German here. Some more context that I feel is missing from your article. First of all, yes, that we still fund the Russian madness is sickening and the reluctance of our government to support Ukraine more is ... disturbing, to say the least.
Now, with that out of the way, back to nuclear energy. I believe that one of the reasons why it is widely not considering a "good" option is because it is basically a dead horse. Ever since (and even before) Fukushima when it was decided to phase out nuclear energy, there has been a constant lobbying from the fossil fuel industry to revert the decision or extend it. No reason was too stupid: high living costs: lets keep nuclear. Refugee crisis: lets keep nuclear. Bank crisis: lets keep nuclear. Whatever was on the agenda, you could bet on the fact that someone came up with the brilliant plan to "just prolong nuclear". Now we have the war in Ukraine and guess what idea is coming up .... I am not saying you are wrong necessarily but that thing is just burned.
The key problem is of course that by shutting down nuclear, renewables should have filled in the gap. Should have. Instead, the past 12 or more years we did everything to buy gas from Russia becoming more and more dependent. And now the shit is hitting the fan.
Ah, and finally. There is truly a huge disbelief that nuclear waste can be handled safely with the political personnel we have. That comes from the fact that even the most die-hard defenders of nuclear energy suddenly feel that their Bundesland is way too beautiful to host a nuclear waste site (looking at you Bavaria). That goes as far as actively blocking a scientific survey to find the best spot in Germany to set up such a place.
Nothing of what I wrote solve the problem at hand. I just wanted to give some context here.
Actually, the fossil fuel industry has been funding the anti-nuclear organizations in Germany, including the Greens, exactly to shut down the nuclear plants. They are the only reliable alternative to fossil fuels.
There is primarily an "energy industry" in Germany, not so much a "fossil fuel industry". While the big energy companies, especially RWE and E.On recently tried to ditch "legacy" energies that apparently they feel are not so profitable any more, nuclear and coal-fired electricity generation was driven by the same companies, so there simply is no difference between fossil fuel and nuclear lobbying, it's the same people.
"Ever since (and even before) Fukushima when it was decided to phase out nuclear energy, there has been a constant lobbying from the fossil fuel industry to revert the decision or extend it."
You are confused, the fossil fuel industry is the biggest opponent of nuclear energy.
Nobody is suggesting that Germany keeps these plants open indefinitely. Just set a date consistent with a change to renewables. As each milestone is met a power station is decommissioned again. Its pretty simple if you ask me.
This is down to political will and solely political will. As a nation that has zero nuclear (Ireland) I can tell you now, we are all looking at Germany, and a lot are of the opinion that Russia did not just populate Germany with gas... we think it probably populated the Bundestag with lackies. Britain might have Londongrad but Germany seems to be the house of Russian political power in Europe at this point.
Please ask around, we never noticed before, but its not looking good. Germanys place in the EU is at stake if this continues. I'm already avoiding German products to be honest, its a small thing but I'll do my bit! It'll be a long, long time before I'm persuaded Germany is not tied at the hip to the Kremlin.
Maybe ask Mr. Schröder for his opinion on the matter? Hell he's a close friend of Putin, was a member of the board of Gazprom and Germany won't even suggest he should face sanctions. Surely if Putins mistress and ex-wife are sanctioned then Schröder should be top of the list? No? Not even sanctions Schröder? Really? Too many pals back home has he?
Not looking good Germany, not a good look at all. I'm worried, disgusted to be honest and pretty much convinced. And I hear nothing from the German silent majority which has me more worried about the relationship between Germans and Russians. Wasn't Merkel from East Germany around the same time Putin was stationed there? Just sayin.
Please by all means convince me I'm wrong.
Is nobody even looking into where German politicians got money to run in elections? From national to local level. Are German political parties funded by Russia? What is the story with all this? It seems Germany is desperate to help Putin at all costs. I'm not imagining it either am I? THESE are the questions others around Europe are asking, but seemingly not Germans themselves are asking. Which is very, very worrying.
Hi Mickel. Quite a couple of points you are adressing here.
First of all, yes, abandoning nuclear should have been flanked by massive investments in renewables. And as you suggested, dates had been set for each nuclear plant to be shut down to give time to do this. But guess what? Take 16 years of conservative government in combination with three major energy companies (Eon, Vattenfall, RWE) and the result is: renewables delayed as much as possible. Instead: investments in coal (the worst CO2 emitting energy source) and gas. Cheapest gas comes from? You name it: Russia.
Its even worse. The biggest opposition party, the social democrats, have historically strong connections to the big energy corps (because jobs) and for decades advertised that the more trade we do with Russia, the less likely is a conflict „because that would hurt both sides“. Well, we see now where that got us.
Former chancellor Schröder is indeed a tragic figure. Taking a job at Gazprom after his time at the helm is very bad style and always had that smell of corruption. There are not so many ways to show the country that you ruled once the middle finger for not being re-elected.
Merkel, together with 20 Mio Germans, was born in former GDR, the socialist part of Germany before reunification. That country however was first occupied by the Soviet Union (not Russia!) and the dependend on it as part of the Warsaw Treaty. So… I do not think that this alone qualifies anyone for being close to or Pro-Russia. If at all, its the opposite.
As for convincing you, I don‘t want to convince anyone. You will hear some of the loudest criticism from within Germany if it comes to our governments’ hesitant (or maybe just too silent) support for Ukraine.
