So Far So Good for Germany's Nuclear Phase-Out, Despite Dire Predictions

[OKIsItJustMe]

http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20121115/germany-energiewende-nuclear-energy-fukushima-chernobyl-merkel-renewables

[font face=Serif][font size=5]So Far So Good for Germany's Nuclear Phase-Out, Despite Dire Predictions[/font]

[font size=4]Clean Break: Chapter 4 in the story of Germany's switch to renewables[/font]

By Osha Gray Davidson
Nov 16, 2012

[font size=3]Bonn, Germany—On the afternoon of April 29, 1986, West Germany's Interior Minister Friedrich Zimmermann walked out of a meeting with the Commission on Radiological Protection and spoke to a TV reporter.

"There is no danger," Zimmermann assured millions of anxious viewers. "Chernobyl is 2,000 kilometers away."

…

On May 30, Merkel held a press conference in the Chancellery. Flanked by members of her cabinet and wearing one of her trademark red power jackets, she announced that she was making the temporary closures permanent. What's more, she continued, the most industrialized nation in Europe, and the world's fourth-largest economy, would permanently close all nine of its remaining nuclear power plants by 2022.

…

There have been no blackouts since Merkel's announcement. On the contrary, Germany's grid, which was already the most reliable in Europe, experienced a total of just 15 minutes and 31 seconds of brownouts in 2011, an improvement over 2010. (The comparable figure for the United States is measured in hours.) The wholesale price of electricity has gone down, not up. The electricity-intensive German manufacturing sector is still thriving. And Germany finished 2011 as a net exporter of energy, while also cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 2 percent.

…[/font][/font]

[dipsydoodle]

1. Fails to mention

the sheer amount of power Germany draws from the nuclear power stations in both France and the Czech Republic. Shut those supplies down and Germany would currently be screwn.

[OKIsItJustMe]

2. Funny…

…some claimed Germany would be “skrewn” even with them.

[font face=Serif][font size=3]…

The nuclear industry and its supporters pounced on Merkel's decision. They predicted blackouts on a scale Germany hadn't experienced since World War II and skyrocketing electricity prices that would wreck the nation's heavy manufacturing sector, the bedrock of the German economy. They warned that Germany would cease to be an energy exporter and be forced to import electricity from, of all places, French nuclear power plants. Utilities would have to burn more coal to make up for the lost nuclear power, they said, pumping huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The British weekly The Economist branded Merkel's action "a lunatic gamble."

…[/font][/font]

[dipsydoodle]

3. Because of the way in power is networked in Europe

no country would be subject to blackouts. That was the case back in 1966 and doubtless further back too.

[OKIsItJustMe]

5. So, you’re saying that the detractors were lying.

Is that right?

[dipsydoodle]

6. Exaggerating and

they've got quite enough coal to compensate too or they will have until 2018 barring further changes in policy meanwhile.

[OKIsItJustMe]

7. Do you mean that exaggeration, in order to give a false impression is not lying?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie

[font face=Serif][font size=5]lie[/font]
[font size=4]lied ly·ing[/font]
[font size=3]Definition of LIE
intransitive verb

1. to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2. to create a false or misleading impression

[/font][/font]

So, what’s the scoop on Germany’s coal usage?

[font face=Serif][font size=3]…

Some analysts suggested that Germany's carbon emissions—which declined by 2 percent in 2011—could have dropped even further if Merkel hadn't acted so precipitously. Even with the Merkel shutdown, however, Germany's old coal plants are being decommissioned faster than new ones—which were ordered years before the Fukushima disaster—are coming online.

…[/font][/font]

[wtmusic]

8. So Far, So Disastrous

"According to estimates by the German BDEW e.V. (Federal Association of German Energy and Water Management), the specific CO2 emissions from electricity generating plants for public power supply (i.e. not including power generation by industry) was 0.51 kg CO2/kWh net. With respect to the previous year (0.49 kg CO2/kWh net), they have risen about 4%! Only 2007 had such a high comparable increase, which also was attributed to the shutdown of some nuclear power plants, but to a lesser extent. The comparably CO2-intensive power generation from lignite exceeded the previous year’s level. Also the relative share of lignite power plants in the overall decreasing power production jumped 25%."

http://notrickszone.com/2012/03/15/germanys-per-kilowatt-hour-co2-emissions-jump-4-transformation-to-renewables-flops/

These people are in denial.

[Yo_Mama]

9. Indeed

The concern over the coal is that it may be structural rather then temporary at this point.

Also citing wholesale prices of electricity is delusive; the end cost to consumers is rising rapidly.

