Germany importing electricity from France after decision to shut down all nuclear reactors

[FBaggins]

Germany is importing massive amounts of nuclear-generated electricity from France following its decision to abandon atomic power in the wake of Japan's Fukushima disaster. But it is still bracing for blackouts of the kind not seen since the Second World War as eight of the 17 reactors were switched off overnight in a populist move that is now seen as a rash decision.

...snip...

The remaining nine reactors will close by 2019 - but experts predict a shortfall that will see the lights going out in power cuts across the continent's biggest economy before then. Energy producers are scrambling to ensure an adequate supply while consumers fret about the costs. Joachim Knebel, chief scientist at Germany's prestigious Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, said: 'It's easy to say, "Let's just go for renewables", and I'm quite sure we can someday do without nuclear, but this is too abrupt.'

Power producers have also warned that they cannot guarantee that the lights might not go out, especially if harsh winters are on the way.

Mr Knebel characterised the government's shutdown decision as 'emotional', and pointed out that, on most days, Germany had survived this experiment only by importing nuclear-generated electricity from France and also Czech Republic.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2031786/Germany-importing-electricity-France-decision-shut-nuclear-reactors.html?ITO=1490

But don't worry! Mannheim indicates that they're ready to bring a 55-yr-old idled coal unit back on line to help with power for the winter.

[RC]

1. It looks like the anti-nukers are avoiding this one like the plague.

[kristopher]

2. It has no significance except...

...as a straw to grasp at by panicked, wild-eyed nuclear proponents.

[NickB79]

3. Apparently, Dr. Knebel feels it has significance

And he's chief scientist at KIT.

[kristopher]

4. What, exactly, is the significance you believe Dr. Knebel sees? nt

[NickB79]

10. This paragraph kind of stands out

"Mr Knebel characterised the government's shutdown decision as 'emotional', and pointed out that, on most days, Germany had survived this experiment only by importing nuclear-generated electricity from France and also Czech Republic."

The use of the word "survived" in this context does not inspire confidence, IMO.

[kristopher]

11. Germany has been buying electricity from and selling electricity to France for many years.

Does that mean that France is "surviving" because of its purchases from Germany?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x309388#309473

[NickB79]

12. Taking many thousands of MW of generation off-line might have something to do with it

Then it becomes a little harder to sell electricity to your neighbors, and much more important to buy electricity from your neighbors.

For example: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-05-30/germany-becomes-net-power-importer-from-france-after-atomic-halt.html

"France, which relies on nuclear plants for about three- quarters of its power needs, exported a net 509 gigaatt hours to Germany last month compared with net imports of 618 gigawatts during the same month last year, RTE said. In the most recent month, Germany joined Belgium, Italy, Spain, Switzerland and the U.K. in relying on France for more power imports than exports, the data indicates. "

The thing is, every news article I can find talks about how Germany's exports of electricity have been cut, while their imports are up sharply.

[kristopher]

14. How is that information to be interpreted?

There are a lot of variables in energy trading, do you think that you've isolated enough to form a coherent picture of the "survival" needs of the respective nations? Or is there reason to believe that there are problems with the validity of how the news media is reporting its data? The move to abandon nuclear has been planned for a considerable time, and while it was accelerated a small amount with the sudden shutdown for inspection of the nuclear fleet after Fukushima, one has to ask - in light of the existing long term planning - if that is actually having the dire consequences that the agents of those who are suffering large financial setbacks are trying to portray, no?

Isn't it reasonable to conclude that articles like the OP are far more probably "hit pieces" than they are sources of reliable information? I mean, seriously, when did you start doubting the ability of huge corporations to shape the public message to their financial benefit?

Does the German Environment Ministry have the same conflict of interest?

[FBaggins]

15. Here's some additional information to "interpret"

IOW, "spin" in your case. :)



http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NP_No_nuclear_back_up_for_Germany_3108111.html

[RC]

5. "...panicked, wild-eyed nuclear proponents."?

Shouldn't that be the anti-nukers that panic. They (you) are the ones posting end of the world radiation gonna kill us all. And within days of Fukushima, long before any air currents could get here, there were panicky post from the anti-nukers on both coasts because of high radiation clouds. That's not wild-eye?
Oh, yeah, don't forget the glowing ocean currents on the west coast, either. Wild-eyed indeed.

[kristopher]

6. Wild-eyed in word and deed...

For example, please precisely explain what the OP contains that the "anti-nukers" are "avoiding like the plague"?

[miyazaki]

13. Considering he claimed the situation was totally 'fubar'

I assume they should all just lay down and die? Typical of their solutions.

[Nihil]

7. The pro-coal posters simply click on "Unrecommend" and move on ...

... with the exception of "Ignored" who is no doubt blustering
about how this can't possibly be true because the great god MZJ
had prophesied otherwise ...

:nopity:

[RC]

8. You will notice that No one is addressing the OP

Not one anti-nuker can justify Germany's response at shutting down their nuclear power plants, just like I said.
Importing nuclear generated electricity from France and restarting an obsolete 55 year old coal fired plant that will send even more CO2 into the atmosphere to help accelerate the Climate Change nuclear power can help control.
This is what happens when you have paranoid Luddites in charge.

[kristopher]

9. I did.

I asked what you saw that was significant. Germany has not only been buying power from France for years, they've also been SELLING power TO France for years. And it's not because Germany isn't able to meet its own needs, but because the power they sell TO France is more valuable than the power they buy FROM France.

There has been a steady stream of propaganda from the nuclear industry, the utilities and their associated minions - propaganda that tries to scare people with unsubstantiated claim after unsubstantiated claim. For example, you'll also note that "Juergen Grossmann, chief executive of the German energy giant RWE, which owns two closed reactors here in Biblis, about 40 miles south of Frankfurt, said; 'Germany, in a very rash decision, decided to experiment on ourselves. 'The politics are overruling the technical arguments".

Now RWE is poised to lose billions of dollars with this move; so what else would you expect them to say. Are you totally oblivious to the FACT that these types of articles are being generated by entities like this that are motivated by money? Don't buy it? Well let's look at the prominent, highlighted-in-bold quote from the mayor of the town that will lose huge sums because they closed down two reactors in his town, "There is German angst about nuclear power. But if you phrased the question, "Would you want to phase out nuclear energy if it cost massively more and you risk blackouts?", the answer would be very different'."

But in fact, as the article states, "there have been no blackouts" and "the government ... is prepared to make huge investments in improving energy efficiency in homes and factories, as well as in new clean power sources and transmission lines."

More accurate is a report, "Hintergrundpapier zur Umstrukturierung der Stromversorgung in Deutschland" that was released by the Umweltbundesamt, or the German Environment Agency (UBA) on May 30th, 2011.

The Conservative German government has issued a 14-page document outlining how Germany can close all its reactors by 2017 and keep the lights on.

...Critics of the reversal have charged that:
Germany will suffer power outages
Germany will import nuclear power from other countries, notably France
Germany will build massive new coal plants to make up the shortfall

The analysis by the German environment agency was undertaken to specifically examine these questions. They concluded that Germany can close the reactors within five years and do so:
Without power outages
Without importing nuclear power from other countries
Without building new coal plants
With only a modest increase in the cost of electricity

The agency says that Germany can close the nuclear plants by faster development of its renewable sources of energy and the construction of 5,000 MW of new gas-fired generation. The new gas-fired generation will give the grid the necessary flexibility to meet demand while also preserving Germany's commitment to reducing its carbon dioxide emissions...

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2011/06/we-can-do-it-says-german-environment-agency-on-nuclear-phase-out

[Yo_Mama]

16. You're arguing politics on a technical issue

It may be me, but I think you're making no sense with this.

There haven't been any blackouts this summer, but no one predicted any. The worry about blackouts comes in the winter, when energy demands will be much higher. They are making plans to deal with it, both by shutting down manufacturing and by restarting some plants.

It's a real issue, not a political issue. The graph already posted shows how the energy balance with France has shifted even during a low usage/high solar generation period. But what you don't see are the extra imports from OTHER countries.

Also, this has forced a lot of power to be transmitted from the north to the south, some of which is being transmitted through neighboring countries' grids, and those countries have already complained and are worried what will happen this winter.

What's really being questioned in this article is not the overarching plan, which everyone in Germany had pretty much committed to, but the suddenness of this move. They're not prepared for it! The grid isn't prepared and the generation side isn't prepared.

Also, you seem intent on portraying all this as the propaganda of the utility companies, but it is the grid agency, the Bundesnetzagentur, which is trying to figure out how to generate the required winter reserve capacity without the reactors. Here's WSJ:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904716604576542092237413596.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

They got a commitment from Austria for additional energy exports, and they are planning to run five thermal plants to create the power reserve they think they need. And they are going to have to raise rates to pay for it, and quite a few of the big industries are talking about moving plants out of Germany.

That's reality. It's got jack to do with politics; Germany's peak power demand comes in the winter, when their solar will be least helpful and wind has historically been uncooperative during some real cold spells. A lot depends on the weather.

[kristopher]

17. The technical issues are being manipulated for greed

They've shut down 6.4% of their generation. No reasonable, informed person can believe a claim that their system was operating on a margin so thin that the non-emergency shut down of that amount of generation is as crippling as it is being made out to be. Japan has lost 30% of their capacity and while it is extremely difficult for them, they are still able to manage. Do you think that any ISO in the US would be crippled if it was required to shut down 6.4% of its generating capacity with advanced notice?