Both our main political parties have been in bed with the large energy companies for too long and were all to happy to take the convenient (read: cheap) road. That was Russian gas. Yes, Russia has been influencing parties but rather indirect and not by financing campaigns. Its more the overall attack on all western countries (election manipulation via social media, influencing Brexit, that level).
Keeping the few nuclear plants open will not significantly change our dependance on Russia. Gas is mostly used to heat homes. Nuclear can not replace that. And funny enough, no one asks the question where Uranium needs to be bought from to run nuclear power plants. Hint: its mainly Khazakstan and … Russia. Not sure if that will really help us to get rid of the dependencies (I don‘t know the numbers here).
Finally, we are now building LNG terminals. To get liquid gas. Guess who always wanted that? The Donald! I do not want to know what is going on in Germany and in the view of our European neighbours, if in 2024 Trump is back and we all wake up in a world where we exchanged dependency on Russian gas for dependency on Trump-led US gas.
Soo.. I think its complex. Germany has maneuvered itself into a shit position and we are not gonna get out here in a couple of weeks or months. The overall support in the country for Ukraine is overwhelming. People are donating and hosting refugees. There is a broader issue with Germany‘s role in the world if it comes to power projection and responsibility (today is May 8, marking the end of WW2 in Europe) which further complicates things but thats a whole other story.
The Belgian greens did agree to keep 2 of our nuclear reactors open for 10 years longer . SO it can be done. Not sure what this will do for them at the next election though.
That's the problem with multiple party coalitions.
All parties have to entertain their core voters and so core beliefs are out of discussion.
Usually there are different ways to come around this:
One way could be that the "other" partners are doing this on their own.
Greens could protest and resist but not to the point of leaving the coalition.
Unfortunately there are key ministries hold by the Greens that have to approve.
They cannot pretend to resist.
An other option is to give the whole topic to the parliament as a "free of party rules" decision.
That has been done recently to overcome the fundamental differences regarding vaccine mandates.
That usually needs a deep moral topic which is not strictly related to party boundaries and every member of parliament may have some kind of deep private moral dilemma to solve.
Last option is to directly pressure from chancellor:
Make it or break it. He uses his power to force a decision and Greens follow that or the government is done and new elections.
In time of crisis forcing an election might be not be the best idea.
The best part is, that regarding weapons and military supplies for Ukraine the Greens are the most supportive party and the Chancellor ist blocking.
I usually like your essays very much. They are very informative and thougtful. They helped me especially during the Covid crisis, thank you very much for publishing them.
This time I am sorry, this just reads like German bashing for whatever reason.
Disclaimer: I am german and I hope this doesn't result in any ad hominem arguments.
First of all, you base all your reasoning on a paper from the ministries that was published March 7th.
This is quite some time ago, and as you know, the official positions, the sanctions against russia have changed quite a bit and the war crimes committed by Russia have escalated over the last 5 weeks in a way that is hard to comprehend.
We currently do not know if they are reconsidering nuclear power and you do not list any of Mr. Habeck other efforts to reduce our dependency on Russian gas as fast as possible (for example his trips to Katar).
"Extending the operating lives of the three nuclear power plants still in operation
would not generate any additional electricity in the winter of 2022/2023 (stretch operation),
but from the fall of 2023 at the earliest, after refueling with newly manufactured fuel rods."
How would extending them help *now* to reduce gas consumption, as your reasoning is that Germany needs to act quick and decisive to not pay Billions of Euro to Russia thus financially supporting the war.
All your reasoning regaring changing laws, finding personell and equipment are in itself correct, albeit you make it sound so very easy to just sort out all difficulties that exist.
Additionally, it is just interessting to assume, that one could just switch back to nuclear power (and reduce gas) like flipping a switch. This is technically neither easy nor fast.
Again a lot of your points are valid, it is good to publish them, it is good to keep all administrations honest (well, sorta), this time being Germany, but please don't make it feel like bashing or it just being super easy, because at least for me, it doent's help but create an inner resistance to your arguments.
And just to make this clear:
I absolutly despise Putin, the war and the genocide Russia commits.
I am all for more sanctions, reducing the gas import from Russia to zero and am willing to endure any negative effects, because this is nothing compared to the horrors the ukranian people have to endure.
But please don't make it sound like everything is just easy and we or our government are just too stupid or plain unwilling to do anything.
Lars, thank you very much for your thoughtful response. It does not sound at all as ad hominem. Quite the opposite, constructive and useful. I appreciate it!
Let me react.
1. Thx for the link. This is the 3rd time I update it 🤔
2. It was not my intention to attack Germany or the German people, but rather the government. You're right that using "Germany" as the subject mixes both. I'll try to change that in the future.
3. I wish I could use a more recent document explaining the decision. But I couldn't find any...
4. The lack of additional electricity generation from nuclear in the 2022/23 winter is addressed in Point 7. The gist of it is that Germany could burn its uranium faster in the summer, at the expense of the winter. For me, the key is that:
- It would reduce dependency during the summer (which would be extremely welcome, and more valuable than in the future since the war is now, and might not still be here in 9 months).
- It would reduce long-term dependency starting in 2023.
- It buys Germany months to figure things out for the 2023 winter.
- I believe the lack of fuel is something that could be accelerated (where there's a will, there's a way). That's my prior, so if they claim it's impossible, I'd like to see why. Without it, I can't update my prior and assume it's an excuse.
