Moorburg coal-fired power station
|Moorburg power plant|
|Type||Steam power plant|
|Primary energy||Fossil energy (coal)|
|power||1730 megawatts of electricity|
|Start of operations||February 28, 2015|
|Chimney height||137 m|
The Moorburg coal-fired power plant (abbreviation: KKW Moorburg or KW Moorburg) in the Moorburg district of Hamburg was built in 2007 on the site of the Moorburg gas power plant, which was demolished in 2004, as a double-block system with around 2 × 800 MW and went into operation in 2015. It cost around 3 billion euros and, assuming 7500 full load hours, is expected to generate 11.5 TWh per year and emit 8.7 million tons of CO 2 .
Structure and technical data
|Net power (electrical)
|2 x 818-827 MW|
|spec. Coal consumption|
|Chimney (height)||2 × 137 m|
|Cooling tower (height)||1 × 85 m|
Planning and history
Vattenfall announced in 2004 that it wanted to build a new power plant in Moorburg. In 2005, the CDU Senate encouraged Vattenfall to build the power plant twice as large and as a district heating power plant. In September 2006, Vattenfall Europe's Supervisory Board gave internal approval for the construction of the power plant. According to Vattenfall, this should cost around 2.6 billion euros.
Since May 4, 2007, the copper producer Aurubis (formerly Norddeutsche Affinerie AG ) has held a stake in the Moorburg coal-fired power plant through a so-called virtual power plant slice - a corporate share of 115 MW. With a long-term supply contract, the pricing of which is based on the generation costs of the corresponding power plant, Aurubis is to obtain one billion kilowatt hours of electricity per year from Vattenfall by 2040.
Construction of the new power plant with two coal-fired units, each with a nominal electrical output of 865 MW, began in October 2007. At full load, coal consumption is around 12,000 tons per day. A decoupling of a maximum of 650 MW district heating was originally intended to replace the generation of the decommissioned Wedel thermal power station and also enable a further expansion of the district heating supply in the south of Hamburg, but the necessary district heating pipe, which was to be laid through the Elbe, was under pressure from citizens' initiatives and environmental organizations not approved. Without the district heating pipeline under the Elbe, the energy efficiency of the power plant is lower, and the investments in the systems for district heating extraction have been made for free.
There are now plans to build a new combined cycle power plant at the Wedel power plant , which would take over the district heating supply of Hamburg. The opposition party CDU would like to use the waste heat from Moorburg after all.
The first block should go into operation in 2012, and the second one a year later. Commissioning had to be postponed several times due to "quality problems with welds", which were discovered in spring 2011 in the steam boilers that had already been built . In January 2012 the commissioning of the two units was announced for the beginning and middle of 2014 respectively. A good 10 percent of the installed T24 boiler steel had to be replaced for quality reasons, as hairline cracks had formed on the welds, as in other coal-fired power plant projects.
The burners were ignited for the first time in June 2013. Thereupon a dark, stinking cloud passed over Moorburg; some residents complained of headaches , shortness of breath and nausea . Vattenfall emphasized that the wind had been calculated incorrectly, but that there was no danger to the population at any time, as all legal limit values had been complied with. The smell of the cloud came from the new parts of the plant, the black color from soot . Politicians and environmental groups criticized Vattenfall for the way the test run was carried out and for the information policy.
On September 1, 2013, the private port operator Brunsbüttel Ports , which belongs to the Schramm Group, started operating the supply and disposal systems of the hard coal-fired power station in Moorburg. It is estimated that over 4 million tons of hard coal a year will be delivered by water across the Elbe. The coal is unloaded with two gantry cranes from ocean-going vessels at the pier , and the day bunkers are later supplied via conveyor belts . Brunsbüttel Ports also takes care of the disposal of waste from power plant operations. The exhaust gas cleaning with a flue gas desulphurization system results in large amounts of gypsum , and wet and dry ash as well as ammonia water are removed with special ships. Trucks are also used for disposal .
Block B was connected to the grid for the first time on February 28, 2014. However, its full commissioning was delayed again and again, it only went into operation on February 28, 2015. Block A went into operation on the evening of August 31, 2015.
Vattenfall's claim for damages
Because of the stricter environmental requirements that were issued as part of the 2008 permit, Vattenfall sued the Federal Republic of Germany in accordance with the rules of the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) in an arbitration tribunal for damages amounting to 1.4 billion euros (see Vattenfall against the Federal Republic of Germany ). In addition, the company sued the OVG Hamburg against the environmental requirements. The two proceedings ended in a comparison .
European Court of Justice: Incorrect approval
In 2010, the Federation for Environment and Nature Conservation Germany lodged a complaint with the EU Commission. In March 2015, the EU Commission announced that it would initiate infringement proceedings against Germany because the power plant's water-law permit violated the Habitats Directive. There is a risk that the project will have a negative impact on protected species such as salmon, river lamprey and sea lamprey. The water extraction required to cool the power plant is harmful to these animals. When the power station was approved, Germany failed to carry out the test provided for in the directive and to look for alternative cooling methods which could avoid the death of the protected species concerned.
In April 2017, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that the permit for the power plant was incorrect because the environmental impact had not been properly checked. Specifically, Directive 92/43 / EEC (Fauna-Flora-Habitat Directive) was violated because the effects on certain fish species were not adequately examined. The EU Commission had sued, which can now take further steps. Instead of cooling with Elbe water, a circuit cooling system could be used. However, this results in an increased internal requirement of the power plant and thus higher electricity production costs as well as increased CO 2 emissions . The operator Vattenfall replied that only a very small number of particularly protected FFH fish species were harmed.
On June 1, 2017, the Authority for the Environment and Energy (BUE), in implementation of the ruling and after consultation with the federal government, prohibited water abstraction from the Elbe for continuous cooling. This means that the power plant may only be operated with circuit cooling using a cooling tower. For through-flow cooling, 64 m³ / s Elbe water are required, for circuit cooling, 1 m³ / s.
The new building is viewed critically by parts of the Hamburg parliament as well as by several associations and initiatives. The main points of criticism include:
- the CO 2 emissions totaling 8.5 million tons annually
- the low fuel efficiency of the system compared to pronounced thermal power stations . Despite the use of combined heat and power (CHP), according to Vattenfall, an annual average utilization rate of only approx. 55% and a corresponding 45% energy loss in the form of waste heat can be expected with the current state of the district heating network .
- the possibly occurring impairment of the flora and fauna of the Elbe by the waste heat, which, according to the current plans, should also be dissipated through the southern Elbe .
The BUND quantifies the approved pollutant emissions at full load as 7850 tons of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides as well as 785 tons of fine dust per year. In addition, up to 3.2 tons of lead, 1.2 tons of mercury, 1.0 tons of arsenic, 0.6 tons of cadmium and 0.6 tons of nickel may be released into the atmosphere.
After the authority for urban development and the environment (BSU), which is responsible for the approval, viewed the project critically in April 2007, it apparently wanted to issue the final approval with certain conditions after the discussion date had been concluded (new water law statement from August 2007).
Signatures were collected from various organizations for a popular petition against the coal-fired power plant Moorburg, with which the Senate and the citizenship were urged to oppose the construction of the coal-fired power plant. When the signatures were first counted in December 2007, only those with a complete address were taken into account, so that the people's petition with fewer than 10,000 valid signatures initially did not seem to have come about. After taking into account incomplete, but clearly assignable address details, the people's petition finally came about, so that the citizens had to deal with it.
On September 30, 2008, Hamburg's Senator for the Environment, Anja Hajduk ( GAL ), issued the final approval to build the power plant under strict environmental conditions. Since the amount of cooling water that can be taken from the Elbe should depend on the respective water level, this can lead to a reduced output of the power plant on 250 days a year. In February 2009, Vattenfall announced that the required conditions would make the construction of the power plant extremely expensive. One of the reasons for this is the second fish pass at the Geesthacht barrage , which was required as a compensatory measure .
In April 2009, Vattenfall took legal action to court because of the tightening of environmental regulations. This litigation was suspended until the process settlement before the OVG Hamburg from September 30, 2008 to March 31, 2011 is implemented. No compensation was granted, Vattenfall and the Federal Republic of Germany each bear their own costs, while both parties bear half of the costs of the arbitration proceedings.
The proceedings were suspended on March 15, 2010. Two weeks earlier, a complaint by the BUND before the OVG Hamburg was successful. It was directed against the Hamburg authority for urban development and the environment and their approval of the district heating line of the Moorburg power plant. The simplified planning approval procedure must be replaced by a plan approval procedure with public participation and an environmental impact assessment .
