Viewpoint: Why the rise in lignite use in Germany does not prove the Energiewende is failing

By Daniel Mittler, political director of Greenpeace International

Perceptions of the German energy transition (Energiewende) often lack a critical level of nuance in the UK. Every time I visit, I get asked “whether I still think the nuclear phase out is a good idea - as emissions are rising as a result”. And every time I point out that there is no connection, that saying that there is an overly simplistic interpretation, and well, not true.

And here we go again. In what it is indeed bad and appalling news reported last week, Germany´s use of lignite reached a 20-year high in 2013. The Financial Times covered these figures, but wrongly or misguidedly stated that “Ms Merkel's decision to phase out nuclear power has left a gap that only fossil fuels could fill quickly.”

It seems to be not only missing the point, but many points:

• Renewables in Germany also continue to rise and play an ever more important role; 11.8% of primary energy or 25% of electricity consumption come from renewables.
• Coal use as a whole is not increasing and rising efficiency means there is more energy generated per ton of coal – so the emissions of the power sector as a whole may even be declining (sadly, we don't have official numbers yet).
• As no nuclear capacity was decommissioned in 2012 or 2013, the nuclear phase out clearly has nothing to do with the increased use of lignite (by the way, nor is any planned to be taken off the grid in 2014).
• Germany has exported more electricity in 2013, so to claim that there was an energy “gap” that needed filling by fossil fuels is a fantasy

All of this does not make the rise of lignite any less bad. But to blame the Energiewende or the nuclear phase out for this rise is plain wrong. The real reasons are to be found in markets failures and close relationships between energy companies and politicians.

A significant factor is the failure of the European Emissions Trading System (ETS) and the resulting ridiculously low price of carbon, which is about 5 Euros a metric ton.

Also, lignite is being burnt in old plants. The investment costs of these plants have been recouped long ago and they can, as a result, make huge profits easily.

In an equally classic market failure, externalities are not reflected in energy prices, which means that the huge health costs of lignite, for example, are borne by society and the taxpayer, not the energy producers.

At a political level, the rise of lignite - and Germany´s continued reliance on coal overall - is a result of the fact that in Germany (much like the UK) a small number of huge energy firms control too much of the energy market and hold excessive power over politicians.

And it's that power dynamic across Europe that has resulted in an ETS that fails to make lignite - the most carbon intensive of all energy sources – uneconomic, as any policy instrument trying to limit carbon emissions surely should. Too many German politicians are in cahoots with the coal industry, which makes them shy away from the action needed to fix market failures or take additional regulatory measures - such as a law to phase out coal.

So Germany´s Energiewende is neither Nirvana nor to blame for everything that goes wrong. What it is is a contested and nuanced policy area. 

So instead of saying: “Look, the Energiewende is failing”, let's demand - in the UK as well as Germany - an end to the excessive power of the energy giants. Let's step up our efforts to fix the ETS, and work together to advance European-wide ways to speed up the uptake of renewables - a no brainer, given how fast installation costs are coming down. Are you in?

Daniel Mittler is the Political Director of Greenpeace International. He is German and lived in Edinburgh and London for most of the 1990s. He now lives in Berlin.

Volunteers Crowdsource Radiation Monitoring to Map Potential Risk on Every Street in Japan

As reported by Democracy Now! on the Pacifica Radio Network:

Safecast is a network of volunteers who came together to map radiation levels throughout Japan after the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant disaster in 2011. They soon realized radiation readings varied widely, with some areas close to the disaster facing light contamination, depending on wind and geography, while others much further away showed higher readings. Safecast volunteers use Geiger counters and open-source software to measure the radiation, and then post the data online for anyone to access. Broadcasting from Tokyo, we are joined by Pieter Franken, co-founder of Safecast. "The first trip we made into Fukushima, it was an eye-opener. First of all, the radiation levels we encountered were way higher than what we had seen on television," Franken says. "We decided to focus on measuring every single street as our goal in Safecast, so for the last three years we have been doing that, and this month we are passing the 15 millionth location we have measured, and basically every street in Japan has been at least measured once, if not many, many more times."

The atomic reactors that melted down and exploded at Fukushima Daiichi Units 1 to 4 were General Electric Mark I Boiling Water Reactors. The U.S. has 23 still-operating Mark Is, as well as 8 more very similarly designed Mark IIs.

Mayor of Town That Hosted Fukushima Nuclear Plant Says He Was Told: “No Accident Could Ever Happen”

Katsutaka Idogawa, former mayor of the town of FutabaAmy Goodman, host of Democracy Now! on Pacifica Radio, reports from Tokyo:

'We speak with Katsutaka Idogawa, former mayor of the town of Futaba where part of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant is located. The entire town was rendered uninhabitable by the nuclear disaster. We ask him what went through his mind after the earthquake and tsunami hit on March 11, 2011. "It was a huge surprise, and at the time I was just hoping nothing that had happened at the nuclear power plant. However, unfortunately there was in fact an accident there," Idogawa recalls. He made a decision to evacuate his town before the Japanese government told people to leave. "If I had made that decision even three hours earlier, I would have been able to prevent so many people from being exposed to radiation." For years he encouraged nuclear power development in the area; now he has become a vocal critic. He explains that the government and the plant’s owner, Tokyo Electric Power Company, always told him, "’Don’t worry, Mayor. No accident could ever happen.’ Because this promise was betrayed, this is why I became anti-nuclear." '

On Hiroshima Day, 2010, Beyond Nuclear's Kevin Kamps visited Futaba and Okuma, the host towns of Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. As part of a nation-wide speaking tour organized by Green Action of Japan, Kevin met with the vice mayor of Futaba, and the mayor of Okuma. Kevin also spoke to a community meeting of citizens concerned about the risks at the nearby six atomic reactors. They wanted to learn about leaks of radioactivity from high-level radioactive waste storage pools in the U.S. The meetings, event, and speaking tour were part of a last gasp effort to prevent the loading of "Pluthermal" (mixed oxide plutonium, or MOX) nuclear fuel into reactors across Japan. However, just the next month, in September 2010, pluthermal was loaded by Tokyo Electric Power Company into Fukushima Daiichi Unit 3. It was just six months before the nuclear catastrophe began. Unit 3 suffered the largest exlosion of all, after its reactor melted down.

Port Clinton, OH passes resolution against Canadian Great Lakes radioactive waste dump; bipartisan congressional opposition grows

On Dec. 10, the City of Port Clinton, Ohio passed a resolution opposing OPG's proposed radioactive waste dump targeted at the Great Lakes shoreline. What is very significant about this is that Port Clinton is located within the 10-mile Emergency Planning Zone (EPZ) of FirstEnergy Nuclear's Davis-Besse atomic reactor, on the Lake Erie shore just east of Toledo. Even "nuclear company towns" like Port Clinton -- which "host" many hundreds of tons of high-level radioactive waste, in "temporary storage" -- are opposed to any proposal to permanently bury radioactive waste on the Great Lakes shore.

In this regard, Port Clinton's resolution is similar to the Town of Ajax's, to the east of Toronto, located immediately adjacent to the 8-reactor Pickering nuclear power plant on the Lake Ontario shore.

Port Clinton's population is just over 6,000, so the number of people represented by resolutions passed at the state, county, town, and village levels in both countries is still around 17.8 million. This, compared to the Town of Kincardine which supposedly has "volunteered" to "host" the dump in Ontario, with a population of only around 11,000, including many Bruce Nuclear Power Plant workers, and other influenced by Bruce Nuclear revenue streams. But in fact, local opposition in and around Kincardine has grown stronger over time.

Tom Henry of the Toledo Blade has published a comprehensive article, "Ohio, Mich. riled over plan to bury radioactive waste: Critics fear dump may contaminate lakes," reporting on Port Clinton's resolution. He reported that a concerned resident of Port Clinton, Victoria Clemons, was instrumental in advocating for passage of the resolution.

Henry also reports that U.S. Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur (D-OH) and U.S. Congresswoman Candice Miller (R-MI) are working on a letter to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, urging him to negotiate with his Canadian counterparts to end this proposal. Kaptur, the Ranking Democrat on the U.S. House Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water, also indicated she will also take her concerns to the Canadian ambassador. Miller is Chairwoman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security, and also sits on the Transportation Subcommittees on Hazardous Materials, as well as Water Resources and the Environment.

Kaptur and Miller thus join Michigan's two U.S. Senators, as well as several additional U.S. House Members, in opposing the Great Lakes radioactive waste dump.

In addition, Henry reports that Ohio State Legislators, Rep. Chris Redfern (D-Catawba Island) and Rep. Randy Gardner (R-Bowling Green), intend to introduce a resolution in the Ohio General Assembly early next year opposing the proposed dump.

This is similar to a State of Michigan Senate resolution, introduced by Sen. Hoon-Yung Hopgood (Democrat-Taylor) and passed unanimously in spring 2013.

Meanwhile, the Stop the Great Lakes Nuclear Dump petition now has 43,864 signatories.

An excellent letter on the disastrous Hinkley nuclear deal

A letter from Ray Davies, Cymru CND (Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament)

Dear Sir,  

So Mr Cameron and the Tories have sold us short yet again.

1. He claims Hinkley C will create  four thousand jobs. The catch is, under EU law they will  have to recruit in Europe ; so most of the highly skilled workforce will come from France and elsewhere in Europe, not Britain and certainly not Wales. Our workers will mainly  be in Security and probably painting the front gates of Hinkley Point. 

2. When the coalition government failed to find a backer for Hinkley C, we promised France and China that  British taxpayers would guarantee them a price double to what electricity costs at the present moment - a price we will all have to pay.  What idiot would not accept that offer? 

3. In 60 years we have never found a safe method to dispose of the countless thousands of tonnes of highly radioactive waste which threaten our children and future generations; and yet we are going to create more and more. 

4. Nuclear power is the economics of the madhouse.  America has closed four nuclear power stations with more to follow because they are not economic. Germany has vowed  to get rid of every one of their nuclear power stations and invest in renewables; Italy has withdrawn their programme; and France is reducing their dependency on nuclear, because it is expensive as well as dangerous. 

5. The site of Hinkley C is geologically unstable, and a nuclear accident could threaten a catastrophe from the Gower to Somerset. Global warming means rising tide levels around the coast, and fracking in Bridgend is another potential threat which could create mini earthquakes around the nuclear site. The whole of Swansea, Newport and Cardiff would be wiped out by a Fukushima style accident.

6. Germany and the US bought out our car industry. France owns our water and the Severn Bridge. Now China- with its dubious safety record-  is getting in on the act. Will there be anything left of our resources to sell off? 

I and many other environmentalists will be doing our utmost to stop this madness taking place- not for a headline in a newspaper, but for the sake of  our children and grandchildren, and for this beautiful planet which is so fragile.

Yours  faithfully,  

Ray Davies 

Vice-Chair CND Cymru