5. On the difficulty of making things happen, I will leave a short story that Steve Jobs gave to employees when they were promoted to vice president at Apple. Jobs would tell the VP that if the garbage in his office was not being emptied, Jobs would naturally demand an explanation from the janitor. "Well, the lock on the door was changed,' the janitor could reasonably respond. "And I couldn't get a key."
The janitor's response is reasonable. It's an understandable excuse. The janitor can't do his job without a key. As a janitor, he's allowed to have excuses.
"When you're the janitor, reasons matter," Jobs told his newly-minted VPs. "Somewhere between the janitor and the CEO, reasons stop mattering."
"In other words,' (Jobs continued,) "when the employee becomes a vice president, he or she must vacate all excuses for failure. A vice president is responsible for any mistakes that happen, and it doesn't matter what you say."
We're talking about the government of the 4th biggest economy in the world. Can it REALLY not keep 3 nuclear reactors functioning?
You're absolutely correct: there is a clear will to kill nuclear power generation in Germany, and it is long overdue that this is done. Nuclear energy is uncontrollable and, on a full cost basis, not economical (it only works with public guarantees to the operating companies; if they had to bear the cost of insurance and waste disposal they would not do it). It is the right thing to end this, not at some yet again later and later point, but now.
Tanks from Germany are now killing Russian tankers in Ukraine. Artillery from Germany is now destroying Russian supplies in Ukraine. Sophisticated anti-air defences from Germany are shooting down Russian aircraft over Ukraine. That is the right contribution to ending this war. This was also long overdue.
Dear Lars, you nailed it, I am not German but European and I consider myself as a critical thinker and i tend to question so called facts. I had exactly the same feeling reading Thomas's "lecture" on how Germany should behave and the more I read the more i became resistant to "his" solutions. This war is insane and terrible and we should not even think how easily it could have been prevented. I also watch other news channels to get a clear (er) picture and the Indian News channels are quite good and more objective, then the western media. Also the historical connections between Germany and Russia or even France and Russia are completely left out. Just the 37Mio dead Russians and Ukrainians (we should not forget that some of the most cruel SS commandos were Ukrainian) in WW2 left a "guilt" in German conscience and I dont think in general any European wants to burn down all bridges between Europe and Russia. Also Italy will not forget that it was Russia that helped them with meds in the early days of Covid!
This war has to end and the least we need at the moment is more old men putting oil into the fire and sending young men to die.
In SS commandos there was people from many European countries. Baltic countries wants to burn down all bridges between Europe and Mongols Russia. There was no real help for Italy from Russia in the early days of Covid. Russia had no meds for own people. Your news channels are bad if you write these nonsenses.
Thanks for the fine overview of the not-fine situation.
In your "I’m lucky to understand the risks" paragraph, your arithmetic is off. 5% of 0.001% is 0.00005% (you have an extra 0 there), and both numbers are WAGs that communicate poorly. The original (per your footnote), as "1 in 100,000 reactor years" is more communicative and illustrates the wild-ass nature of the guessing. I also note that Table 1 of the IAEA Bulletin you link to has a gross blunder in the penultimate row, the product that should be 2 x 10^-6 is shown 4 orders of magnitude larger. Whoopsadaisy.
All for the argument that Germany can and should do more! And that all levers should be looked at.
However, I wanted to point out to you that your estimate of the impact is by around an order of magnitude off. The impact of prolonging the 3 nukes is around 0.6% of total gas consumption, or maybe 1-2% of Russian imports. As background: I'm a German energy economist. Quick bottom up calculation:
Germany consumes 1000TWh of gas. 3 remaining nukes produce around 30 TWh electricity (4GW*7500h). To produce that you need around 60TWh thermal input (simplified 50% fuel efficiency). So 6% is the absolute upper bound of any estimate. However, as other tech are in the mix, coal reserves already reactivated & nukes run as base load, while at current prices gas is only used during peak hours, the additional gas mitigation by keeping these nukes is around 6TWh, or 0.6% (here's an in-depth analysis unfortunately in German: https://t.co/jTUuAUTSJZ).
The issues, where I where your calculation is arriving at the wrong numbers is:
- Only 15% of gas goes into electricity generation. The 30% includes heat delivered by combined-heat-and-power plants. Some statistics don't manage to differentiate that out. Furthermore, the 15% includes the electricity from these CHPs units. So you cannot cut those out without them stopping to deliver heat, as these are co-products.
- you take the 2021 year of 10% as a baseline for the remaining 3 nukes, but that year we still had nearly double the capacity.
- you miss out on the merit order effects. There's a reason why 3GW nukes cannot substitute 30GW of gas. Germany has already reactivated hard-coal plants to get more capacity online.
Thanks for this, Jorn. I downloaded the doc, translated it, and am reading it. It will take me some time to process. I want to pinpoint exactly where the disconnect is, but I'm also working on other pieces. It does seem like a very pertinent document.
I'm loving the charts and detailed numbers. Yet this article sounds more like complaining about politicians & government 🥸 Even the title is as such.
What about focusing on a solution…
What about making an article: "How Germans can Stop Fueling Russia's War Machine"… and provide *solutions* to each of the 'excuses' highlighted in this article…
I think the main point was there is no solution. This is about what Germany is thinking. If people aren’t thinking logically then it’s a lack of desire problem. Many times it helps to show someone themselves in a mirror. To help them realize they aren’t thinking logically and that they should stand up and take action.
