Many energy policy discussions of the last few weeks seem strange against the background of their trigger. While a bitter war is raging in Ukraine, there is a fierce debate here on land about whether it is an unbearable imposition to turn down the room temperature by one or two degrees, whether public buildings can still be illuminated and private pools can still be heated. As a large and industrially strong Central European country, Germany still has numerous levers to make its primary energy supply more versatile than, for example, most Eastern European countries.
There, but also in France and Great Britain, the nuclear energy is still being used. While sometimes even new Meiler are being planned, the remaining three nuclear power plants (nuclear power plants) should be removed from the network in Germany at the end of this year. The fact that the Green Energy Minister Robert Habeck, after a word of power by Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz, has to take every three longer than planned, shows that the stress tests of the transmission system operators do not leave any other choice. If the gas stores in winter and other European countries cannot step in, energy scarcity actually threatens in the event of unfavorable meteorological conditions. In France, for example, around half of the 56 nuclear power plants are currently falling - the reason is numerous planned and unplanned maintenance.
So was it a mistake to get out of nuclear energy right now? Finally, in the 1970s and 1980s-not only in Germany, but worldwide-the numerous new nuclear power plants were fueled by the oil price crisis in order to become more independent of the expensive oil and gas imports from the Opec countries. Did we give this trump card out of our hands at the absolute false time?
The war exposes the energy policy failures of the past and increases the pressure to create the energy transition as soon as possible. For example, the decisions of the red-green federal government 20 years ago were sometimes far too timid and not sufficiently focused on establishing a high-tech, sustainable energy landscape. The subsequent federal governments under the leadership of Angela Merkel have completely delayed the energy transition – not least in order to serve the interests of industry and the large, fossil-oriented energy companies.
Germany is now one of the countries with the highest electricity prices worldwide and still has a very high per capita emissions of greenhouse gases. In addition, Germany has made itself extremely dependent on Russian imports, especially in the natural gas, which not least the lobbying of the former Chancellor Gerhard Schröder as well as numerous economic entanglements of leading politicians in the big parties. It represents a bad failure of political and business journalism here on the country that it has not been much more important to all of these points with extreme urgency.
Up until now, natural gas has been a necessity.
So that the electricity does not suddenly fail or the gas supply tears off, a sufficiently large stock of primary energy providers is necessary. So far, natural gas has so far been indispensable as a raw material in the chemical industry and as an energy source for the heating of apartments. However, this competes with the use of natural gas in gas power plants for power supply. Germany has moved into the majority of its natural gas imports by pipeline from Russia in recent years. Pipeline gas has several advantages: it is easy to transport in large quantities as well as much more environmentally friendly and cheaper than liquefied gas, which has to be compressed and transported via the ocean by tanker. In the meantime, there is already a competition in Europe, who can now buy more Norwegian or Dutch gas via existing pipelines.
The natural fluctuations of wind and solar power are easy to catch with gas power plants. Coal and especially nuclear power plants do not allow such quick load change. Thus, gas is a good addition to renewable energy sources. In order to save gas that is used to heat apartments, numerous coal -fired power plants are likely to run on full tours in the coming months. However, coal emits about twice as much carbon dioxide as natural gas per kilowatt hour generated. This in turn is in a sharp contrast to the climate goals: According to a new study, the G7 countries will massively miss their own climate goals and, instead of the 1.5 degrees agreed in Paris, to global global warming of 2.7 degrees. A catastrophic scenario that should be avoided at any cost.
So how can the power grid be stabilized in these tense times when the dreaded dark lull is coming and wind and solar power generation is collapsing at the same time?
The decision to keep the ISAR 2 and Neckarwestheim 2 nuclear power plants in stretching operations by April 15, 2023 until April 15, 2023 shows that despite the will to exit nuclear, there are still violent concerns whether the supply can be guaranteed in the coming winter. Two of the reserve Akws are far from the wind turbines in the north in Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg and thus in the south of the Republic. In order to compensate for the nuclear power generated there, the wind energy would have to be transported through a power grid towards the south, which is insufficiently designed for such high loads. The sabotage of wind turbine by the Bavarian state government, which has prevented new wind turbines in the Free State for years, and the kidnapped construction of a north-south-current route are responsible for the fact that the reserve use of the two nuclear power plants is now necessary. At first, this is not a runtime extension: new fuel elements should not be delivered, only the rods already in the reactor are used in the so -called extension operation until the end.
"The still running nuclear power plants were originally designed for an operation time of 40 years," says Uwe Stoll from the Society for Plant and Nuclear Safety. The currently applicable nuclear law stipulates the three still running power plants after 33 or 34 years. Recurring tests on the reactor and other safety -relevant system parts are intended in regular operation. Since the ongoing reactors have passed these exams, nothing speaks against extension from Stoll. However, if it turns out that you have to extend the term of the reactors beyond the reserve time, then this should not be at the expense of security, says the nuclear technology expert.
