Extension of the service life of German nuclear power plants

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Overview of the German nuclear power plants

Under the term extension of the term of service , there was a debate in Germany as to whether the legislature should extend the remaining service life of German nuclear power plants (NPP) - be it by increasing the remaining electricity volumes (which it did in autumn 2010) or by allowing certain nuclear power plants to be allocated by certain dates operate (which the cabinet decided in June 2011).

The phase-out of nuclear energy was first regulated in the year 2000 in the agreement between the Federal Republic of Germany and the operating companies of the nuclear power plants called the nuclear consensus . On the basis of the treaty, the Atomic Energy Act was amended in 2002 with the votes of the then red-green majority in the Bundestag. On October 28, 2010, the Bundestag passed a further amendment to the Atomic Energy Act (Bundestag majority by CDU / CSU and FDP) to extend the service life in such a way that the seven plants that were commissioned before 1980 received electricity for an additional eight years of operation and the remaining ten nuclear reactors would receive electricity got for an additional 14 years. The thirteenth law amending the Atomic Energy Act revoked the extension of the term due to public opposition only shortly afterwards; the law came into force on August 6, 2011.

Course of the political debate

During the 2009 election campaign , the parties CDU, CSU and FDP announced that they would change the Atomic Energy Act in the event of an election victory and extend the service life of German nuclear power plants. They also expressed this intention in the coalition agreement they signed after the federal election at the end of October 2009 .

The coalition agreement contains the following formulations on energy policy .

From the coalition agreement (p 29): "Nuclear energy is a bridging technology seen that renewable energy is to replace up reliable on their use. Running times are to be extended in compliance with German and international safety standards, the new building ban remains in place. Prerequisites for the extension of the term are regulations on operating times of the power plants, safety level, benefit sharing and use of funds for research into renewable energies. The moratorium on exploring the Gorleben salt dome will be lifted immediately. "

Norbert Röttgen , at that time Federal Environment Minister, signaled at the beginning of 2010 that he considered an extension of a maximum of ten years to be sufficient. Economics minister Rainer Brüderle (FDP) later called for a term extension of at least 15 years.

In the summer of 2010, the federal government was 'thinking out loud' about auctioning off longer running times for nuclear power plants to the power companies operating the power plants (analogous to the auction of mobile phone licenses about 10 years earlier). She expressed hope for competition, billions in profits and transparency. Opposition and environmental groups were sharply negative.

The four power companies operating nuclear power plants did not want to agree to a regulation that the next federal government could reverse. That is why they endeavored to contractually agree new rules with the government and to agree ( prohibitively ) high contractual penalties in the event that a later federal government wants to change the contract. In August 2010, the energy suppliers publicly initiate the energy policy appeal .

Energy companies are threatening to phase out nuclear power

In August 2010 the energy companies threatened to shut down all reactors immediately if the federal government stuck to its plans for a fuel tax . The electricity suppliers had previously forecast supply gaps if their nuclear power plants were to go offline as planned in the nuclear consensus .

External reports

Three reports commissioned by the federal government (coalition of CDU, CSU and FDP) from external institutes were handed over to the federal government on August 27, 2010 for the study "Energy scenarios for the federal government's energy concept".

The three institutes are:

The neutrality of the EMI was questioned; its director Marc Oliver Bettzüge held an endowed professorship at Cologne University , which was financed by the Stifterverband für die Deutsche Wissenschaft until 2012 .

The report was published on August 30, 2010. The federal government obliged all three institutes to base their deliberations on certain hypotheses (assumptions): They had to compare the consequences of various term extensions with a so-called base scenario , the previously planned nuclear phase-out.

Die Zeit commented :

“While additional climate protection measures that are completely detached from the operation of the nuclear power plants are taken into account in all extension scenarios, these do not take place in the base scenario. As if climate protection were only feasible if the reactors remained connected to the grid for longer. An absurd assumption. Three examples: The thermal insulation of buildings, the consumption of biofuels , and even the future performance of wind turbines would therefore develop better if the life of the nuclear reactors were extended than without them. It's like comparing apples with pears. "

- The time No. 34 from August 19, 2010

"Atomic Summit"; Agreement in the CDU-FDP coalition

Protest on September 18, 2010 in Berlin in front of the Reichstag

Federal Environment Minister Norbert Röttgen (CDU) and Federal Economics Minister Rainer Brüderle (FDP) announced on September 5, 2010 that the German nuclear power plants should receive additional power generation capacities (also known as “residual electricity volumes”) of 1,804.278 TWh. Based on the average generation from 2000 to 2008, this corresponds to an extension of an average of twelve years. Various institutes and the prognoses of the federal government came to the conclusion that the actual extension would be longer.

According to the subsidy fund contract signed by the federal government with the four big energy companies the following night on September 6th at 4:30 am, the NPPs built up to 1980 received additional "residual electricity" with which they could have run eight years longer; newer nuclear power plants received additional electricity for 14 years, with reference generation 2000–2008. In return, the energy companies should pay a new fuel element tax from 2011 to 2016 ; After their expiry on December 31, 2016, they are to pay nine euros per additional MWh fed into a fund from 2017 to “finance the promotional measures for implementing the energy concept”. Due to numerous exception clauses, it was not possible to foresee whether and to what extent the future fund contributions would be charged. For comparison: 1 MWh = 1,000 kWh costs the end user over 200 euros.

Examples for some NPPs with purely arithmetically extended runtimes:

The German public utilities (often also called "municipal utilities") feared massive losses: The coalition agreement will cost them 4.5 billion euros. They demanded financial compensation - citing the protection of legitimate expectations : "Our investments in power plants were made in the belief that they were politically reliable". The utilization of their power plant fleet falls significantly due to the longer running times. The decision also removes the basis for all future investments in power plants. There is so much generation capacity available by 2030 that there will be no new construction projects. “The competition is practically dead.” The German Association of Cities also demanded compensation payments for the municipal utilities. Longer running times for nuclear power plants should not jeopardize investments in environmentally friendly energy generation, said City Council President Petra Roth .

The Association of Municipal Enterprises (VKU) also criticized the nuclear contract.

The government initially planned to keep the nuclear treaty secret, but surprisingly published it on September 9, 2010. In a special meeting of the Bundestag environmental committee on September 15, 2010, Federal Environment Minister Norbert Röttgen said that neither he nor a representative of his ministry had participated in the nuclear summit .

On September 18, tens of thousands of nuclear power opponents demonstrated in Berlin's government district against the term extensions agreed at the nuclear summit.

On September 28th, the federal cabinet approved several bills and put them on the legislative path. The package of measures and laws, which the federal government collectively calls the “energy concept”, was then presented by the Chancellor and five ministers involved: Economics Minister Rainer Brüderle (FDP), Transport Minister Peter Ramsauer (CSU), Research Minister Annette Schavan (CDU), Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble (CDU) and Environment Minister Norbert Röttgen (CDU). Röttgen spoke of a "milestone in the economic history of our country".

Vote in the Bundestag

On October 1, 2010, the relevant laws were discussed in the Bundestag. The final reading of the law on October 28, 2010 resulted in a roll-call vote of 309 yes-votes and 280 no-votes, with 2 abstentions and 30 votes not cast, for the eleventh amendment to the Atomic Energy Act . After that, the service life of the 17 nuclear reactors in Germany was extended by an average of 12 years. For nuclear power plants with the start of power operation up to and including 1980, the term was extended by 8 years, for the younger nuclear power plants by 14 years.

The role of the Federal Council and the federal states

In the opinion of the CDU / CSU-FDP coalition, the revision of the Atomic Energy Act does not require the approval of the Federal Council . Since atomic policy falls exclusively into the legislative competence of the federal government, this is not a " law requiring approval ". The amendment to the Atomic Energy Act 2002, which should lead to the nuclear phase-out, was also passed without the consent of the Federal Council. These considerations gained weight when it became clear that the CDU-FDP coalition ruling in North Rhine-Westphalia under Jürgen Rüttgers would lose the state elections in North Rhine-Westphalia in 2010 and that the CDU, CSU and FDP would lose their majority in the Federal Council. Numerous political actors stated that they consider circumventing the Federal Council to be unconstitutional or that they would sue the Federal Constitutional Court if they attempted to do so.

In the summer of 2010 nine of the 16 countries (as of August 2010) threatened a constitutional lawsuit if the CDU / CSU-FDP coalition wanted to implement the extension plans without the involvement of the Federal Council:

The federal states justify their demand for co-determination

  • with the nuclear oversight that they exercise as well
  • so that they have to be financially responsible if a nuclear power accident occurs in which large amounts of radioactivity get into the environment and cause damage there (for both points see Atomic Energy Act (Germany) ).