Finally, someone that knows something. Man, I'm getting in my nerves in this site. It is like being Casandra seeing the future but nobody believe you XD. I guess you have a science background.
Worth checking who can provide fuel rapidly. Fortunately, 40% of Uranium exports come from Kazakhstan, a country outside Russia's... wait? What happened there a few months back??!!
And if we don't want too? There has been plenty of wars we don't give a shit for money. We don't give a shit about so many things. I'm sorry but I cannot buy this war is more important than others. I'm not saying you should do nothing but not expect me to pay more for gas just to save people. Otherwise at least explain me clearly how to distinguish those wars we need to stop from those that are ok. My messages is mostly sarcasm, I'm against all wars, because they kill human being is both sides. And a lot of people is our countries make a lot of money. The military complex in France sold plenty of weapons to Russia for 5 years. We are selling weapons to Arabia Saudí. So, what is the line??
Unless the line is "only stop wars if I can profit from it, the good wars where I make money those are fine!!" I hope is not that.
One compelling reason to keep nuclear permanently resides in the fact that intermittent renewables cannot supply energy when those resources are not available. If the world hopes to reach net zero CO2 emissions, it will CATEGORICALLY have to use nuclear energy. There is no choice. This decision by the Green Party is caused by a combination of stupidity and fascism.
It is really funny but also expected to read comments from some Germans stating that this article is "anti German" or bashing German politicians. Oh.... these Germans....so sensitive...
1) Disclaimer. I am an engineer with 30 years of experience. I have worked and lived in Spain, France, USA, Switzerland and I live and work in Germany since 2010. So I have some info on different ways of working styles...
2) I remember very well the day (I was working in Germany) Frau Merkel (Phd in quantum chemistry) announced that ALL German nuclear power plants will be closed because there was a Tsunami in Fukushima. This was despite the fact that a tsunami does no happen often in Bavaria or Baden-Württemberg..... But the green votes were growing and hey! we (CDU) needed some votes. And it is cool also.
3) That day a colleague in the research institute where I was working was completely infuriated by what he considered a stupid decision based in emotions and not in facts. He was working in the renewable energy lab of ditto research institute. Specifically in wind energy. So not very pro nuclear exactly I would say...
4) It puzzles people outside Germany why the government does not change a decision....Well, I would not define DEUTSCHE KULTUR as very humble and able to recognize MISTAKES in a CANDID and HONEST way. Should we talk about Berlin Airport here?
5) More information on acting FAST and coping with CHANGE can be seen in this video. All foreign workers in Germany find it VERY FUNNY (nur für Ausländer) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWU6ix0jXG0
6) Finally, I miss a little bit of analysis on how NPP are used in baseload operation while Gas CCPP are fundamental for grid frequency control. For this purpose, unfortunately we do not have a substitute for gas. Food for thought.
Excellent article Thomas, I couldn't agree more. I suggest you give a try to https://www.deepl.com/translator , it is way better than Google Translate (and a glimpse of the future when AI will replace many jobs) ;)
Wonderfully done and following discussion awesome. How about the new technology in nuclear power? Too far away? I'm sending this valuable interaction widely. Please keep the discussion going.
Thank you for your fine work. Here is some more: How will Russia respond to losing the petro income if Germany stops buying? (History shows us that is is very difficult for rational people to deal in a logical manner with irrational people and achieve an acceptable outcome.) And a final query: What conclusions do you draw as a result of the Russian military activity at the Chernobyl disaster site? As usual, we are living in interesting times.
I once lived with a psychopath. Here's my lesson: you can't appease crazy. The only thing you can do with crazy is cut all ties. It might be painful at first, but it's the only way in the long term.
German here. Some more context that I feel is missing from your article. First of all, yes, that we still fund the Russian madness is sickening and the reluctance of our government to support Ukraine more is ... disturbing, to say the least.
Now, with that out of the way, back to nuclear energy. I believe that one of the reasons why it is widely not considering a "good" option is because it is basically a dead horse. Ever since (and even before) Fukushima when it was decided to phase out nuclear energy, there has been a constant lobbying from the fossil fuel industry to revert the decision or extend it. No reason was too stupid: high living costs: lets keep nuclear. Refugee crisis: lets keep nuclear. Bank crisis: lets keep nuclear. Whatever was on the agenda, you could bet on the fact that someone came up with the brilliant plan to "just prolong nuclear". Now we have the war in Ukraine and guess what idea is coming up .... I am not saying you are wrong necessarily but that thing is just burned.
The key problem is of course that by shutting down nuclear, renewables should have filled in the gap. Should have. Instead, the past 12 or more years we did everything to buy gas from Russia becoming more and more dependent. And now the shit is hitting the fan.
Ah, and finally. There is truly a huge disbelief that nuclear waste can be handled safely with the political personnel we have. That comes from the fact that even the most die-hard defenders of nuclear energy suddenly feel that their Bundesland is way too beautiful to host a nuclear waste site (looking at you Bavaria). That goes as far as actively blocking a scientific survey to find the best spot in Germany to set up such a place.
Nothing of what I wrote solve the problem at hand. I just wanted to give some context here.
This is super interesting. I didn't know. Thanks for sharing.