Now the nuclear energy has to deal with some fundamental problems. It starts with the fuel uranium when supplying the power plants. The radioactive metal is won over two thirds in the areas of indigenous peoples, which the profits have little, but abundant from the environmental damage. Nevertheless, nuclear power plants are nowhere in the world against catastrophic accidents. The company - in particular the affected residents affects any damage. And at the end of the fuel chain there is high radioactive nuclear waste, which has to be completed by the biosphere for millions of years. This raises numerous, previously unresolved technical and ethical questions.
However, nuclear energy has the advantage over coal power to cause hardly any greenhouse gases in the operation. A good part of the ecological footprint calculated across the entire life cycle - apart from the problems mentioned in uranium extraction and the disposal of the nuclear waste - comes from the large amounts of concrete and steel that are in a nuclear power plant. Since this is a one -time investment, the footprint becomes even better the longer a nuclear power plant runs. An early shutdown worsens the balance. This also explains why many countries are currently thinking about runtime extensions: necessary retrofitting and investments in safety are much faster and cheaper than a new building. Numerous new construction projects in recent years have to deal with massive delays and significantly increased costs. Experts suspect that many of these projects also played a role worldwide after militarily implementable nuclear technology, so that the question of costs was secondary.
Anxiety about social unrest
Germany is currently in a dilemma. In the event of a strong break -in of energy supply, a recession and perhaps also with social unrest can be expected. In the Czech Republic there was already a great demonstration against the increased energy prices. In addition, there are conflicts with the European and German climate goals that are determined by international agreements, national laws and emission trade.
"Germany can only achieve the climate goals sought for 2030 if the renewable energies are expanded very strongly in the shortest possible time," explains Cyril Stephanos, head of the Coordination Center of Energy Systems of the Future at Acatech, the German Academy of Technology. "This is shown by invoices that the Energy Economic Institute at the University of Cologne (EWI) carried out for us." According to the Federal Environment Agency, the annual expansion of solar systems would have to be used many times from currently 5 gigawatts to up to 20 gigawatts and that of wind turbines From currently almost 2 gigawatts to up to 15 gigawatts.
For the coming winter, the first thing to do is to save energy. Then maybe we can get away with it again without major losses. In the medium to long term, Germany will have to import gas. However, there is the possibility of increasing the security of supply if several European nations pull together: so far, Germany has been dependent on gas imports from neighboring countries, because it does not have liquefied gas terminals itself and is still building them. However, as a central country in Europe with large gas storage facilities and an extensive pipeline network, it can offer these storage and transport capacities to its neighbors. "Unfortunately, the energy discussion is not only being held very nationally in Germany," says Cyril Stephanos. "However, in order to ensure security of supply throughout Europe and at the same time to ensure that energy prices do not rise further, a common European approach is necessary.«
In any case, Germany will be massively dependent on the coal power in the next few years-whether with the three reserve AKWs or without them-on which we should actually say goodbye to climate protection reasons. Climate change even endangers coal power directly: long -lasting drought ensures low river levels, which on the one hand affects coal transport by ship and on the other hand the cooling water supply of the power plants.
Coal exit continued feasible by 2030
"The EWI's invoices show that the energy prices could remain at a high level compared to the years before 2021 in the medium and long term," explains Stephanos. It is therefore all the more important that today's course in energy policy is conducted with foresight and technological expertise. In addition, politics will also have to withstand growing social pressure.
"According to the calculations of the EMI, a coal phase-out by the year 2030 would basically be feasible," says Stephanos. However, more gas-fired power plants would have to be built for this. These would only be in operation in phases. At the same time, it would be important that the new power plants can also be operated with green hydrogen in order to enable the transition to a climate-neutral energy supply. However, since hardly any group is likely to invest in gas-fired power plants under the current circumstances, the expansion would have to be driven forward strongly by politics. For this – just as for the expansion of renewables – high investments would be necessary.
Germany cannot prescribe its neighboring countries how to supply themselves with energy. In terms of greenhouse gas balance, Germany has so far been worse than many others, especially Eastern European, states. It can be debated for a long time about whether it would have been better to be climate policy better and then switch off the coal and then the nuclear power plants. But especially in difficult situations like now, the options have to be viewed soberly. A seriously driven, research and technology-strong energy transition is- with 20 years late! - Finally in the corridor and can lead to new solutions in partnership with other countries.
(Editor's note: The article was updated on October 25, 2022 with regard to the decision by Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz, to continue to drive three nuclear power plants in stretching.)
For further reading: If you would like to delve deeper into the scientific and technical foundations of nuclear energy and its social conflict areas, you will find comprehensibly prepared information in the two books by Dirk Eidemüller "Nuclear Power Explained" (2021) and "The Nuclear Age - from nuclear fission to disposal" (2012).
