Skip to main content

Buyer's Remorse Over Nuclear Energy in Germany

pass08_bavaria We've mentioned a few times that the Germans have experience a kind of buyer's remorse over their decision to phase out nuclear energy by 2020. We haven't really found a good explanation of what the Germans would have to do to reverse this - presumably get a bill through the lower and upper houses of their parliament -  but Prime Minister Angela Merkel is definitely making it a campaign issue:

Merkel spoke at an election rally in Bavaria, where voters go to the polls this month. [Nuclear] Reactors account for 60 percent of the state's power and switching them off would force it to buy electricity from neighboring Czech Republic, she was cited as saying.

Now, we wouldn't be surprised to learn that Bavarians have a rivalry with the Czechs that make this pitch more potent, or at least are responsive to a nationalist plea, but we don't actually know this. What we do know is that this ban has a lot of heat on it lately and we'll be surprised if it lasts all the way to the next federal election a year or so from now - they seem to run their campaign season as long as we do.

(Well, maybe not so surprised - the current German government is a right-left coalition, a seemingly unworkable melange that will need to sort itself out before progress gets made. We'd say wherever the Green Party lands coalition-wise might determine the course of events.)

Picture of a Bavarian somewhere. When I was in Germany, my hosts  made fun of Bavarians as, essentially, hicks. Just reminded me that wherever one is, there's someone nearby to tease. In New York City, it was the "bridge and tunnel" folk, that is, New Jerseyans and Long Islanders.

Comments

Norske-Division said…
For Bavarians it would be seen as a step backwards to be depending upon the Czechs for electricity. It's not that they hate the Czechs or anything, they've got a good relationship, but Bavaria has traditionally (and is still) more developed infrastructure wise and industrially. To draw an analogy to America, it would be like Texas relying on Mexico for electricity.

And yes, any change in the law would need to pass through both Bundestag and the Bundesrat, and then be signed by the Bundeskanzler. But the Bundesrat is unlikely to stand in the way of any such law, given recent changes in the law. I will ask my friend from Germany to be sure though.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…