Sounds like the typical escalation of commitment. That's very human, but very unfortunate and illogical. Good leadership should solve that...
Actually, the fossil fuel industry has been funding the anti-nuclear organizations in Germany, including the Greens, exactly to shut down the nuclear plants. They are the only reliable alternative to fossil fuels.
There is primarily an "energy industry" in Germany, not so much a "fossil fuel industry". While the big energy companies, especially RWE and E.On recently tried to ditch "legacy" energies that apparently they feel are not so profitable any more, nuclear and coal-fired electricity generation was driven by the same companies, so there simply is no difference between fossil fuel and nuclear lobbying, it's the same people.
Interesting. Why does it matter that the same people produce coal and nuclear electricity?
"Ever since (and even before) Fukushima when it was decided to phase out nuclear energy, there has been a constant lobbying from the fossil fuel industry to revert the decision or extend it."
You are confused, the fossil fuel industry is the biggest opponent of nuclear energy.
Nobody is suggesting that Germany keeps these plants open indefinitely. Just set a date consistent with a change to renewables. As each milestone is met a power station is decommissioned again. Its pretty simple if you ask me.
This is down to political will and solely political will. As a nation that has zero nuclear (Ireland) I can tell you now, we are all looking at Germany, and a lot are of the opinion that Russia did not just populate Germany with gas... we think it probably populated the Bundestag with lackies. Britain might have Londongrad but Germany seems to be the house of Russian political power in Europe at this point.
Please ask around, we never noticed before, but its not looking good. Germanys place in the EU is at stake if this continues. I'm already avoiding German products to be honest, its a small thing but I'll do my bit! It'll be a long, long time before I'm persuaded Germany is not tied at the hip to the Kremlin.
Maybe ask Mr. Schröder for his opinion on the matter? Hell he's a close friend of Putin, was a member of the board of Gazprom and Germany won't even suggest he should face sanctions. Surely if Putins mistress and ex-wife are sanctioned then Schröder should be top of the list? No? Not even sanctions Schröder? Really? Too many pals back home has he?
Not looking good Germany, not a good look at all. I'm worried, disgusted to be honest and pretty much convinced. And I hear nothing from the German silent majority which has me more worried about the relationship between Germans and Russians. Wasn't Merkel from East Germany around the same time Putin was stationed there? Just sayin.
Please by all means convince me I'm wrong.
Is nobody even looking into where German politicians got money to run in elections? From national to local level. Are German political parties funded by Russia? What is the story with all this? It seems Germany is desperate to help Putin at all costs. I'm not imagining it either am I? THESE are the questions others around Europe are asking, but seemingly not Germans themselves are asking. Which is very, very worrying.
Hi Mickel. Quite a couple of points you are adressing here.
First of all, yes, abandoning nuclear should have been flanked by massive investments in renewables. And as you suggested, dates had been set for each nuclear plant to be shut down to give time to do this. But guess what? Take 16 years of conservative government in combination with three major energy companies (Eon, Vattenfall, RWE) and the result is: renewables delayed as much as possible. Instead: investments in coal (the worst CO2 emitting energy source) and gas. Cheapest gas comes from? You name it: Russia.
Its even worse. The biggest opposition party, the social democrats, have historically strong connections to the big energy corps (because jobs) and for decades advertised that the more trade we do with Russia, the less likely is a conflict „because that would hurt both sides“. Well, we see now where that got us.
Former chancellor Schröder is indeed a tragic figure. Taking a job at Gazprom after his time at the helm is very bad style and always had that smell of corruption. There are not so many ways to show the country that you ruled once the middle finger for not being re-elected.
Merkel, together with 20 Mio Germans, was born in former GDR, the socialist part of Germany before reunification. That country however was first occupied by the Soviet Union (not Russia!) and the dependend on it as part of the Warsaw Treaty. So… I do not think that this alone qualifies anyone for being close to or Pro-Russia. If at all, its the opposite.
As for convincing you, I don‘t want to convince anyone. You will hear some of the loudest criticism from within Germany if it comes to our governments’ hesitant (or maybe just too silent) support for Ukraine.
Both our main political parties have been in bed with the large energy companies for too long and were all to happy to take the convenient (read: cheap) road. That was Russian gas. Yes, Russia has been influencing parties but rather indirect and not by financing campaigns. Its more the overall attack on all western countries (election manipulation via social media, influencing Brexit, that level).
Keeping the few nuclear plants open will not significantly change our dependance on Russia. Gas is mostly used to heat homes. Nuclear can not replace that. And funny enough, no one asks the question where Uranium needs to be bought from to run nuclear power plants. Hint: its mainly Khazakstan and … Russia. Not sure if that will really help us to get rid of the dependencies (I don‘t know the numbers here).
Finally, we are now building LNG terminals. To get liquid gas. Guess who always wanted that? The Donald! I do not want to know what is going on in Germany and in the view of our European neighbours, if in 2024 Trump is back and we all wake up in a world where we exchanged dependency on Russian gas for dependency on Trump-led US gas.
Soo.. I think its complex. Germany has maneuvered itself into a shit position and we are not gonna get out here in a couple of weeks or months. The overall support in the country for Ukraine is overwhelming. People are donating and hosting refugees. There is a broader issue with Germany‘s role in the world if it comes to power projection and responsibility (today is May 8, marking the end of WW2 in Europe) which further complicates things but thats a whole other story.
Some clarification on how public opinion in Germany doesn't seem to change politics here:
The German Greens are founded on the opposition of nuclear power.
They simply cannot renounce that position without letting the whole party explode.
I guess green voters might be able to convince, but the party members would just end the government instead.
The Belgian greens did agree to keep 2 of our nuclear reactors open for 10 years longer . SO it can be done. Not sure what this will do for them at the next election though.
That makes sense.
But then they should not be in sole charge of this decision.
That's the problem with multiple party coalitions.
All parties have to entertain their core voters and so core beliefs are out of discussion.
Usually there are different ways to come around this:
One way could be that the "other" partners are doing this on their own.
Greens could protest and resist but not to the point of leaving the coalition.
Unfortunately there are key ministries hold by the Greens that have to approve.
They cannot pretend to resist.
An other option is to give the whole topic to the parliament as a "free of party rules" decision.
That has been done recently to overcome the fundamental differences regarding vaccine mandates.
That usually needs a deep moral topic which is not strictly related to party boundaries and every member of parliament may have some kind of deep private moral dilemma to solve.
Last option is to directly pressure from chancellor:
Make it or break it. He uses his power to force a decision and Greens follow that or the government is done and new elections.
In time of crisis forcing an election might be not be the best idea.
The best part is, that regarding weapons and military supplies for Ukraine the Greens are the most supportive party and the Chancellor ist blocking.
Dear Tomas,
I usually like your essays very much. They are very informative and thougtful. They helped me especially during the Covid crisis, thank you very much for publishing them.
This time I am sorry, this just reads like German bashing for whatever reason.
Disclaimer: I am german and I hope this doesn't result in any ad hominem arguments.
First of all, you base all your reasoning on a paper from the ministries that was published March 7th.
This is quite some time ago, and as you know, the official positions, the sanctions against russia have changed quite a bit and the war crimes committed by Russia have escalated over the last 5 weeks in a way that is hard to comprehend.
We currently do not know if they are reconsidering nuclear power and you do not list any of Mr. Habeck other efforts to reduce our dependency on Russian gas as fast as possible (for example his trips to Katar).
In the paper (btw, there is a spelling mistake in the link, it should read https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Nukleare_Sicherheit/laufzeitverlaengerung_akw_bf.pdf) there is one paragraph that I find neglected:
"Extending the operating lives of the three nuclear power plants still in operation
would not generate any additional electricity in the winter of 2022/2023 (stretch operation),
but from the fall of 2023 at the earliest, after refueling with newly manufactured fuel rods."
How would extending them help *now* to reduce gas consumption, as your reasoning is that Germany needs to act quick and decisive to not pay Billions of Euro to Russia thus financially supporting the war.
All your reasoning regaring changing laws, finding personell and equipment are in itself correct, albeit you make it sound so very easy to just sort out all difficulties that exist.
Additionally, it is just interessting to assume, that one could just switch back to nuclear power (and reduce gas) like flipping a switch. This is technically neither easy nor fast.
Again a lot of your points are valid, it is good to publish them, it is good to keep all administrations honest (well, sorta), this time being Germany, but please don't make it feel like bashing or it just being super easy, because at least for me, it doent's help but create an inner resistance to your arguments.
And just to make this clear:
I absolutly despise Putin, the war and the genocide Russia commits.
I am all for more sanctions, reducing the gas import from Russia to zero and am willing to endure any negative effects, because this is nothing compared to the horrors the ukranian people have to endure.
But please don't make it sound like everything is just easy and we or our government are just too stupid or plain unwilling to do anything.
Slava Ukraini!
Beste regards,
Lars
Lars, thank you very much for your thoughtful response. It does not sound at all as ad hominem. Quite the opposite, constructive and useful. I appreciate it!
Let me react.
1. Thx for the link. This is the 3rd time I update it 🤔
2. It was not my intention to attack Germany or the German people, but rather the government. You're right that using "Germany" as the subject mixes both. I'll try to change that in the future.
3. I wish I could use a more recent document explaining the decision. But I couldn't find any...
4. The lack of additional electricity generation from nuclear in the 2022/23 winter is addressed in Point 7. The gist of it is that Germany could burn its uranium faster in the summer, at the expense of the winter. For me, the key is that:
- It would reduce dependency during the summer (which would be extremely welcome, and more valuable than in the future since the war is now, and might not still be here in 9 months).
- It would reduce long-term dependency starting in 2023.
- It buys Germany months to figure things out for the 2023 winter.
- I believe the lack of fuel is something that could be accelerated (where there's a will, there's a way). That's my prior, so if they claim it's impossible, I'd like to see why. Without it, I can't update my prior and assume it's an excuse.
5. On the difficulty of making things happen, I will leave a short story that Steve Jobs gave to employees when they were promoted to vice president at Apple. Jobs would tell the VP that if the garbage in his office was not being emptied, Jobs would naturally demand an explanation from the janitor. "Well, the lock on the door was changed,' the janitor could reasonably respond. "And I couldn't get a key."
The janitor's response is reasonable. It's an understandable excuse. The janitor can't do his job without a key. As a janitor, he's allowed to have excuses.
"When you're the janitor, reasons matter," Jobs told his newly-minted VPs. "Somewhere between the janitor and the CEO, reasons stop mattering."
