Skip to main content

Germany’s Nuclear Fiasco and the Courts

Germany hasn’t done itself any favors by deciding to shut down its nuclear energy industry. It’s had to resort to coal, wrecked its climate change goals and tried to jumpstart renewables as a replacement way too early in their evolution. Other than that, though, spetzel ice cream, right?

The forced closure of RWE's Biblis nuclear power plant after the Fukushima accident was unlawful, the German Supreme Administrative Court has ruled. The utility is now likely to sue for considerable damages.

This has a quality somewhat similar to the shutdown of the Yucca Mountain used fuel repository in this country – similarly precipitous, largely political in nature and, ultimately, inspiring lawsuits that prevail over the government actions.

There are differences, too. Yucca Mountain is inscribed as the repository in the Nuclear Waste Act, so closing it runs afoul of a federal law. In Germany, the laws of which I know next to nothing, the situation is different:

Efforts to force the shutdowns were "formally unlawful because [RWE] had not been consulted and this constituted a substantial procedural error," said the court.

As I said, what this relates to, I have no idea. It could be a nuclear specific law or one that applies to industry and business generally or maybe just to utilities. But the upshot is significant:

Plant owner RWE can now sue for compensation over the loss of the Biblis units as an asset.

Well, someone can sue, as we’ll see further on. The World Nuclear News story reports that other reactor operators such as Vattenfall, e.On and EnBW will likely not pursue RWE’s approach – apparently this is (at least partly) a state action – that is, brought by the state itself - and would have to duplicated in the states where these companies operate, so the decision doesn’t apply throughout the country. But the companies are not sitting idle, either, unlike some of their reactors.

Instead the companies are contesting the constitutionality of the 2011 amendment to the Atomic Act which redrew operating periods for remaining reactors. Another set of questions on the fuel tax have now been referred by German courts to the European Court of Justice. Sweden-owned Vattenfall is contesting the shutdown via international arbitration.

Couldn’t happen to a nicer country – sincerely, I worked for a spell in Germany some years ago and enjoyed the experience mightily – but what a mess. We’ve argued that a country must make its own choices about its energy options without pesky outsiders weighing in. If nuclear energy “loses”, it loses. You can’t win them all. But it’s not just nuclear energy that’s losing here, it’s the German people, too. That’s the real shame of all this.

---

I poked around some German sites to see if there’s some interesting additional information there, but World Nuclear News caught the highlights really well. One story said that RWE lost this action in a lower court before prevailing in the state supreme court. One thing about these stories is how blunt German reporting sounds next to English:

Die vorübergehende Stilllegung des Atomkraftwerks Biblis war rechtswidrig. Das hat das Bundesverwaltungsgericht bestätigt. Hessen drohen damit Schadenersatzforderungen in dreistelliger Millionenhöhe. Die Landesregierung will das Urteil prüfen.

Which means (roughly – my German was never very good):

Closing the nuclear facility Biblis temporarily was illegal. The Federal Administrative Court confirmed this. Hesse [the state; Frankfurt is the biggest city] has threatened to sue for hundreds of millions [of Euro, I guess] in damages, but the state government said it will study the ruling first.

Right to the point. It’s also almost identical in content to the World Nuclear News lede, except that it stresses the role of the state government and says it will be the state that brings suit, not RWE. I can’t really tease out how Hesse and RWE interact as a matter of law – World Nuclear News may have this correct because it has a better understanding of this than I do. RWE is not owned by Hesse or Germany, so perhaps its corporate identity and who can sue who for what in Germany are factors, too. Subjects for further research.

Comments

Mitch said…
"The forced closure of RWE's Biblis nuclear power plant after the Fukushima accident was unlawful,"

Worst, it made no logical or common sense! Why shut 'em all down just because someone else thousands of miles away suffered a rare superquake that only damaged one old plant which didn't hurt anybody??? Duh!
Anonymous said…
Nitpick about the translation of the German bit: "Hessen drohen damit Schadenersatzforderungen..." means that HesseN (not Hesse) doesn't threaten to sue, but BE threatened to be sued for damages, by RWE. They're studying the rulling in hopes not to have to pay, maybe go to the supreme court.

Twominds

Popular posts from this blog

Why Ex-Im Bank Board Nominations Will Turn the Page on a Dysfunctional Chapter in Washington

In our present era of political discord, could Washington agree to support an agency that creates thousands of American jobs by enabling U.S. companies of all sizes to compete in foreign markets? What if that agency generated nearly billions of dollars more in revenue than the cost of its operations and returned that money – $7 billion over the past two decades – to U.S. taxpayers? In fact, that agency, the Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank), was reauthorized by a large majority of Congress in 2015. To be sure, the matter was not without controversy. A bipartisan House coalition resorted to a rarely-used parliamentary maneuver in order to force a vote. But when Congress voted, Ex-Im Bank won a supermajority in the House and a large majority in the Senate. For almost two years, however, Ex-Im Bank has been unable to function fully because a single Senate committee chairman prevented the confirmation of nominees to its Board of Directors. Without a quorum

New Home for Our Blog: Join Us on NEI.org

On February 27, NEI launched the new NEI.org . We overhauled the public site, framing all of our content around the National Nuclear Energy Strategy. So, what's changed? Our top priority was to put you, the user, first. Now you can quickly get the information you need.  You'll enjoy visiting the site with its intuitive navigation, social media integration and compelling and shareable visuals.  We've added a feature called Nuclear Now, which showcases the latest industry news and resources like fact sheets and reports. It's one of the first sections you'll see on our home page and it can be accessed anywhere throughout the site by clicking on the atom symbol in the top right corner of the page. Most importantly for you, our loyal NEI Nuclear Notes readers, is that we've migrated the blog to the new site. Moving forward,  all blog posts will be published in the News section , along with our press releases, Nuclear Energy Overview stories and more. Just l

Hurricane Harvey Couldn't Stop the South Texas Project

The South Texas Project As Hurricane Harvey battered southeast Texas over the past week, the devastation and loss of life in its wake have kept our attention and been a cause of grief. Through the tragedy, many stories of heroics and sacrifice have emerged. Among those who have sacrificed are nearly 250 workers who have been hunkered down at the South Texas Project (STP) nuclear plant in Matagorda County, Texas. STP’s priorities were always the safety of their employees and the communities they serve. We are proud that STP continued to operate at full power throughout the storm. It is a true testament to the reliability and resiliency of not only the operators but of our industry. The world is starting to notice what a feat it is to have maintained operations through the catastrophic event. Forbes’ Rod Adams did an excellent job describing the contribution of these men and women : “STP storm crew members deserve to be proud of the work that they are doing. Their famil