In Unexpected Swing, Germany’s Public Now Favors Nuclear Power 

Posted: January 26, 2023 by oldbrew in climate, Energy, Nuclear power
Tags: , ,

Isar nuclear power site, Bavaria

Replacing what worked with what sounded good is finally running up against reality. The days of indulging in fantasy energy futures are fading. There’s so-called climate policy, and then there’s the need to survive the winters and keep the lights on. Back to the future.
– – –
Russia’s war in Ukraine is forcing a rethink of energy security not only in Germany but also by the entire continent, and nuclear power is one of the winners, says

For decades, Germany has maintained a love-hate relationship with nuclear power. Currently, Germany has three existing nuclear reactors that produce ~6% of the country’s power supply, a far cry from the 1990s when 19 nuclear power plants produced about a third of the country’s electricity supply.

The genesis of the current state of affairs can be traced back to 1998 when a new center-left government consisting of the Greens party and Social Democrats started demanding that the country moves away from nuclear power, a long-held objective of the Greens.

The Greens became prominent in the 1980s after they started rallying against the dangers of nuclear energy and nuclear weapons against the backdrop of the Cold War. Indeed, the last new nuclear plants to be built in Germany date back to 2002 after which plans were put in place to phase out all existing plants over the next few decades.

However, the tide turned again in 2010 after a coalition of the liberal Free Democratic Party and the conservative Christian Democrats rose to power and extended the use of nuclear energy in Germany by up to 14 years.

But alas, the newfound love for nuclear power was not to last: a year later, explosions and meltdowns at the Fukushima nuclear power plant in Japan soured the public’s mood on nuclear power and forced Germany to do another about-face on this policy. Berlin then returned to the original plan for a nuclear phaseout by the end of 2022.

But Russia’s war in Ukraine is forcing a rethink of energy security not only in Germany but also by the entire continent.

Up until last year, Germany and Russia were major energy partners, with the latter providing the country with the majority of its oil and natural gas. But Russia’s war has led to Europe and Germany scrambling for alternative supplies as winter looms. Germany is now rethinking its nuclear phaseout strategy, and the public is falling in line.

“We will need more electric power in the future. That’s a fact. And 6% can be a lot to miss when there is nothing new [to replace it]. We’d be losing 6% when we really will need more,”German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has told Deutsche Welle.

Previously, the majority of the public was in favor of the nuclear phaseout in the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster; now over 80% are in favor of extending the lifespan of Germany’s existing nuclear reactors.

Nuclear energy is seen as a preferable energy source to a fall back to burning coal. According to Dutch-based anti-nuclear group WISE, nuclear plants produce 117 grams of CO2 emissions per kilowatt-hour, much lower compared to burning lignite which emits over 1,000 grams of CO2 per kilowatt-hour.

Back To Coal

But limiting greenhouse gas emissions is hardly a top priority for energy-starved Europe. According to a report by the Observer Research Foundation, energy supply disruptions triggered by Russia’s war on Ukraine took LNG prices even higher leaving coal as the only option for dispatchable and affordable power in much of Europe, including the tough markets of Western Europe and North America that have explicit policies to phase out coal.

According to the Washington Post, coal mines and power plants that closed 10 years ago have begun to be repaired in Germany. In what industry observers have dubbed a “spring” for Germany’s coal-fired power plants, the country is expected to burn at least 100,000 tons of coal per month by winter. That’s a big U-turn considering that Germany’s goal had been to phase out all coal-generated electricity by 2038.

Other European countries such as Austria, Poland, the Netherlands and Greece have also started restarting coal plants.

Full article here.

  1. saighdear says:

    Izat so? maybe something to do with this too? last night I fell over this couple of programmes and missed the third!
    1. bad enough to understand in German, and then there’s the French connection, but enough to g et the drift.
    2. Just to SEE how they do what over there Blame our Forestry commision for NOT doing this 30 years ago when Granpaw wanted to do this with waste wood from the Clear fells.
    3. Huh disgusted with politics so not even going to watch it for some time

  2. catweazle666 says:

    So now it’s “Atomkraft? Ja bitte!”

    Well, well!

  3. oldbrew says:

    Move over so-called climate crisis, here’s the real energy crisis.

  4. Bazz says:

    The whole Fukushima event would not have occurred if the plant had been built on the West Coast instead of the East Coast. Bear in mind Plate Tectonics and Tsunamis when building nuclear plants.

  5. ivan says:

    Bazz the problem with Fukushima was the fact the diesel engines fot the circulation pumps were placed below ground level and, strange as it may seem, they don’t work underwater.

  6. FerdiEgb says:

    “nuclear plants produce 117 grams of CO2 emissions per kilowatt-hour” says WISE, but even that is overblown: the IPCC themselves have commissioned an investigation of all CO2 emissions from the start (raw materials, refining, buildings) via use (fossil fuels or not) to the grave (demolishing, waste,…) of the different ways to produce power over the full life time. Their results:

    nuclear power: 5 g CO2/kWh
    water: 11 g
    wind: 13 g
    solar: 35 g
    biomass: 230 g
    gas: 625 g
    coal: 1152 g CO2/kWh

    To take into account that wind and solar need 100% fossil (or other) backup for when there is very little wind and sun, as was the case during three weeks in December last year in about whole Europe. That makes the real emissions for sun + wind + gas already around 330 g CO2/kWh in average. While nuclear only needs the general backup of 10% power of a country as reserve + 10% connections with the neighbors for in case of an emergency shut down of one or more production plants…

    See for the details:
    Click on any country and hoover over the different forms of production.
    Also have a look at the difference in CO2 emissions of world nuclear champion France compared to world wind champions Denmark and Germany…

  7. Eric says:

    Reblogged this on Calculus of Decay .

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s