The President of the Bundestag, Norbert Lammert , reported legal concerns and said that he “does not consider the solution that has been found, which is to be implemented without the consent of the Bundesrat, to be a stroke of genius”. Going it alone harbors a “considerable constitutional risk”.

An approval requirement of the Federal Council affirmed publicly (as of September 2010) eight respected constitutional law , including the ex-President of the Federal Constitutional Court Hans-Jürgen Papier and Joachim Wieland . Papier's report was published on June 2, 2010. The constitutional lawyer and CDU politician Rupert Scholz, however, pointed in a constitutional report to parallels with the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court on the Aviation Security Act (May 4, 2010); the purely quantitative increase in enforcement burdens (extension of the duration) for the federal states does not constitute an obligation for the approval of the Federal Council. In addition, representatives of the Scientific Service of the Bundestag, the Federal Ministry of the Interior and the Federal Ministry of Justice expressed themselves in a joint statement and some constitutional lawyers against the requirement of consent .

On November 10, 2010, the Federal Council's Legal Committee decided by a majority that the nuclear amendment required the approval of the Federal Council to extend its term. The Ministry of Justice of Rhineland-Palatinate had requested the vote. In the Legal Affairs Committee, nine federal states voted in favor of this legal opinion, six voted against, and one state (the black and yellow governed Schleswig-Holstein - Cabinet Carstensen II ) abstained. In addition to SPD-led countries, the representatives of Hamburg (CDU Greens) and Saarland ( Jamaica coalition ) voted for this view . The vote in the Legal Committee is not binding for the plenary session of the Bundesrat. On November 26, 2010, the Federal Council passed the extension without referring to the Mediation Committee.

In the opinion of the Greens, the deliberations in the Environment Committee before the vote in the Bundestag were “illegal”. SPD parliamentary group leader Thomas Oppermann said that "the Bundestag was not involved in this legislative process to the necessary extent."

Constitutional Lawsuits

Since the federal government enforced the law to extend the term without the involvement of the Federal Council, the opposition announced early on that it would file a constitutional complaint . Independently of this, nine federal states have announced that they will also initiate constitutional lawsuits.

Greenpeace announced its own constitutional lawsuit in September 2010, which was filed on February 3, 2011. Greenpeace is suing for the revocation of the operating license for six of the oldest nuclear reactors in Germany: Biblis A and B, Isar 1, Philippsburg as well as Krümmel and Brunsbüttel.

On February 28, 2011, the federal states of Berlin, Bremen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Brandenburg and Rhineland-Palatinate filed a constitutional complaint against the extension of the service life of German nuclear power plants.

In addition, on March 4, 2011, the SPD parliamentary group and the Greens parliamentary group submitted a legal action suit .

moratorium

On March 11, 2011, the Tōhoku earthquake struck Japan . The quake and the subsequent tsunami caused severe damage to several Japanese nuclear power plants . In Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant , there was a series of nuclear accidents , causing large amounts of radioactive material were released.

Human chain of opponents of nuclear power on March 12, 2011 in Baden-Württemberg (here on the edge of Schloßplatz in Stuttgart's government district).

The series of accidents rekindled the debate about nuclear energy and extending service life in Germany. Due to the upcoming state elections in Baden-Wuerttemberg on March 27, 2011 , the debate became the subject of daily politics.

Politicians from the SPD and the Greens questioned the extension of the term. Environment Minister Norbert Röttgen initially described the discussion as out of place. He later said the government saw nuclear power "as a bridge, that is, it is an obsolete model". The events made it clear that "we need a different energy supply." Japan's nuclear power plants were designed to be particularly safe, "and yet it happened."

On March 14th, Guido Westerwelle said after an FDP presidium meeting that he could imagine suspending the decision to extend the term. On the same day, Chancellor Angela Merkel announced a three-month suspension of the service life extension for German nuclear power plants.

