Skip to main content

The Irresistible Chaos of German Energy Policy

heart of glass
"It should make you think..."
Stefan Guttler in Werner Herzog's Heart of Glass (1976)
The news out of Germany could be better, but your feeling about it may depend on how much sympathy you have for a country that keeps shooting its own feet:
Germany's surcharge for renewable energy will rise by almost half next year, a government source told Reuters on Wednesday, intensifying the burden for consumers from the country's shift away from nuclear power.
Reuters could have avoided the nuclear energy angle, but make no mistake – the decision to shut the nuclear plants before renewable energy sources were really ready to take over has done no one any favors.

This story in Der Spiegel (in English) makes the point the German way – bluntly:
With the new rates, German citizens will be paying a total of more than €20 billion ($25.7 billion) next year to promote renewable energy. This is more than €175 for an average three-person household, a 50 percent increase over current figures. And then there are the additional charges a consumer pays for the electricity tax, the cogeneration assessment, the concession fee and value-added tax.
And remember, the majority of Germany’s nuclear facilities (a bare majority – 9 of 17) are still operating, reducing the nuclear share of electricity generation from about 25 percent to 17 percent. So Germany is running on the fumes, so to speak, of an industry it intends to close down by 2022 – and not well.

Think there might be a political price?
In a government statement issued in June 2011, Chancellor Angela Merkel promised that prices would remain stable. "The EEG assessment should not increase above its current level," she told the German parliament, the Bundestag. Economics Minister Rösler said that there could even be "room for decreases." The environment ministers, first Norbert Röttgen and then Peter Altmaier, behaved as if Germany's phase-out of nuclear energy was not going to cost anything, even as they handed out billions in subsidies to owners of homes with solar panels and wind-farm operators.
In the interim, prices are going up and Germany has switched on plants using brown and black coal. See here for more. Renewable energy sources are up, too, with biomass and wind providing about 20 percent, also higher than nuclear energy, but without a grid that can handle sporadic generation well.
All this has caused some chaos:
What some grid operators, power plant owners and scientists are doing today is nothing short of flabbergasting. There are power plants that are not connected to the grid, power masts without lines, and power lines leading to nowhere.
This is a little overstated, but the Der Spiegel story is a real hair raiser and well worth a full read. It barely mentions nuclear energy, but it’s there in the negative space.
The prospects are so poor that energy providers have little interest in building new power plants. Under current conditions, even the most modern and efficient combined steam and gas power plants are not recovering billions in investment costs.

What this amounts to is that companies will be compensated in the future for keeping their backup power plants up and running. As the government considers writing a bill to this effect, electricity consumers will once again be the ones to foot the bill.
And this is only the first full year of the transition.

The German director Werner Herzog made a movie back in the 70s called Heart of Glass about a small town that loses its ability to make a special kind of glass, causing the townspeople to lose their minds. But that wasn’t an intentional loss. This is. Call it Heart of the Atom.

Comments

Anonymous said…
As difficult as this is for individual consumers, think what will happen to large-scale users of electricity, factories and assembly plants, for example, that require large amounts of electricity on demand at reasonable cost. Those are going to be devastated by the price spikes. German's economy is really going to suffer. I would not be surprised if many of them simply leave Germany entirely. It all goes to show you what can happen if you don't pay attention to the downside risks of getting rid of nuclear in favor of something entirely unreliable and uneconomical.

Popular posts from this blog

A Billion Miles Under Nuclear Energy (Updated)

And the winner is…Cassini-Huygens, in triple overtime.

The spaceship conceived in 1982 and launched fifteen years later, will crash into Saturn on September 15, after a mission of 19 years and 355 days, powered by the audacity and technical prowess of scientists and engineers from 17 different countries, and 72 pounds of plutonium.

The mission was so successful that it was extended three times; it was intended to last only until 2008.

Since April, the ship has been continuing to orbit Saturn, swinging through the 1,500-mile gap between the planet and its rings, an area not previously explored. This is a good maneuver for a spaceship nearing the end of its mission, since colliding with a rock could end things early.

Cassini will dive a little deeper and plunge toward Saturn’s surface, where it will transmit data until it burns up in the planet’s atmosphere. The radio signal will arrive here early Friday morning, Eastern time. A NASA video explains.

In the years since Cassini has launc…

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 …

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…