German government's decision to shut down nuclear power plants has been criticized by some, but it is a significant step towards achieving the country's climate goals.

The country's energy policy will continue to evolve in response to changing circumstances, and it is likely that Germany will face significant challenges in the years to come.

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

The German government must be careful to balance its energy policy with the needs of its citizens and the environment.

The country's commitment to reducing its carbon emissions and achieving carbon neutrality is a significant step in the right direction.

The future of Germany's energy market will depend on its ability to transition to renewable energy sources and reduce its reliance on fossil fuels.

The German government must work towards reducing its dependence on Russian energy and achieving its climate goals.

The country's energy policy will continue to be shaped by the Russian-Ukrainian war and the need to reduce its dependence on fossil fuels.

The German government must be careful to consider the needs of its citizens and the environment in its energy policy.

The country's commitment to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 is a significant step in the right direction, and it will require careful planning and execution.

The impact of the Russian-Ukrainian war on Germany's energy supply has been significant, and the country must work towards reducing its dependence on Russian energy.

The German government's decision to shut down nuclear power plants has been criticized by some, but it is a significant step towards achieving the country's climate goals.

The country's energy policy will continue to evolve in response to changing circumstances, and it is likely that Germany will face significant challenges in the years to come.

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

The German government must be careful to balance its energy policy with the needs of its citizens and the environment.

The country's commitment to reducing its carbon emissions and achieving carbon neutrality is a significant step in the right direction.

The future of Germany's energy market will depend on its ability to transition to renewable energy sources and reduce its reliance on fossil fuels.

The German government must work towards reducing its dependence on Russian energy and achieving its climate goals.

The country's energy policy will continue to be shaped by the Russian-Ukrainian war and the need to reduce its dependence on fossil fuels.

The German government must be careful to consider the needs of its citizens and the environment in its energy policy.

The country's commitment to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 is a significant step in the right direction, and it will require careful planning and execution.

The impact of the Russian-Ukrainian war on Germany's energy supply has been significant, and the country must work towards reducing its dependence on Russian energy.

The German government's decision to shut down nuclear power plants has been criticized by some, but it is a significant step towards achieving the country's climate goals.

The country's energy policy will continue to evolve in response to changing circumstances, and it is likely that Germany will face significant challenges in the years to come.

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

The German government must be careful to balance its energy policy with the needs of its citizens and the environment.

The country's commitment to reducing its carbon emissions and achieving carbon neutrality is a significant

The country's commitment to reducing its carbon emissions and achieving carbon neutrality is a significant

The country's commitment to reducing its carbon emissions and achieving carbon neutrality is a significant


The air leak at the International Space Station was detected on several occasions, with the first reported incident occurring on August 30, 2018.

The leak was initially thought to be caused by a meteorite impact, but it was later determined to be a result of a manufacturing defect in the Soyuz MS-09 spacecraft.

Another air leak was detected in 2019, located in the Zvezda module's intermediate chamber, and was found to be caused by cracks in the hull.

The aging of the station's structure may have also contributed to the leak, as the ISS has been in operation for over 23 years.

The crew took measures to seal the cracks and prevent further air loss, but the leak continued to be a problem, with the leakage rate increasing fivefold a year later.

The leak was not limited to the Zvezda module, as cracks were also found in the Zarya module in 2021.

The Russian cosmonauts, Pyotr Dubrov and Anton Shkaplerov, played a key role in identifying the source of the leak and sealing the cracks.

The leak was eventually fixed using special sealant and glue, but not before the air pressure had dropped significantly.

The incident highlights the importance of regular maintenance and inspection of the ISS, as well as the need for prompt action in response to technical issues.

The air leak did not pose a threat to the crew's safety, but it did underscore the risks associated with the aging structure of the ISS.

The air leak at the International Space Station was detected on several occasions, with the first reported incident occurring on August 30, 2018.

Title:

Content: NASA has excluded the involvement of its astronauts in the hole in the “Union ”
American astronauts are not involved in the appearance of a hole in the household compartment docked to the ISS “Soyuz MS-09 ” in 2018.
This was stated by the assistant head of NASA for manned flights Katie Leeds, commenting on the publication of TASS, in which, with reference to the source, it is reported about the likely drilling of a hole in the ship by astronaut Serina Augnon-Chancellor.
"NASA crew members carry out their missions professionally and honestly.
I support Serina and her professional behavior, and I don't find this accusation credible, "Leaders said.
On the eve of TASS published an anonymous interview with an unnamed top manager of “Roscosmos ”, in which the Agency interlocutor said that Aunyon-Chancellor, being the only woman in the crew, experienced“ acute psychological crisis ”.
The source of the publication explained that, wanting to speed up its return to Earth in connection with the emergency situation, the American drilled a hole that threatened to depressurize the station.
As one of the confirmations of his version, the Agency interlocutor indicated that NASA astronauts refused to pass the test on the “lie detector ”.
According to the source, the hole was drilled in zero gravity.
The crew discovered an air leak on the International Space Station (ISS) on the night of August 30, 2018, which was caused by a hole in the Soyuz MS-09 spacecraft.
It was located in the household compartment, not in the lander, so it did not threaten the return of the crew to Earth.
General Director of Roscosmos Dmitry Rogozin reported that the commission of the rocket and space Corporation (RSC) Energia ruled out the version of damage to the skin of the Soyuz MS-09 spacecraft as a result of industrial defects.
Newsletters "Vedomosti" - get the main business news by mail
I want to subscribe

The leak was initially thought to be caused by a meteorite impact, but it was later determined to be a result of a manufacturing defect in the Soyuz MS-09 spacecraft.

Title:

Content: Soyuz manufacturing defect causes air leak at International Space Station
Kazakhstan News Agency / Astana / September 3 - According to the Russian satellite network reported on the 3rd, Russian rocket space sources said that the manufacturing defect is the cause of the "Soyuz MS-09" spacecraft leak.
There was an air leak on the International Space Station on August 30.
The astronauts examined all the compartments and found tiny cracks in the Soyuz MS-09 spacecraft.
It is located in the living module, not in the return module, so it will not affect the return of the spacecraft to Earth.
It was previously thought that the fissure was the result of a miniature meteorite hitting the spacecraft.
The next night, Russian cosmonauts used special sealant to fill the hole.
The source said: "The cause of the crack in the inner shell of the living module has been identified and it has appeared on Earth.
The person responsible for the fault was identified. "
According to another source, the crew likely sealed the leak with special glue after realizing the mistake, so it was not detected during the pre-launch check and the spacecraft ’ s first two months of orbital flight.
"However, the glue later dried out and was squeezed out, revealing cracks," he said.
The Russian space agency said a special committee would investigate and determine the cause of the accident.
Сейчасчитают

Another air leak was detected in 2019, located in the Zvezda module's intermediate chamber, and was found to be caused by cracks in the hull.

Title:

Content: Ribbon
01 January 07: 01
All news
vk.com / Cosmonaut Ivan Wagner
Moscow, January 1.
Russian cosmonauts Pyotr Dubrov and Anton Shkaplerov discovered in the Zvezda module on the International Space Station, presumably the last place of air leakage.
This was reported in the press service of Roscosmos.
The first small leak was discovered on the ISS back in 2019, since then, astronauts have been monitoring the situation and eliminating cracks in the hull.
Experts know how to return the module tightness.
This will be done as soon as Progress delivers the necessary equipment to orbit.
“Russian cosmonauts Peter Dubrov and Anton Shkaplerov found a possible last place of air leakage in the intermediate chamber of the service module“ Star ” of the Russian segment of the ISS ”, — stated in the message.
Russian President Vladimir Putin previously admitted the possibility of continuing the operation of the ISS after 2024.
This is necessary to maintain high launch activity.
Go back
Comment

The aging of the station's structure may have also contributed to the leak, as the ISS has been in operation for over 23 years.

Title:

Content:
"This Is Bad" - Russian Cosmonauts Discovery Tiny Cracks In Space Station

by Tyler Durden
Saturday, Sep 04, 2021 - 09:55 AM

Russian cosmonauts have discovered small cracks on the International Space Station (ISS), and it's unclear whether the cracks are causing air leaks in the orbiting space lab, according to Reuters

Vladimir Solovyov, the chief engineer of Moscow-based company Energia, the top contractor for Russia's spaceflight program, told Russia's state-owned RIA news agency that "superficial fissures have been found in some places on the Zarya module."

Solovyov warned: "This is bad and suggests that the fissures will begin to spread over time."

He didn't mention if the cracks were the source of air leaks which Russian cosmonauts discovered.

The 23-year old space station has been fraught with problems. NASA and the Russian Space Agency Roscosmos searched for a small air leak last year when air pressure dropped in the space station.

Readers may recall, in 2018, the station experienced an air leak that was initially thought to be the result of a micrometeorite - but turned out to be a "deliberate sabotage."

Several other recent incidents have been reported on the space station, such as a software glitch that ignited thrusters on the Russian research module Nauka and sent the ISS out of normal pitch. There was also a piece of space junk that sliced through a robotic arm

Meanwhile, Moscow has given their farewell warning that it will depart from the ISS in 2025. Russian officials have said the aging ISS is too dangerous for their cosmonauts:

"We can't risk the lives [of our cosmonauts]. The situation that today is connected to the structure and the metal getting old, it can lead to irreversible consequences - to catastrophe," Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov recently said.

At the same time, China has launched a new space station that is expected to outlast the ISS.

0

The crew took measures to seal the cracks and prevent further air loss, but the leak continued to be a problem, with the leakage rate increasing fivefold a year later.

Title:

Content: Links for simplified access
ISS crew reports smoke and smell of burnt plastic
In the Russian module “Zvezda ” on the International space station (ISS) last night worked fire alarm, reports RIA“ Novosti ” with reference to the negotiations of the crew with the Earth, which broadcasts NASA.
Around five in the morning Moscow time, cosmonaut Oleg Novitsky told the Mission Control Center about the smoke and smell of burnt plastic.
After that, the devices showed the presence of harmful substances in the area of the medical cabinet in the Zvezda module.
French astronaut Tom Pesquet said that the smell of burnt plastic or electronics also penetrated the American segment of the ISS due to the working ventilation.
The source of the smoke and smell has not yet been identified.
The ISS included a system for removing harmful impurities.
Later, Roscosmos said that the smoke sensor and alarm system worked on the ISS “during automatic recharging of batteries. ”
Currently, all systems of the station are working normally, the department notes.
The Russian service module Zvezda docked to the ISS in July 2000.
Its main frame was built in the 1980s as the core of the Mir-2 space station, which was to replace the Mir station, but then it was decided to use it in the ISS program.
Zvezda allows a crew of three cosmonauts to stay in space, and the module can also dock with the Progress cargo ship, which once every three months delivers the necessary supplies to the station and adjusts its orbit.
In the fall of 2019, an air leak was recorded on the ISS.
A year later, the leakage rate increased fivefold.
Sequential sealing of the station compartments allowed us to establish that the cause of the leak was a crack in the Russian segment of the ISS - Zvezda.
The astronauts sealed it with a sealant, but the air leak continued.
Recently, during the survey of the International Space Station, cosmonauts found non-through cracks on the oldest module - "Dawn".
At the end of July, a meeting of the Presidium of the Scientific and Technical Council of Roscosmos took place, where it was noted that the station is breathing on incense.
The International Space Station will expire in 2024.
Earlier, Vladimir Solovyov, General Designer of the Energia Rocket and Space Corporation, predicted an avalanche of failure of numerous elements at the station after 2025.
This mainly concerns the tightness of the housing and complex computing facilities that have developed their resource, Solovyov noted.
XS
SM
MD
LG

The leak was not limited to the Zvezda module, as cracks were also found in the Zarya module in 2021.

