Skip to main content

The German Nuclear Freak-Out

Dusseldorf Germany had an election this past weekend. How did that go?

The German chancellor, Angela Merkel, has pledged to press ahead with a review of nuclear power's future in Germany after her coalition suffered a "very painful" defeat in a weekend state election dominated by Japan's nuclear crisis.

Despite the embarrassment of losing a region held by her party, the Christian Democratic Union, for 58 years, Merkel played down the result's national significance, saying she had no plans to reshuffle her cabinet.

That region, Baden-Wuerttemberg, is one of the most conservative in Germany, so it going to the Greens is exceptionally dramatic. It’s the first time the environmental party has won any state election (I believe).

This doesn’t mean Merkel and her coalition are out of power, but  for now, this is the rhetoric:

Germany could well become the first major industrial power to abandon nuclear energy entirely: likely in the next 10-15 years. But others may follow suit. In an interview last week, German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle called events in Japan the September 11th of nuclear power. "Some events," he said, "represent such a turning point that afterwards nothing is the same."

I don’t think that quote proves that point, but there you are.

---

Shutting down a major part of your electricity output while recovering from a recession has the potential to send Germany into an economic tailspin, a reality that has businesses there very nervous:

Ms Merkel’s decision to temporarily close seven nuclear power stations in the wake of Japan’s nuclear crisis has triggered an outpouring of criticism from business lobbies and individual entrepreneurs.

For example:

Dieter Hundt, president of the German employers’ federation (BDA), appealed for “politicians to return to good sense, rationality and reliability”.

He condemned the moratorium on extending the life of Germany’s 17 nuclear power stations as “a big mistake”. It failed to stop an anti-nuclear backlash among voters in Baden-Württemberg, who returned a “green-red” coalition of the environmentalist Green party and the centre-left Social Democratic party.

And:

Hans-Peter Keitel, president of the Federation of German Industry, warned in Stern magazine that Germany must “take incredible care not to destroy our economic success in the debate about nuclear energy.

“Electricity in Germany must be safe, clean and affordable, or we will endanger the very foundation of our prosperity.”

Indeed.

---

And the real irony here: Germany still needs the electricity and renewable energy sources just aren’t mature enough to step in. So, as Merkel predicted last week, if Germany has to buy electricity, the logical place to go – is – France.

---

Note: Germany and its experience with nuclear energy – essentially a positive one – makes for a richly ironic storyline. But I should stress that the election in Baden-Wuerttemberg occurred on the heels of Fukushima Daiichi and lit a flame under anti-nuclear forces there – leading to the kind of single issue voting that can lead to buyers remorse later. This happens in politics all over all the time. Once the situation has calmed down, the folks speaking the intemperate words quoted in this story and in the linked pieces will recover themselves. Then, we’ll really know what happens next.

So take this story with a large shaker of salt. I’m pretty sure there will be further developments none of us could predict now.

A nuclear plant near Dusseldorf. Lonely, isn’t it?

Comments

Horizon3 said…
What is going to happen is, Germany will be forced into wealth redistribution, just like the US. They will be forced to buy electricity from other European countries like Austria, Poland, Spain, and Italy.
I really! really! hate this globalist carp.
Anonymous said…
Well, as one particularly despicable political demagogue in this country said, never let a good crisis go to waste. So it is no surprise that the Greenies would jump on this tragedy and exploit it for politcal benefit. Despicable, but not surprising.
Pol H. D. said…
Today Germany produces already 12 GW Photovoltaics on the grid - more than they do with nuclear power. Renewable energy sources will easily replace nuclear power in places where politicians and people make the correct choices. Of course large energy utility companies will loose their monopoly as people will take control of their own needs.
Brian Mays said…
"Today Germany produces already 12 GW Photovoltaics on the grid ..."

No they don't. On average throughout the year, Germany produces much less than a single GW.

Germany's just not a good place for solar. One must be daft to think it is.
jimwg said…
I wonder, is it _really_ as much safety concerns or an implacable philosophical distaste for anything nuclear that drives Greens (i.e. the atom must be banished for the so unnaturally alien manner it killed humans at Hiroshima and Nagasaki?).
I mean if you're against _anything_ nuclear no matter how many safeguards or restrictions there are (even if it's nuclear-powered spacecraft), what else is there to think?
JimB said…
I think the idea of Germany "attempting" to phase out nuclear power is a great idea. We can learn a lot from watching another country's mistakes in energy management. It will be interesting to see at what point their grid begins to become unstable and how much their energy will cost. If it works...more "power" to them. If it doesn't...it will be a cheap lesson for the rest of us.

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin