2014 saw Germany’s carbon emissions fall for the first time since the
big 2009-2013 emissions increase that occurred concurrently with their
record renewable energy installation and nuclear phase-out, breaking the
so-called Energiewende Paradox. Germany’s electricity costs are still one of the highest in the
world, and their electricity production is still made primarily from
coal, with a significant amount of nuclear, wind, biomass, solar,
natural gas and hydro, in that order.
Renewables grew exponentially from
2005 to 2012, but have slowed in the last few years even though costs
continue to rise (see Figure and Tables below). Some think that Germany’s energy transition has turned a successful
corner and that the only reason electricity prices haven’t dropped is
that there isn’t enough competition in the markets (CleanTechnica). Translation – suppliers are keeping prices artificially high and ripping off ordinary consumers.
But Germany is phasing out nuclear in the next several years, even
though nuclear provides about 18% of their production and is still their
largest low-carbon source by far. What they replace it with will
determine what direction their energy transition will take.
Will it be replaced by renewables or coal?
Electricity costs are still one of the
highest in the world. Electricity production in Germany is made
primarily from coal, with a significant amount of nuclear, wind,
biomass, solar, natural gas and hydro,
in that order. Renewables grew
exponentially from 2005 to 2012, but have slowed in the last few
years.
Germany is phasing out nuclear in the next several years which provides
about 18% of their
production, the largest low-carbon source by far.
Will it be replaced by renewables or coal? Source:
Craig Percy
The problem is when nuclear goes, it will go almost overnight. So the
replacement capacity has to be installed before that happens. It’s not
easy or quick to install that much capacity, and you can’t install that
much capacity ahead of time and just let it lie unused. While Germany is the eighth largest coal producer in the world, it still imports significant amounts of coal
from the United States. It’s hard to see how Germany can avoid
increasing its coal use dramatically after it phases out nuclear power.
The U.S. coal industry is certainly hoping this happens as a way to help
offset the decreasing coal use within the United States.
So the strategy will be tricky, and that strategy will probably
include a combination of continuing to increase conservation and
efficiency, ramping up coal for the interim years while more renewables
get installed, and increasing power imports from other countries in the
European Union, particularly France.
But Germany already imports over half of its energy.
Germany’s plan is to have 35% of their power come from renewables by
2030, up from the 25% today. But with 18% presently coming from nuclear,
they will actually need to double renewables without ramping up fossil
fuels dramatically or increasing their imports to extreme levels. On the other hand, they could perform a delicate dance with France to
achieve the image of success, by clouding the differences between
consumption and generation.
Recently, France passed a law saying they will reduce nuclear from 75% to 50%
by 2025 and increase their use of renewables to 40% by 2030. They can
take more power from Germany during time periods when German renewables
are producing excess energy, and then send nuclear power to Germany when
German renewables are not producing enough.
That way France will appear to have a lower proportion of nuclear,
and a higher proportion of renewables, without changing its generation
significantly. And Germany gets clean nuclear power to help achieve its
CO2 reduction goals. But this won’t work for too long. Germany’s plan calls for renewables
to produce 80% of their power by 2050 and to lower carbon emissions by
80% relative to 1990 (BlogActive). So they really would have to replace nuclear with renewables, and eventually cut coal itself dramatically, if they are to have any chance of achieving this final goal.
I hope they make it.
Germany Electricity Production 2014 (513.9 TWh)
Source TWh %Total
Coal (brown + hard) 237.2 46.2%
Nuclear 91.8 17.9%
Wind 51.5 10.0%
Biomass 48.9 9.5%
Solar 32.8 6.4%
Natural Gas 31.4 6.1%
Hydroelectric 20.3 4.0%
Net energy imports (% of use) 61.0%
GDP/unit energy use (PPP $/koe) 11.0
Germany Electricity Production 2000 (572.3 TWh)
Source TWh %Total
Coal (brown + hard) 304.2 53.2%
Nuclear 169.6 29.6%
Wind 9.5 1.7%
Biomass 4.7 0.1%
Solar 0.1 0%
Natural Gas 52.5 9.2%
Hydroelectric 21.7 3.8%
Net energy imports (% of use) 59.9%
GDP/unit energy use (PPP $/koe) 6.3
Germany Electricity Production 1990 (547.6 TWh)
Source TWh %Total
Coal (brown + hard) 321.6 58.7%
Nuclear 152.4 27.8%
Wind 0.1 0%
Biomass 1.4 0%
Solar 0.0 0%
Natural Gas 40.5 7.4%
Hydroelectric 17.4 3.2%
Net energy imports (% of use) 47.0%
GDP/unit energy use (PPP $/koe) 4.2
Data from Trading Economics
Net energy imports (% of energy use) are estimated
as energy use less production, both measured in oil equivalents. A
positive value indicates that the country is a net importer. Energy use
refers to use of primary energy before transformation to other end-use
fuels, which is equal to indigenous production plus imports and stock
changes, minus exports and fuels supplied to ships and aircraft engaged
in international transport. Net energy imports in Germany was last
measured at 59.88 in 2012, according to the World Bank, but can be
extrapolated to 61.0% for 2014.
GDP per unit of energy use (PPP dollar per kg of oil
equivalent) is the PPP GDP per kilogram of oil equivalent of energy
use. PPP GDP is gross domestic product converted to current
international dollars using purchasing power parity rates. An
international dollar has the same purchasing power over GDP as a U.S.
dollar has in the United States.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2015/07/02/germanys-energy-transition-breaks-the-energiewende-paradox/?ss=energy