On March 15, the Chancellor announced that the seven oldest German nuclear power plants would be shut down during the moratorium. The temporary shutdown affects the Neckarwestheim I , Philippsburg I (Baden-Württemberg), Biblis A and B (Hesse), Isar I (Bavaria), Unterweser (Lower Saxony) and Brunsbüttel (Schleswig-Holstein) nuclear power plants . The Krümmel nuclear power plant near Hamburg, which has been shut down since 2009, will remain out of operation for the three months.

The legal position in this matter is still unclear, as the government cannot simply override a law passed by parliament. The former President of the Federal Constitutional Court, Hans-Jürgen Papier, views the Federal Government's approach rather critically and even speaks of “unconstitutional action”. According to him, a law that has already been passed can only be suspended by the Federal Constitutional Court : "A moratorium is conceivable, but only by changing the law."

The opposition criticized the federal government's sudden change of course as not credible. The SPD accused the government of political opportunism because of the upcoming state elections; the federal government does not want to draw any serious consequences from the development. Otherwise the old nuclear reactors would have to be shut down immediately and the remaining operating times of the other reactors limited. To this end, the SPD called for a new shutdown law.

On March 16, 2011, the federal government and the federal states' environment ministers responsible for nuclear power plants referred to the Atomic Energy Act (Section 19 (3)) and justified the temporary shutdown by stating that “the Atomic Energy Act allows the temporary cessation of operations if there is a suspicion of danger. Such a suspicion exists if, due to justified uncertainties in the context of risk prevention, the possibility of damage cannot be completely ruled out. "

On March 18, 2011, Federal Environment Minister Röttgen assessed the new situation with the words: “For the first time we have experienced that even a tiny residual risk can materialize.” On March 22, Chancellor Merkel announced the establishment of an ethics committee for a secure energy supply .

On March 23, 2011, it was announced that the Federal Minister of Economics and Technology, Rainer Brüderle , had admitted to industry representatives (BDI) that the moratorium after the Tōhoku earthquake in 2011 was not for material reasons, but was campaign tactics.

On April 15, 2011, the Federal Chancellor invited the Prime Ministers of all federal states to Berlin. After the meeting, she announced that the federal cabinet would approve the necessary bills for the nuclear phase-out on June 6, 2011. It is "urgent".

Interests of the operator

From a business point of view, an operator is interested in operating a system as long as the income from the operation exceeds the variable costs (= as long as profit margins are achieved).

All NPPs are practically written off; all operators have made high provisions in their balance sheets for the demolition of a nuclear power plant. All of them also have an interest in continuing operations because they can then leave these provisions untouched for a longer period of time; they generate income through investment income. The Öko-Institut wrote in 2000:

“ The longer the nuclear power plants are in operation, the greater the interest and investment income, since more provisions are then accumulated and the accumulated provisions are used later. Therefore, the provisions actually represent a considerable financial incentive to operate the nuclear power plants as long as possible. ”A spokesman for the institute demanded: “ In order to create equal opportunities on the electricity market and to reduce the economic incentive to operate nuclear power plants, the provisions must be transferred to a fund which is withdrawn from the power plant operator's access ” .

In 2005 Eurosolar's economic incentive was criticized. In 2005, Stadtwerke Schwäbisch Hall filed a lawsuit with the European Court of Justice (ECJ). In its judgment of November 29, 2007 (C-176/06), the ECJ rejected the action as inadmissible.

The accumulated provisions at the end of 2008 totaled 27.5 billion euros.

criticism

The Advisory Council for Environmental Issues of the Federal Government assessed the decision to extend the term in a detailed statement on the Federal Government's energy concept as follows:

"The Advisory Council for Environmental Issues (SRU) considers the planned extension of the service life of the nuclear power plants to be a mistake, as it contradicts the goals of the energy concept and the establishment of a sustainable power supply and could possibly have serious consequences."

- Advisory Council for Environmental Issues of the Federal Republic of Germany, September 15, 2010

“We urgently advise the federal government against extending the operating times for nuclear power plants. Longer terms are not a bridge, but an investment barrier for renewable energies. "

- Martin Faulstich , Chairman of the Advisory Council for Environmental Issues

In summer 2011, after withdrawing the extension of the term, Lammert commented on the same.

“What Lammert thinks of Merkel's nuclear policy, he celebrates with a visit to the Mainz glass company Schott. 'With the most prominent conversion at the head of government, there has been a change in the risk assessment', ...

