After 2011’s Fukushima disaster in Japan, Germany gave itself not much more than 10 years to close down all it nuclear power plants.
The country also has a roadmap to switch to renewable energy for 80% of its electricity needs by 2050. That may sound like a long time, but the clean energy installed base today only provides 23% of the European Nations power demand.
But the nuclear energy phase-out has meant that at the moment Germany is burning more coal now than it did 24 years ago.
And it’s desperate for more reports the FT, even begging the Swedes who are divesting from coal to do the opposite and expand their operations inside Germany:
Sigmar Gabriel, Germany’s vice-chancellor, warned Sweden’s new prime minister Stefan Löfven last month that there would be “serious consequences” for electricity supplies and jobs if Sweden’s state-owned utility Vattenfall ditched plans to expand two coal mines in the northeast of Germany.
Just to make matters even more complicated Vattenfall has also filed a lawsuit against Germany seeking €4.7bn in compensation over Berlin’s nuclear decision.
Continue reading at FT.com (paywall)
7 Comments
LAMB
“FOR EACH ACTION, THERE IS AN EQUAL AND OPPOSITE REACTION”.
So true in this case.
klgmac
Cheap energy is necessary for a functioning economy. Alternative energy is expensive energy and hurts our most vulnerable citizens the most.
Jean
I would rather have a coal fired power plant in my neighborhood than a nuclear plant…I know a lot of people will disagree but this is my opinion.
Micha
This article is complete nonsense. Neither did Germany burn less coal 24 years ago nor does Germany “beg” Sweden for more coal. Vice-Chancelor Gabriel is a social-democrat, the party that has always been pro coal. There are problems that have to be resolved with Germany´s energy transition. That´s normal. The transformation of a complete energy supply system based on nuclear and fossil energies towards renewables can´t be done in a few years. Of course there are some obstacles. But the last 14 years have been an amazing success story for renewables. This article desperately tries to defend coal even though we all know that there is no chance to save the climate and keep the level of coal consumption we have.
Rhey
What the government should do is minimize politics. This will never solve the problems of a country if leaders just look at their suits and colors or their vested interests. Whether it is nuke, coal, or renewable energies, at this stage it doesn’t matter as long as the economy is balance and / or constantly growing. More importantly,the government has to look at the needs of the people today, tomorrow and the future generation. Sustainable economic development is of prime importance. Adverse change of energy sources will always have a dual effect. No need to argue on this however, in practical life, one must think the answer of the “NEED” today and work at the background the “NEED” for tomorrow. A win-win decision is highly considered.
Ole 500
I’ll wager Germany changes their mind about going nuclear free. China certainly is betting big on Coal, Nuclear, Natural Gas, and Hydro, with not much more than a head nod towards traditional renewables like Wind and Solar
http://www.eia.gov/countries/analysisbriefs/China/images/electrcity_net_generation_fuel_forecast.png
SageThinker
We need a carbon fee and rebate to go worldwide. We need to price carbon and redistribute the dividend.