"In other words,' (Jobs continued,) "when the employee becomes a vice president, he or she must vacate all excuses for failure. A vice president is responsible for any mistakes that happen, and it doesn't matter what you say."
We're talking about the government of the 4th biggest economy in the world. Can it REALLY not keep 3 nuclear reactors functioning?
You're absolutely correct: there is a clear will to kill nuclear power generation in Germany, and it is long overdue that this is done. Nuclear energy is uncontrollable and, on a full cost basis, not economical (it only works with public guarantees to the operating companies; if they had to bear the cost of insurance and waste disposal they would not do it). It is the right thing to end this, not at some yet again later and later point, but now.
Tanks from Germany are now killing Russian tankers in Ukraine. Artillery from Germany is now destroying Russian supplies in Ukraine. Sophisticated anti-air defences from Germany are shooting down Russian aircraft over Ukraine. That is the right contribution to ending this war. This was also long overdue.
Sorry seeing this now.
So the downsides of nuclear are:
- Uncontrollable (how? You mean reactor melting?)
- Expensive if you add public guarantees (how specifically?)
- Expensive if you add waste disposal (can you elaborate?)
Anything else?
Dear Lars, you nailed it, I am not German but European and I consider myself as a critical thinker and i tend to question so called facts. I had exactly the same feeling reading Thomas's "lecture" on how Germany should behave and the more I read the more i became resistant to "his" solutions. This war is insane and terrible and we should not even think how easily it could have been prevented. I also watch other news channels to get a clear (er) picture and the Indian News channels are quite good and more objective, then the western media. Also the historical connections between Germany and Russia or even France and Russia are completely left out. Just the 37Mio dead Russians and Ukrainians (we should not forget that some of the most cruel SS commandos were Ukrainian) in WW2 left a "guilt" in German conscience and I dont think in general any European wants to burn down all bridges between Europe and Russia. Also Italy will not forget that it was Russia that helped them with meds in the early days of Covid!
This war has to end and the least we need at the moment is more old men putting oil into the fire and sending young men to die.
In SS commandos there was people from many European countries. Baltic countries wants to burn down all bridges between Europe and Mongols Russia. There was no real help for Italy from Russia in the early days of Covid. Russia had no meds for own people. Your news channels are bad if you write these nonsenses.
Thanks for the fine overview of the not-fine situation.
In your "I’m lucky to understand the risks" paragraph, your arithmetic is off. 5% of 0.001% is 0.00005% (you have an extra 0 there), and both numbers are WAGs that communicate poorly. The original (per your footnote), as "1 in 100,000 reactor years" is more communicative and illustrates the wild-ass nature of the guessing. I also note that Table 1 of the IAEA Bulletin you link to has a gross blunder in the penultimate row, the product that should be 2 x 10^-6 is shown 4 orders of magnitude larger. Whoopsadaisy.
Ah thanks for catching that!
And yes, you're right that the idea here is just orders of magnitude. I clarified in the text. Thx!
Dear Tomas,
All for the argument that Germany can and should do more! And that all levers should be looked at.
However, I wanted to point out to you that your estimate of the impact is by around an order of magnitude off. The impact of prolonging the 3 nukes is around 0.6% of total gas consumption, or maybe 1-2% of Russian imports. As background: I'm a German energy economist. Quick bottom up calculation:
Germany consumes 1000TWh of gas. 3 remaining nukes produce around 30 TWh electricity (4GW*7500h). To produce that you need around 60TWh thermal input (simplified 50% fuel efficiency). So 6% is the absolute upper bound of any estimate. However, as other tech are in the mix, coal reserves already reactivated & nukes run as base load, while at current prices gas is only used during peak hours, the additional gas mitigation by keeping these nukes is around 6TWh, or 0.6% (here's an in-depth analysis unfortunately in German: https://t.co/jTUuAUTSJZ).
The issues, where I where your calculation is arriving at the wrong numbers is:
- Only 15% of gas goes into electricity generation. The 30% includes heat delivered by combined-heat-and-power plants. Some statistics don't manage to differentiate that out. Furthermore, the 15% includes the electricity from these CHPs units. So you cannot cut those out without them stopping to deliver heat, as these are co-products.
- you take the 2021 year of 10% as a baseline for the remaining 3 nukes, but that year we still had nearly double the capacity.
- you miss out on the merit order effects. There's a reason why 3GW nukes cannot substitute 30GW of gas. Germany has already reactivated hard-coal plants to get more capacity online.
Best regards
Jörn Richstein
Thanks for this, Jorn. I downloaded the doc, translated it, and am reading it. It will take me some time to process. I want to pinpoint exactly where the disconnect is, but I'm also working on other pieces. It does seem like a very pertinent document.
Really interesting! On the other hand, here there are some justifications with numbers and articles. what do you think about it? Thanks
https://twitter.com/FernandoRod_07/status/1462487712091582466?t=_JOzJGGHTHSnK7kZl9f1yQ&s=19
Fantastic! I was looking for a steel man argument against nuclear. This is as good as it gets
I'm loving the charts and detailed numbers. Yet this article sounds more like complaining about politicians & government 🥸 Even the title is as such.
What about focusing on a solution…
What about making an article: "How Germans can Stop Fueling Russia's War Machine"… and provide *solutions* to each of the 'excuses' highlighted in this article…
I think the main point was there is no solution. This is about what Germany is thinking. If people aren’t thinking logically then it’s a lack of desire problem. Many times it helps to show someone themselves in a mirror. To help them realize they aren’t thinking logically and that they should stand up and take action.