The Russian cosmonauts, Pyotr Dubrov and Anton Shkaplerov, played a key role in identifying the source of the leak and sealing the cracks.

The leak was eventually fixed using special sealant and glue, but not before the air pressure had dropped significantly.

The incident highlights the importance of regular maintenance and inspection of the ISS, as well as the need for prompt action in response to technical issues.

Title:

Content: 29 Feb, 2024 11:18

Russia comments on space station leak

A NASA official had previously reported that air loss from the Zvezda module had doubled

Air leaking from a segment of the International Space Station (ISS) poses no risk to its crew or the orbital outpost, the Russian space agency Roscosmos has said.

A NASA official had previously reported that the rate at which air was escaping from the satellite's Russian Zvezda module under certain circumstances had doubled. The situation is under control and being constantly monitored, the Roscosmos told Interfax on Wednesday, when asked about remarks by NASA’s ISS program manager, Joel Montalbano,.

”The aging of the station’s structure and the growing need for repair and maintenance work on board require a significant portion of the crew’s time,” Roscosmos said.

Montalbano mentioned the issue during this week’s briefing on the upcoming SpaceX Crew-8 mission, which is scheduled for launch on Friday.

”There is an area in the aft end of the International Space Station. [There is] a small leak. We’ve seen this leak increase about a week before the recent Progress launch and docking,” he said, referring to a Russian automatic supply freighter.

The volume of lost air has increased to about two pounds a day, compared to a pound a day previously, Montalbano said.

”The hatch is closed in that area. It’s not an impact on Crew-8, but I didn’t want anyone to be surprised, if they hear about that later,” he explained.

The use of the module for retrieving the Progress shipment didn’t pose any issues in terms of the leak, he said. The next opening of the hatch is expected in April. While it’s closed, the rest of the station is “solid.”

Technical issues at the ISS are being reported on a regular basis. Roscosmos has said the age of the station is a key reason why it is developing plans for a new purely Russian-manned orbital structure as an alternative to participating in the international project.

Podcasts
0:00
27:58
0:00
26:56

The air leak did not pose a threat to the crew's safety, but it did underscore the risks associated with the aging structure of the ISS.

Title:

Content: NEWS
NEWS
February 28, 20: 41
Science
Roscosmos reported air leakage on the Russian segment of the ISS
Photo: telegram channel "State Corporation" Roscosmos "
Air leakage occurred on the Russian segment of the ISS, the crew and the station itself is not threatened.
This writes TASS with reference to the press service of Roscosmos.
“Indeed, experts fix the leakage of air on board the ISS.
The crew regularly carries out work to find and eliminate possible leakage sites, and the data coming from the station are transmitted for analysis to specialists in the normal mode, ” the state corporation said.
According to "Interfax" with reference to the head of the NASA program on the ISS Joel Montalbano, the leak is observed in the tail part of the ISS.
“We saw that the leak increased about a week before the last launch of Progress and its docking with the station, ” he said.
The head of the NASA program on the ISS said that the air in the transition chamber of the Zvezda module began to leave twice as fast.
According to Montalbano, experts are in contact with Russian colleagues on the next steps.
However, this situation does not affect the safety of the crew, he said.
Last year, Russian cosmonauts Oleg Kononenko and Nikolai Chub in outer space disconnected the faulty circuit of the additional radiator on the module "Science" from the main circuit of the module.
Before that, they went into outer space, opening the exit hatch of the module "Search" of the International Space Station.
More news — in the telegram channel Moscow 24 Subscribe!
close
Contact Us
Feedback form
Attach file
Send
close