Which wouldn't be so bad, except the current end prices to consumers aren't even paying for the needed infrastructure improvements. We'll have to see how this develops over the next few years, but for now I don't think it's a success.

[OKIsItJustMe]

10. German Study: Not Much Power Storage or Coal Power Needed for 40% Renewable Power Supply

http://cleantechnica.com/2012/10/09/german-study-not-much-power-storage-or-coal-power-needed-for-40-renewable-power-supply/

[font face=Serif][font size=5]German Study: Not Much Power Storage or Coal Power Needed for 40% Renewable Power Supply[/font]

October 9, 2012 By Nathan

[font size=3]There isn’t much of a need for power storage in Germany even if it increases the share of its electricity that is generated by renewable sources by around 50%, according to a new study by the German engineering association VDE.

Importantly, the study has shown that “baseload power – coal and nuclear – will have to go as the country switches to renewables.”

[font size=1]German engineering association VDE finds that the need for storage will be modest |up| to a 40% share of renewable power, at which point the need will increase. But the chart |above| also shows that German engineers believe that nuclear (red), brown coal (brown), and hard coal (black) are incompatible with renewable power. German engineers expect their country to mainly switch to cogeneration (fired with both biomass and fossil fuels) along with gas turbines running on natural gas and power-to-gas, a way of storing excess power seasonally.[/font]

There have been doubts expressed in the international media that Germany may not be able to switch over directly from nuclear to renewables without first relying on ramped-up coal use during the transition. But that concern isn’t a common one within Germany. As the new study shows, renewables completely ‘obliterate’ the need for baseload power.

...

“In five scenarios, the VDE finds that dispatchable power generators will mainly have to be flexible, but also that this requirement can be met in all of the scenarios. And up to a 40% share of renewables, the cost of power storage (or otherwise lost excess power production) remains moderate, only raising the cost of power by 10% in the worst case,” Craig Morris of Renewables International writes.

...[/font][/font]

[PamW]

12. What a CROCK!!!

OKIsItJustMe states
As the new study shows, renewables completely ‘obliterate’ the need for baseload power.

Either you are reading someone's propaganda, or you don't know what baseload power is.

The power usage varies throughout the day. The "baseload" power is simply the mathematical minimum of the power usage over a day. It's the minimum amount of power that is provided over the 24 hour day. Many renewable proponents make the ERROR in thinking that the baseload power has something to do with the generation of energy.

Quite the contrary; the baseload power has only to do with the demand for energy. There is a baseload power provided that the demand for power is finite and doesn't drop to zero. The ONLY way you don't have a need for baseload power is if at some point in the day, the demand for power drops to ZERO.

That never happens. One of the main reasons is that modern society makes extensive use of refrigeration. The demand for electric power in your home never drops to zero; not even at night. The reason is that you have a refrigerator that runs at night. Restaurants have refrigerators too. So do the other components of the food supply business.

In addition, hospitals require power 24 hours a day; as does anyone with a medical device that supports them that requires power 24 / 7.

The idea that there is no baseload power requirement is a convenient LIE, UNTRUTH, and FALSEHOOD that is usually told in a self-serving manner by the proponents of solar power since that methodology doesn't have a prayer at meeting the power demand at night in the absence of an energy storage capability that we don't have.

Once you tell that particular lie; I know not to listen or heed anything else you say.

PamW

[cprise]

13. Did you even read the article?

What I got from it is that renewables don't have to supply baseload power at all, up to the point where they supply 40% of all peak usage.

Further...

“To move beyond 40% to 80% renewable power (the target for around 2050), Germany could need as much as 14 GW of short-term and 18 GW of seasonal power storage to meet its peak power demand..."

So the renewable part of the infrastructure will have to eventually get into the business of supplying baseload (though "baseload" may eventually become thought of as "backup&quot .

Have a nice day!

[cprise]

14. Yet overall emissions were down substantially

While we are trying to do the "big picture", its important to also put Germany's choices within the context of Europe's cap and trade framework.

Even when considering the need to build new coal power plants to help transition away from nuclear, the carbon trading system has helped to create the confidence to do so. In this case they have newer generators coming online and automatically exerting price pressure against older less efficient coal plants, hastening their retirement.

I believe what we are seeing in Germany is not denial, but radicalism operating on a number of different levels. They have turned their backs on the growth paradigm and are attacking it on multiple fronts. Only time will tell if that approach will save them time and trouble or make things more chaotic than the Anglosphere's policy of despotism and misinformation.

[mrf901]

11. missleading article, by omission

the oldest nuke plants,
and lots more importantly,

very small by today's standard,
have been turned off