5 ms·

Germany has actively shut down nuclear plants and as a result burns more fossil fuel, no? As a percentage of total generation nuclear in Germany was never as h

by tass 2y ago

Germany has actively shut down nuclear plants and as a result burns more fossil fuel, no? As a percentage of total generation nuclear in Germany was never as high as France, but couldn’t they skip the 20 billion euro cost of a new plant and simply restart an existing one?

mk89 2y ago
Apparently yes: https://www.radiantenergygroup.com/reports/restart-of-germany-reactors-can-it-be-done https://www.radiantenergygroup.com/reports/restart-of-german... But in practice as long as you have Greens in the government you'll never be able to do it.
- nolist_policy 2y ago
  That report is one year old, so the price calculations are completely off. It neglects that all reactors need to go into revision. It completely ignores the political dimension which is extremely complicated even if you ignore the Greens. For example the fuel elements are sourced from Russia.
  - mk89 2y ago
    The US is still buying uranium from Russia. Keeping the reactors open for another 3-5-10 years wouldn't have been such a big deal in terms of fuel. Considering also we're still buying gas from them ...
- j-pb 2y ago
  The minister of the economy (greens) was the one who had them running longer than planned due to the Ukraine War [0], they were also the ones commisioning a study from the energy companies to see if they could extend their operations for years [1]. It was the konservative CDU/CSU that set the final decommission date after Fukushima [2]. 0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xznqbpv0QE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xznqbpv0QE 1: https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Nukleare_Sicherheit/laufzeitverlaengerung_akw_bf.pdf https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Nuklear... 2: https://www.sueddeutsche.de/bayern/atomstreit-in-der-koalition-soeder-droht-mit-ruecktritt-1.1101971 https://www.sueddeutsche.de/bayern/atomstreit-in-der-koaliti...
  - mk89 2y ago
    It's partially true, considering the other two parties were pushing for it too. They had to agree. Plus, we should not mix Habeck with the Greens. Habeck is an individual that sometimes is not supported at all by his own party. I still remember the discussions - they were literally the only ones not wanting to do it - they set hard conditions, red lines etc. Obviously this went against their political program - thus the resistance. It was FDP that pushed for additional extensions. [0] They even proposed to buy new fuel (and further extend) but no, of course not.[1] PS: CDU/CSU did what unfortunately was hyped on TV - fear of 3 headed monsters etc. Greens, on the other hand, don't understand that we have an energy issue right now and extending nuclear reactors for another 5 years would buy us some time. The ideology won. The sad irony is that because of this ideological choice, they had to burn more coal....!!!! EDIT: just found this [2]. What's more to add. They are admitting they could have kept the reactors open for another 15 years. EDIT: according to Habeck, it was the chancellor that pushed for the extension. [3] confirmed also here. [4] So all the Greens actually did was resistance. [0]: https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/german-greens-minister-robert-habeck-under-fire-over-2022-nuclear-shutdown/ https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/ger... [1]: https://www.dw.com/en/german-greens-lay-out-nuclear-power-position-amid-federal-government-infighting/a-63449846 https://www.dw.com/en/german-greens-lay-out-nuclear-power-po... [2]: https://greennuclear.online/@collectifission/112588204256628685 https://greennuclear.online/@collectifission/112588204256628... [3]: https://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/2024-06/robert-habeck-akten-atomausstieg-vorwuerfe-cdu#comments https://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/2024-06/robert-habeck-akten-a... [4]: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/german-chancellor-decides-runtime-extension-all-remaining-nuclear-plants-ending-coalition-row https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/german-chancellor-decid...
    - j-pb 2y ago
      > Plus, we should not mix Habeck with the Greens. > The chancellor’s decision came only two days after Habeck’s Green Party at a party convention officially accepted a runtime extension only for the two plants in southern Germany. lol Getting new fuel for them doesn't make any economic sense. Your entire argument is an emotional appeal. Show me the numbers that show that nuclear is cheaper than renewables and I'll change my mind, but until then it doesn't make economic sense, and would only be the "ideological descision making" that you accuse the green of.
j-pb 2y ago
The current _green_ minister of the economy actually had them running longer than the previous conservative government had planned them to, due to the russian gas crisis. Due to them being phased out there are essentially no spare parts, personell, and fuel, at this point they are being shut down for technical, economical, and organisatory reasons[0] instead of political ones. Also to put things into perspective, Germany deployed as much solar in the last 3 years[1] as it had in total combined nuclear capacity ever (if you sum up every reactor ever build)[2]. 0: https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Nukleare_Sicherheit/laufzeitverlaengerung_akw_bf.pdf https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Nuklear... 1: https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/aktuelles/ausbau-erneuerbare-energien-2225808 https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/aktuelles/ausbau-erne... 2: https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-g-n/germany https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profil...
- sampo 2y ago
  > Also to put things into perspective, Germany deployed as much solar in the last 3 years[1] as it had in total combined nuclear capacity ever This is clearly not true. Perhaps you a confusing the nominal capacity of solar plants to real electricity production? Your source says "The total output of all solar plants rose to 82.2GW" / "Die Gesamtleistung aller Solaranlagen stieg auf 82,2 GW". Whereas in year 2000, Germany produced 170 TWh of electricity with nuclear power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Germany#/media/File:Electricity_generation_in_Germany_by_energy_source.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Germany#...
  - ben_w 2y ago
    170 TWh is the energy not the power, the area under the curve over the course of a year rather than the height of that curve at any given point. 170 TWh / 1 year is an average of 19.41 GW: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=170%20TWh%2F1%20year http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=170%20TWh%2F1%20year This output is a bit less than the PV capacity installed in Germany over the last 3 years, which is something like 27 GW depending on how accurate the estimates are for 2023. However, the capacity factor of German PV is about 10%, so the energy produced in 2022 by PV in Germany from 67 GW of capacity was just under 60 TWh delivered. It's probably going to have been around 85 TWh by the end of this year, based on forecasts for installation.

by tass 2y ago

mk89 2y ago

Apparently yes: https://www.radiantenergygroup.com/reports/restart-of-germany-reactors-can-it-be-done https://www.radiantenergygroup.com/reports/restart-of-german... But in practice as long as you have Greens in the government you'll never be able to do it.

nolist_policy 2y ago
That report is one year old, so the price calculations are completely off. It neglects that all reactors need to go into revision. It completely ignores the political dimension which is extremely complicated even if you ignore the Greens. For example the fuel elements are sourced from Russia.
- mk89 2y ago
  The US is still buying uranium from Russia. Keeping the reactors open for another 3-5-10 years wouldn't have been such a big deal in terms of fuel. Considering also we're still buying gas from them ...
j-pb 2y ago
The minister of the economy (greens) was the one who had them running longer than planned due to the Ukraine War [0], they were also the ones commisioning a study from the energy companies to see if they could extend their operations for years [1]. It was the konservative CDU/CSU that set the final decommission date after Fukushima [2]. 0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xznqbpv0QE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xznqbpv0QE 1: https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Nukleare_Sicherheit/laufzeitverlaengerung_akw_bf.pdf https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Nuklear... 2: https://www.sueddeutsche.de/bayern/atomstreit-in-der-koalition-soeder-droht-mit-ruecktritt-1.1101971 https://www.sueddeutsche.de/bayern/atomstreit-in-der-koaliti...
- mk89 2y ago
  It's partially true, considering the other two parties were pushing for it too. They had to agree. Plus, we should not mix Habeck with the Greens. Habeck is an individual that sometimes is not supported at all by his own party. I still remember the discussions - they were literally the only ones not wanting to do it - they set hard conditions, red lines etc. Obviously this went against their political program - thus the resistance. It was FDP that pushed for additional extensions. [0] They even proposed to buy new fuel (and further extend) but no, of course not.[1] PS: CDU/CSU did what unfortunately was hyped on TV - fear of 3 headed monsters etc. Greens, on the other hand, don't understand that we have an energy issue right now and extending nuclear reactors for another 5 years would buy us some time. The ideology won. The sad irony is that because of this ideological choice, they had to burn more coal....!!!! EDIT: just found this [2]. What's more to add. They are admitting they could have kept the reactors open for another 15 years. EDIT: according to Habeck, it was the chancellor that pushed for the extension. [3] confirmed also here. [4] So all the Greens actually did was resistance. [0]: https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/german-greens-minister-robert-habeck-under-fire-over-2022-nuclear-shutdown/ https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/ger... [1]: https://www.dw.com/en/german-greens-lay-out-nuclear-power-position-amid-federal-government-infighting/a-63449846 https://www.dw.com/en/german-greens-lay-out-nuclear-power-po... [2]: https://greennuclear.online/@collectifission/112588204256628685 https://greennuclear.online/@collectifission/112588204256628... [3]: https://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/2024-06/robert-habeck-akten-atomausstieg-vorwuerfe-cdu#comments https://www.zeit.de/wirtschaft/2024-06/robert-habeck-akten-a... [4]: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/german-chancellor-decides-runtime-extension-all-remaining-nuclear-plants-ending-coalition-row https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/german-chancellor-decid...
  - j-pb 2y ago
    > Plus, we should not mix Habeck with the Greens. > The chancellor’s decision came only two days after Habeck’s Green Party at a party convention officially accepted a runtime extension only for the two plants in southern Germany. lol Getting new fuel for them doesn't make any economic sense. Your entire argument is an emotional appeal. Show me the numbers that show that nuclear is cheaper than renewables and I'll change my mind, but until then it doesn't make economic sense, and would only be the "ideological descision making" that you accuse the green of.

j-pb 2y ago

The current _green_ minister of the economy actually had them running longer than the previous conservative government had planned them to, due to the russian gas crisis. Due to them being phased out there are essentially no spare parts, personell, and fuel, at this point they are being shut down for technical, economical, and organisatory reasons[0] instead of political ones. Also to put things into perspective, Germany deployed as much solar in the last 3 years[1] as it had in total combined nuclear capacity ever (if you sum up every reactor ever build)[2]. 0: https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Nukleare_Sicherheit/laufzeitverlaengerung_akw_bf.pdf https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Nuklear... 1: https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/aktuelles/ausbau-erneuerbare-energien-2225808 https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/aktuelles/ausbau-erne... 2: https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-g-n/germany https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profil...

sampo 2y ago
> Also to put things into perspective, Germany deployed as much solar in the last 3 years[1] as it had in total combined nuclear capacity ever This is clearly not true. Perhaps you a confusing the nominal capacity of solar plants to real electricity production? Your source says "The total output of all solar plants rose to 82.2GW" / "Die Gesamtleistung aller Solaranlagen stieg auf 82,2 GW". Whereas in year 2000, Germany produced 170 TWh of electricity with nuclear power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Germany#/media/File:Electricity_generation_in_Germany_by_energy_source.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Germany#...
- ben_w 2y ago
  170 TWh is the energy not the power, the area under the curve over the course of a year rather than the height of that curve at any given point. 170 TWh / 1 year is an average of 19.41 GW: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=170%20TWh%2F1%20year http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=170%20TWh%2F1%20year This output is a bit less than the PV capacity installed in Germany over the last 3 years, which is something like 27 GW depending on how accurate the estimates are for 2023. However, the capacity factor of German PV is about 10%, so the energy produced in 2022 by PV in Germany from 67 GW of capacity was just under 60 TWh delivered. It's probably going to have been around 85 TWh by the end of this year, based on forecasts for installation.