Emission limit values
In the approval notice of September 30, 2008, the authority for urban development and the environment of the city of Hamburg set emission limit values that at least corresponded to the limit values that were specified in the 13th BImSchV (2004) when the application was submitted .
Pollutants with limit values in the daily average are to be monitored by continuously operating measuring devices, the other values by individual measurements. For comparison, the limit values of the 13th BImSchV are listed, as well as the emission values that can be achieved in normal operation with the best available technologies , as specified in the information sheet of the European Commission for correspondingly large new systems with hard coal dust firing based on the data collection in 2001 and 2002 are.
|Air pollutant||Daily mean emission values with BAT *||Limit value Moorburg in the daily average||Limit value Moorburg in half-hourly mean **||Limit value 13. BImSchV (2004) daily mean||Limit value 13. BImSchV (2004) half-hourly average|
|Total dust ( dust )||5-20 mg / Nm 3||10 mg / Nm 3||20 mg / Nm 3||20 mg / Nm 3||40 mg / Nm 3|
|Nitrogen oxides (as NO 2 )||90-150 mg / Nm 3||70 mg / Nm 3||200 mg / Nm 3||200 mg / Nm 3||400 mg / Nm 3|
|Sulfur dioxide (as SO 2 )||20-150 mg / Nm 3||100 mg / Nm 3||200 mg / Nm 3||300 mg / Nm 3||600 mg / Nm 3|
|Carbon monoxide ( CO )||30-50 mg / Nm 3||100 mg / Nm 3||200 mg / Nm 3||250 mg / Nm 3||500 mg / Nm 3|
|Mercury and compounds (as Hg )||no BAT emission level||0.03 mg / Nm 3||0.05 mg / Nm 3||0.03 mg / Nm 3||0.06 mg / Nm 3|
|Inorganic Chlorine Compounds (as HCl )||1-10 mg / Nm 3||-||-||-||-|
|Inorganic fluorine compounds (as HF )||1-5 mg / Nm 3||-||-||-||-|
|Ammonia ( NH 3 )||≤ 5 mg / Nm 3 for SCR / SNCR||-||5 mg / Nm 3 (SCR)||-||-|
|Dioxins and Furans ** ( PCDD / PCDF )||no BAT emission level||-||0.1 ng / Nm 3||-||0.1 ng / Nm 3|
|* Database of the BVT leaflet: 2001/2002, revision from 2011|
|** Limit value for dioxins and furans refers to 6–8 hours of sampling|
The European Commission has been organizing a new collection of data on updated best available techniques (BAT) since October 2011 and is expected to publish new BAT conclusions for large combustion plants in 2014 . The emission values specified therein, which can be achieved with BAT in existing plants, must be complied with by the Moorburg power plant no later than four years after the publication of the BAT conclusions in accordance with the European Industrial Emissions Directive.
- Moorburg power plant on Vattenfall.de
- Emission limit values and current daily mean values of the power plant
- Information from the Climate Alliance on the Moorburg power plant
- Article about the power plant with picture gallery at kontrastkammer.de
- List of power plants in Germany
- List of fossil fuel power plants in the European Union with the highest carbon dioxide emissions
- Moorburg coal-fired power station officially in operation. In: NDR.de. March 1, 2015, archived from the original on March 2, 2015 ; accessed on March 1, 2015 : “The time had come late on Saturday evening: the energy company Vattenfall started commercial use of the hard coal power plant in Hamburg-Moorburg after years of delay. After more than a year of trial and test operation, the first block of the power plant with an output of 827 megawatts now meets the requirements of the grid operator, announced Vattenfall. "
- Small inquiry from Dr. Monika Schaal from August 27, 2009 ( page no longer available , search in web archives ) Info: The link was automatically marked as defective. Please check the link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. PDF, Hamburg Parliamentary Database
- Questions and answers at the Moorburg power plant. In: Vattenfall GmbH. December 5, 2014, archived from the original on January 8, 2018 ; accessed on January 7, 2018 : “The construction of this plant will cost around 3 billion euros. [..] With an average operation with 7500 full load hours per year, the power plant generates around 11.5 terawatt hours (TWh) of electricity and releases around 8.7 million tons of CO 2. "
- Vattenfall - a company is falling apart . welt.de, December 27, 2014
- Power plant Moorburg: A chronology . ndr.de, December 19, 2014