The solution is actually not that hard:
1. Decide to do it
2. Do it
The details are embedded in the article, but I'll make them explicit. Thanks. Here:
a. Get the workers back from retirement
b. Start training new ones asap
c. Talk with previous suppliers to get them back to producing what's needed
d. If you lack the workers or suppliers, hire / secure from across Europe
e. Talk with fuel providers to see everything that can be done to accelerate fuel replacement
f. Put together a budget to pay for all of this
g. Accept that you will be extending nuclear energy for a handful of years
h. Accept that you need to change the law, and maybe amend the constitution
Thay's not how safety of a nuclear power plant works. You can't just decide to do it and let it explode.
Man, this is getting ridiculous.
Finally, someone that knows something. Man, I'm getting in my nerves in this site. It is like being Casandra seeing the future but nobody believe you XD. I guess you have a science background.
Worth checking who can provide fuel rapidly. Fortunately, 40% of Uranium exports come from Kazakhstan, a country outside Russia's... wait? What happened there a few months back??!!
And if we don't want too? There has been plenty of wars we don't give a shit for money. We don't give a shit about so many things. I'm sorry but I cannot buy this war is more important than others. I'm not saying you should do nothing but not expect me to pay more for gas just to save people. Otherwise at least explain me clearly how to distinguish those wars we need to stop from those that are ok. My messages is mostly sarcasm, I'm against all wars, because they kill human being is both sides. And a lot of people is our countries make a lot of money. The military complex in France sold plenty of weapons to Russia for 5 years. We are selling weapons to Arabia Saudí. So, what is the line??
Unless the line is "only stop wars if I can profit from it, the good wars where I make money those are fine!!" I hope is not that.
Just like with most any democratic platform issue, the idea of not going nuclear can be debunked by:
1) what is the cost benefit?
2) compared to what?
3) Do you have any evidence?
It’s all just virtue-signal grandstanding. At a huge cost, this time in 1000s of lives per month.
Super interesting, Tomas. Muchas gracias for sharing.
One compelling reason to keep nuclear permanently resides in the fact that intermittent renewables cannot supply energy when those resources are not available. If the world hopes to reach net zero CO2 emissions, it will CATEGORICALLY have to use nuclear energy. There is no choice. This decision by the Green Party is caused by a combination of stupidity and fascism.
The intermittent nature of renewable energy can be solved through energy storage. EVs have even been proposed as feeding back to the grid.
excellent!!
Excellent article Tomas.
It is really funny but also expected to read comments from some Germans stating that this article is "anti German" or bashing German politicians. Oh.... these Germans....so sensitive...
1) Disclaimer. I am an engineer with 30 years of experience. I have worked and lived in Spain, France, USA, Switzerland and I live and work in Germany since 2010. So I have some info on different ways of working styles...
2) I remember very well the day (I was working in Germany) Frau Merkel (Phd in quantum chemistry) announced that ALL German nuclear power plants will be closed because there was a Tsunami in Fukushima. This was despite the fact that a tsunami does no happen often in Bavaria or Baden-Württemberg..... But the green votes were growing and hey! we (CDU) needed some votes. And it is cool also.
3) That day a colleague in the research institute where I was working was completely infuriated by what he considered a stupid decision based in emotions and not in facts. He was working in the renewable energy lab of ditto research institute. Specifically in wind energy. So not very pro nuclear exactly I would say...
4) It puzzles people outside Germany why the government does not change a decision....Well, I would not define DEUTSCHE KULTUR as very humble and able to recognize MISTAKES in a CANDID and HONEST way. Should we talk about Berlin Airport here?
5) More information on acting FAST and coping with CHANGE can be seen in this video. All foreign workers in Germany find it VERY FUNNY (nur für Ausländer) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWU6ix0jXG0
6) Finally, I miss a little bit of analysis on how NPP are used in baseload operation while Gas CCPP are fundamental for grid frequency control. For this purpose, unfortunately we do not have a substitute for gas. Food for thought.
Great analysis, I agree 100% that it’s madness to keep nuclear plants shut down and not let the remaining ones operate in a time like this.
Excellent article Thomas, I couldn't agree more. I suggest you give a try to https://www.deepl.com/translator , it is way better than Google Translate (and a glimpse of the future when AI will replace many jobs) ;)
I’ve heard about it. Thanks! Good to know.
Wonderfully done and following discussion awesome. How about the new technology in nuclear power? Too far away? I'm sending this valuable interaction widely. Please keep the discussion going.
Both fusion and fission are extremely promising.
I have been writing on the topic, but it's so vast that it needs dedication.
I have 3-6 articles in mind on the topic. I hope to publish them in the next 6 months
Thank you for your fine work. Here is some more: How will Russia respond to losing the petro income if Germany stops buying? (History shows us that is is very difficult for rational people to deal in a logical manner with irrational people and achieve an acceptable outcome.) And a final query: What conclusions do you draw as a result of the Russian military activity at the Chernobyl disaster site? As usual, we are living in interesting times.
I once lived with a psychopath. Here's my lesson: you can't appease crazy. The only thing you can do with crazy is cut all ties. It might be painful at first, but it's the only way in the long term.