Yet articles like the OP are designed to create that very impression, that the shutdown of the 8 plants in Germany is going to cause massive problems for the German people, German industry and the German economy. That type of hyperbole is pure hogwash.

That narrative requires the belief that the government planners are total idiots who care nothing for the energy needs of the public - and they are flouting the corrupting power of money to do it!

You, and those who are spreading the message as promulgated by the nuclear industry and utilities, are quite sure that those who stand to lose SEVERAL BILLIONS OF DOLLARS EACH MONTH with this transition are the only ones capable of rational thought and willing to tell the truth. Apparently - against all reason - the fact that they have such a huge financial stake in the policy shutting them down means nothing to you.

That position doesn't make one iota of sense.

The government of Germany could have planned the early shut down of only 7 plants, or 6, or 5 if they needed to do that to avoid supply disruptions, but they decided right away to shut down 7 plants and discussed for a couple of months whether they should keep an 8th plant active just in case they needed it. They have decided not to, it too is being shut down. S

So either the government is made up of foolish stupid liars, or the nuclear industry and its minions is made up of greedy liars. Going by the claims being made there really is no middle ground on that.

Yes, there will be some juggling, and the utilities are going to be required to be extremely proactive to make it work. But there is no sound basis for questioning the government planners who say it will work.

German panel to endorse closing nuclear plants
FRANKFURT | Tue May 10, 2011 6:19pm EDT

(Reuters) - A panel of experts appointed by the German government to advise on its strategy on nuclear power will recommend that the countries' seven oldest reactors be closed indefinitely, a document obtained by Reuters showed.

In a draft of its final report to be released at the end of May, the commission also said that Germany could cope without nuclear power by 2021.

There are alternatives to nuclear power that "all entail fewer risks," the panel said in the draft.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/10/us-germany-nuclear-commission-idUSTRE7496IM20110510

Nuclear Phaseout Could Spell Disaster for German Energy Giants
With the government's decision to phase out nuclear energy, Germany's four biggest utility companies face an uncertain future. Profits could tumble this year by as much as 30 percent and the companies are also becoming increasingly vulnerable to takeovers. Are the days of giant energy companies numbered in Germany?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,766095,00.html


And a few from one of the nuclear industry lobbying websites, World Nuclear News

The first one is from one year ago when they thought they had won a major corporate victory against the desires of the German people. Note the pessimism about renewables within 40 years: these are they same voices you are now listening to.

Nuclear a cash cow for Germany's plans
06 September 2010
German nuclear power plants are set to operate for longer after a policy change from Angela Merkel's government gave them a short-term extension in return for billions in taxes.

Speaking on the night of 5 September, German Chancellor Angela Merkel announced a new political deal that 'extends the lives' of Germany's current nuclear reactor fleet. Reactors built before 1980 would be allowed to operate for a further eight years beyond limits imposed in 2002, and newer reactors would gain another 14 years.

The nuclear industry welcomed the extension of permitted operation, but warned of the unsustainable position Germany had taken. Head of the World Nuclear Association John Ritch said, "Germany's policy is now headed in the right direction but still rests on delusional foundations. No serious energy or environmental planner believes that a major economy like Germany's can be largely reliant on renewables within the next 40 years."...

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NP_Nuclear_a_cash_cow_for_Germanys_plans_0609101.html


But then...
Observe the focus of the headline

Billion-euro nuclear shutdown in Germany
16 March 2011

The German government has declared a three-month moratorium on nuclear power, in which eight reactors will stay offline, checks will take place and nuclear policy may be reconsidered.

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/newsarticle.aspx?id=30154

Nuclear policy to impact EOn results
05 May 2011

The head of EOn has insisted that nuclear still has an important part to play in Germany's future energy mix, but warned that the country's changing energy policy would be a major factor in future earnings.

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/C-Nuclear_policy_to_impact_EOn_results-0505114.html

Are you aware that of the ones that they are continuing to operate, they plan to shut down a further 3 early? 1 by 2015, another by 2017 and another by 2019?
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/newsarticle.aspx?id=30154

And finally the worldwide implications - this IS a big effing deal (to quote Joe Biden) because it is going to completely negate a decade's worth of very expensive propaganda designed to promote the false narrative that nuclear power is indispensable in a low carbon economy.

Germany to phase out nuclear power. Could the US do the same?

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has endorsed a plan to end all nuclear power in Germany by 2022. Increasingly, studies suggest this is not a far-fetched idea, even for the US.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0607/Germany-to-phase-out-nuclear-power.-Could-the-US-do-the-same#comments

[FBaggins]

19. "Japan has lost 30% of their capacity"

The difference you're blind to is twofold (at least)

1) The bulk of the remaining capacity in Japan is non-variable while Germany has shifted substantially to solar/wind. When that variability sits on top of adequate baseload generation (as in the graph I supplied), it isn't a problem. Now it can be. They can't expect their solar panels to produce much in January. If the wind drops at the same time they're going to need lots of help from their neighbors.