- Blickpunkt Moorburg - You have never seen the power plant like this before . Vattenfall Europe website, accessed March 22, 2011
- Joint press release NA, Hamburg, Berlin, May 4, 2007 t ( Memento of February 21, 2014 in the Internet Archive )
- Vattenfall exchanges bad steel . In: Hamburger Abendblatt , April 16, 2012, accessed on April 16, 2012
- Moorburgtrasse-stop initiative
- Wind power storage is to replace coal piles . In: Hamburger Abendblatt , February 9, 2012, accessed on February 11, 2012
- Hamburg: CDU wants to use waste heat from Moorburg , March 30, 2016
- Rebecca Kresse: Moorburg goes on line very late . Hamburger Morgenpost, April 11, 2011
- Moorburg district heating power plant will not go online until 2014 . In: Hamburger Abendblatt , January 26, 2012, accessed on January 27, 2012
- Power plant test run. It stinks a lot to the Moorburgers . In: Hamburger Abendblatt , June 21, 2013, accessed on June 30, 2013
- coal power plant. Moorburg's smoking neighbor ( memento from June 29, 2013 in the web archive archive.today ) In: Harburger Ads and News , June 20, 2013, accessed on June 30, 2013
- Eckhard-Herbert Arndt: Schramm Group “under power” . In: Daily port report of September 3, 2013, p. 3
- Moorburg power plant goes online ( Memento from March 7, 2014 in the Internet Archive ). In: Hamburg1 , February 28, 2014, accessed on March 1, 2014
- Frank Drieschner: The chimney solution . In: Zeit online, February 13, 2015, accessed on February 17, 2015
- Eckhard-Herbert Arndt: Moorburg strengthens coal balance · Second power plant block has now been connected to the grid . In: Daily port report of September 2, 2015, p. 15
- spiegel.de: Ceremony for the CO2 monster
- Journal for Environmental Law 7–8 / 2017, pages 404–405
- Judgment: Approval for Vattenfall's coal-fired power station Moorburg not correct. iwr.de, April 28, 2017, accessed May 1, 2017 .
- Jens Meyer-Wellmann: Moorburg is not allowed to use Elbe water for "flow cooling" . In: Hamburger Abendblatt from June 1, 2017, accessed on June 2, 2017
- Vattenfall builds climate posters in Moorburg . Robin Wood's pages on the new power plant ( Memento from March 3, 2010 in the Internet Archive )
- Hamburg Moorburg - The end of climate protection? ( Memento of February 21, 2014 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF, 971 kB), accessed on June 17, 2011
- Hamburger Abendblatt: New Power Plants Threaten Hamburg's Climate Balance , April 21, 2007
- Citizenship of the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg: Printed matter 18/7431 - Information from the President of the Citizenship: People's petition against the coal-fired power station Moorburg
- Hamburger Abendblatt: Petition against Kraftwerk successful , December 22, 2007
- Parliamentary database of the Hamburg citizenship: Procedure 18/7431: People's petition against the coal-fired power station Moorburg
- Authority for Urban Development and Environment: Authority approves power plant with restrictions , press release, City of Hamburg, September 30, 2008
- tagesspiegel.de: Moorburg power plant much more expensive , February 25, 2009
- Spiegel online: "Power struggle for Moorburg". Retrieved October 4, 2010 .
- Nathalie Bernasconi: Background paper on Vattenfall v. Germany arbitration. (PDF, 555 kB) International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), July 2009, accessed on May 5, 2016 (English).
- Investment Treaty Arbitration: “Arbitration verdict on ICSID Case No. ARB / 09/6 ". Retrieved December 13, 2013 .
- New drafts and BVT leaflet Large Combustion Plants ( Memento of July 15, 2012 in the Internet Archive ), Joint Research Center , European Commission, Seville
- BVT leaflet "Large combustion systems" (2006, partial translation) ( Memento of July 17, 2013 in the Internet Archive ), Federal Environment Agency , Dessau
- Approval notification, chapter 4.2.1, page 20 (PDF; 914 kB) according to the Federal Immission Control Act , Authority for Urban Development and Environment , City of Hamburg, September 30, 2008
- Current information on the exchange of information ( Memento of the original from July 30, 2012 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. on Best Available Techniques, Joint Research Center , European Commission , Seville