Merkel’s Green Shift (sic) Backfires as German Pollution Jumps

[kristopher]

16. So let me get this straight

You are claiming the coal plants that were under construction BEFORE the nuclear shutdown are the fault OF the nuclear shutdown?

Is that right?

And you are scoffing at the statement: "the concurrent expansion of distributed renewables builds the systemic momentum to shut down centralized coal altogether."

Is that also right?

In their presentation to the UK government (PDF), researchers at Pöyry say there are three main reasons for the "apparent surge" in new coal plant construction, which is "due to highly unusual historic reasons": a favorable market environment in 2007/2008; excess carbon allowances; and an "inability or reluctance of developers to cancel projects" when circumstances changed.

... the researchers say "there will be no major new unabated coal or date night projects in Germany for the foreseeable future beyond those currently under construction."

...running "thermal plants has become increasingly difficult" in Germany because renewable power is "reducing output of all thermal plants and depressing wholesale electricity prices." In other words, Germany's GW of coal power will increasingly translate into fewer GWh; the plants may be built, but they will be running less and less. The experts speak of "net increase of 8.9 GW" by 2015, but it remains to be seen whether Germany will increase its consumption of coal power in the process ...

Starting in 2009, the experts find that "developers' appetites" for new coal projects has died down significantly so that there will be no further investment in coal plants "in this decade." By 2035 (see chart above), installed coal power generating capacity will have fallen from around 42 GW to around 15 GW – and again, that installed capacity is likely to be running at lower utilization levels.

http://www.renewablesinternational.net/no-additional-coal-plants-in-germany/150/537/62691/




So please explain how the plants in the construction pipeline were a response to the nuclear shutdown and not, as I have asserted elsewhere a part of the plan by the conservative government to both build MORE coal plants alongside of EXTENDING the use Nuclear?

Merkel has had to be dragged kicking and screaming into changing business as usual. But the public is firmly committed to the move away from centralized generation and she is only holding onto power by the skin of her teeth.

Germany has set a goal of 40% carbon reductions over 1990 levels by 2020, 55% by 2030 and 70% by 2040. They are on track with their infrastructure to meet those goals.

If you want to criticize, I'd suggest you look for the mote in thine own eye and focus your efforts on pushing the US to emulate German energy policy. I say that because the policy you are criticizing - keeping nuclear plants running - crowds out the type of generation that actually FORCES fundamental change onto the system.


The Poryr study is here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/194335/Poyry_Report_-_Coal_fired_power_generation_in_Germany.pdf