2) Japan started with a greater margin of excess capacity. You may not have noticed on the map, but they're an island. They have comparatively little ability to import power from neighbors (or indeed even from one side of the country to the other), while Germany is part of a much larger grid.

[kristopher]

20. Uh-huh... Yeah.... Riiiiiight...

Germany has shut down 6.4% of their generation. No reasonable, informed person can believe a claim that their system was operating on a margin so thin that the non-emergency shut down of that amount of generation is as crippling as it is being made out to be. Japan has lost 30% of their capacity and while it is extremely difficult for them, they are still able to manage. Do you think that any ISO in the US would be crippled if it was required to shut down 6.4% of its generating capacity with advanced notice?"

Nuclear Phaseout Could Spell Disaster for German Energy Giants

With the government's decision to phase out nuclear energy, Germany's four biggest utility companies face an uncertain future. Profits could tumble this year by as much as 30 percent and the companies are also becoming increasingly vulnerable to takeovers. Are the days of giant energy companies numbered in Germany?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,766095,00.html

Revenue lost by 7 shut down plants:
$1.3 Billion - $3.5 Billion per month
$15.6 billion- $42.0 Billion per year

[FBaggins]

21. 6.4% (or whatever it really is) CAN be a big deal...

When you can't count on another 20% of your generation.

But you still don't get that... Do you?

Watch and learn.

[Yo_Mama]

22. Of course everyone's going to argue for their own book

But if you are genuinely accusing the head of BNetzA, Kurth, of being a liar and a shill for the nuclear industry, then you have psychological problems. This is his background:
http://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/EN/FederalAgency/TheAgency/Management/PresidentMatthiasKurth_Basepage.html

Kurth has hardly been an enemy of renewables or a shill for the utility companies. He is partly behind some of the newer arrangements by which the coalitions contract for and sell the power from renewables:
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bundestag.de%2Fpresse%2Fhib%2F2010_12%2F2010_414%2F02.html

BNetzA is the utility regulatory agency. All it really cares about is keeping the power going.

Because of the suddenness of this decision, and because of the localized effect, it is a potential issue over the winter when demand is high.

The reason those nuclear plants were built where they were in the first place was because of the industry demand there. But because they were there, lines to import power into the region are sparse. Suddenly shutting them down has presented an issue for grid stability locally, and talking about percent of nameplate capacity nationally is ludicrous, technically.

The Germans will build a more flexible grid, but it requires time to do so.

They already know the solar generation will be at a low point during the depth of winter. Historically wind in Germany (power that they can get locally into the grid) has tended to have periods of extremely low output during some cold snaps. There is nothing at all political about these plans.

[kristopher]

23. You ARE kidding, right?

You wrote: "...you seem intent on portraying all this as the propaganda of the utility companies, but it is the grid agency, the Bundesnetzagentur, which is trying to figure out how to generate the required winter reserve capacity without the reactors. Here's WSJ: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904716604...
They got a commitment from Austria for additional energy exports, and they are planning to run five thermal plants to create the power reserve they think they need. And they are going to have to raise rates to pay for it, and quite a few of the big industries are talking about moving plants out of Germany.
That's reality. It's got jack to do with politics; Germany's peak power demand comes in the winter, when their solar will be least helful and wind has historically been uncooperative during some real cold spells. A lot depends on the weather."

And you are trying to say that this is an adequate and *appropriate* response to this?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x309388#309683

The OP is part of the messaging for a specific meme created by the nuclear industry and the utilities. Is Kurth, specifically, participating in that messaging? I have no idea and neither do you. What you've posted is a discussion of the problems associated with a transition. No one has said that there will not be problems. The question is, as I raised several times above in this thread, "What is the significance of those problems?"

You say they've stepped up imports for a short period; Even IF true, so what?
You assert that they are "planning to run five thermal plants to create the power reserve they think they need". Even IF true, so what?
You say "they are going to have to raise rates to pay for it". Even IF true, so what?

As for the claim that "quite a few of the big industries are talking about moving plants out of Germany", I'd say that sounds strikingly like the claims of the right wing about taxes and environmental regulations of all sorts, wouldn't you?

So I ask you point blank:
1) Do you acknowledge or deny that the utilities and nuclear industry have an extremely strong motive to lie about the significance of the problems associated with shutting down a small fraction of Germany's generating capacity?

2) Do you acknowledge or deny that the utilities and nuclear industry are actively engaged in a PR campaign to spread FUD regarding the consequences of the shut down of nuclear plants comprising 6.4% of Germany's generating capacity?

[Nihil]

18. FYI

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary
depends upon his not understanding it."
- Upton Sinclair