The consequences of the Ukraine war repeatedly heat up the debate about possible service life extensions for the German nuclear reactors. The federal government is sticking to its course.
These are questions that have been flaring up again and again in recent times: In view of the war in Ukraine and the threat of gas shortages, is there a need to turn away from the German nuclear phase-out? And would that really bring more security in the energy supply? Here is an overview.
What is the starting position?
The German phase-out of nuclear power has long been a done deal. By the end of 2022, the last three nuclear power plants in Lingen in Lower Saxony, Isar 2 in Bavaria and Neckarwestheim 2 in Baden-Württemberg should go offline. Germany is thus sealing a historic decision made by the then federal government in 2011. Since then, doubts about the decision have repeatedly been raised. The proponents of nuclear power argue, among other things, with climate protection, since nuclear power plants are responsible for significantly less greenhouse gas emissions over the entire life cycle than, for example, gas or coal-fired power plants. With the start of the war in Ukraine on February 24, the debate picked up speed again – most recently because of reduced gas supplies to Germany.
Economics Minister Robert Habeck (Greens) recently said that coal-fired power plants might have to be used more in order to reduce gas consumption. The situation is serious. Against this background, politicians from the Union, FDP and leading economists are demanding continued operation of the nuclear power plants. “Every megawatt hour that is not produced in these three power plants, we have to produce it differently. The only alternative that we have is coal, with all the consequences, »said the President of the Federation of German Industries, Siegfried Russwurm, who was more open on Tuesday than before on this topic.
Will the federal government reconsider its position?
It doesn’t look like it at the moment. At the beginning of the year, the environment and economic ministries examined a possible continued operation and came to the conclusion that “an extension of the runtimes would only make a very limited contribution” to solving the problem of energy supply bottlenecks, as stated in the test report of March 8, 2022 . A further operation of the nuclear power plant would be associated with “very high economic, constitutional and safety risks”. It went on to say that one would have to extend it for at least three to five years in order to justify the effort. By 2028, however, as it is said, “other options” would be available to ensure an adequate power supply.
What would a runtime extension bring anyway?
This is debatable. The three nuclear power plants that are still in operation currently supply around 30 terawatt hours of electricity per year and account for a five percent share of German electricity production. According to the federal government, they would primarily replace electricity from coal-fired power plants and therefore make little contribution to increasing independence from Russian gas imports. From the point of view of the federal government, longer nuclear power plant runtimes would not bring any additional amounts of electricity in the winter of 2022/2023, but only from autumn 2023 at the earliest after refilling with fuel rods.
Would term extensions be possible at such short notice?
In theory yes – but in practice the hurdles are very high. The law would have to be changed for that. According to the Atomic Energy Act, the three remaining nuclear power plants may not be operated beyond December 31, 2022. In the case of a short-term extension of the lifespan, a cross-border environmental impact assessment could also be necessary.
What do the nuclear power plant operators say?
All three operators – EnBW (Neckarwestheim), RWE (Lingen) and Eon (Isar 2) – will refuse any extension of the term on request. For example, RWE explained on Tuesday: “Our power plant in Emsland is geared towards phase-out at the end of the year, by which time the fuel will have been used up. Continued operation beyond December 31, 2022 would entail high hurdles of a technical and legal nature.» EnBW and Eon have also been referring to the position of the federal government for a long time.
What about the nuclear plant personnel and the nuclear fuel?
That’s another problem. The contracts with the employees of the plants have been terminated, the staff is not readily available at short notice. Another hurdle is the nuclear fuel, which according to experts cannot simply be “reloaded”. Approval procedures can take several years. Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) only told the Münchner Merkur on Monday that it would take “at least 12 to 18 months” to get new fuel rods. In this context, environmental organizations also draw attention to the dependency on nuclear fuel from Russia. According to the European Atomic Energy Community Euratom, in 2020 the EU obtained about 20 percent of its uranium from Russia, more than 19 percent from the ally Kazakhstan.
What about security issues?
The war in Ukraine is currently showing how dangerous combat operations can be in the vicinity of nuclear power plants. In early March, a fire at the site of Ukraine’s Zaporizhia nuclear power plant, the largest nuclear power plant in Europe, caused a stir. Also because of the risk of an incident involving the release of radioactive radiation, the Federal Government has so far remained so resolute in its position on nuclear power.
Source: Stern
Jane Stock is a technology author, who has written for 24 Hours World. She writes about the latest in technology news and trends, and is always on the lookout for new and innovative ways to improve his audience’s experience.