But now Lammert wants to show how amateurish Merkel extended the running times of the kilns in September. He criticizes the “superficiality of the definition” for an average of twelve years, which seemed completely arbitrary to him. 'That was thumbs up.'

... 'And above all, I thought it was utterly stupid to insult the Federal Council and keep the states outside.' The 'presumption' of wanting to adopt a concept lasting 40 years without a broad consensus was 'either arrogant or unworldly'. 'It was a simple case of arrogance.'

Lammert had expressed his concerns at the meeting of the CDU board two weeks before the extension of the term. "

Conversion of the power grid

For the stable operation of the power system will control power needed. The demand is increasing due to the increasing share of solar and wind energy in electricity generation. It is controversial whether nuclear power plants are designed, suitable and / or approved for the generation of control energy.

For most German nuclear power plants (KKW), the ability to operate in a load sequence was a design criterion that determined the concept. For this reason, the core monitoring and the reactor control have already been designed when the reactors are designed so that no subsequent upgrading of the systems for load-following operation is necessary.

The Bavarian state government replied to the request that all Bavarian NPPs are designed for load-following operation. A major inquiry by the SPD parliamentary group in the Bundestag was answered that nuclear power plants can provide control power to a certain extent - power gradients of up to 2 percent per minute in a range between 60% and 100% of the nominal power; there is also sufficient operating experience for this. For the larger reactors, this means load strokes of 400 MW within a quarter of an hour, which is sufficient to compensate for normal wind fluctuations. Larger gradients and load strokes would be possible, but would require administrative and technical optimizations in system operation.

Technically, however, it is currently not possible to completely take nuclear power plants off the grid and switch them on again a short time later. However, due to the increased expansion of renewable energies, this operating mode could be required in just a few years. In a study in 2011, Wolfgang Renneberg came to the conclusion that nuclear power plants are only partially suitable for so-called load follow -up operation .

Since electricity exchanges in Europe have been trading in electricity and the prices have been published, actors and the public have become more aware than before of the importance of control power.

Lack of security / sustainability

From a security point of view, extending the term is controversial. It is asserted that age-related incidents increase the likelihood of incidents, that the NPPs do not correspond to the state of the art and that old NPPs have structural defects that cannot be remedied even by extensive modernization. Under the influence of ionizing radiation as well as frequent start-ups and shutdowns of power plants, many power plant components would suffer material fatigue, which could lead to accidents.

However, this is offset by statements that the German nuclear power plants were designed for load-following operation over their entire service life. Accordingly, the number of load changes was set relatively high. The stresses associated with the respective load changes were determined for components relevant to fatigue and taken into account in the dimensioning. The following values ​​were used for a PWR in the range from 40 to 100% of the nominal output:

Load change Number of load changes
100-80-100 100,000
100-60-100 15,000
100-40-100 12,000

Since the German NPPs have been operated predominantly with constant power to cover the base load in their previous operating time, considerable reserves would still exist in the event of an extension of the service life, also with regard to material fatigue.

More nuclear waste

The amount of nuclear waste generated is roughly proportional to the amount of electricity generated. Longer terms mean more nuclear waste. For this additionally generated nuclear waste - as for the previously generated - there is neither a repository nor a sustainable disposal concept. Massive resistance has been directed against the transport ( Castor ) and storage of nuclear waste in Gorleben from the start.

The extension of the running times for nuclear power plants planned by the federal government in September 2010 would have tripled the amount of new nuclear waste generated compared to the planning for the nuclear consensus.

According to data from the Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS) and calculations by Greenpeace, the following would also have occurred:

  • 4400 to 4800 tons of highly radioactive nuclear waste as well
  • 9200 cubic meters of low and medium level nuclear waste.

(For comparison: the amount of conventional hazardous waste to be disposed of ( waste to be brought to underground landfills outside the nuclear industry) is between 200,000 and 700,000 tons per year in Germany.)

Investment uncertainties

The termination of the nuclear consensus from 2000 through the extension of the term of the energy concept at the end of 2010 means far-reaching encroachment on the framework conditions of the energy industry. Many companies had adjusted their investment strategies to a speedy phasing out of electricity production from nuclear power plants. Albert Filbert, chairman of the VKU public utilities association, says : “Our investments in power stations were made in the belief that they are politically reliable. […] The decision [to extend the term, editor's note. Red. ] Also removes the basis for all future investments in power plants. "

“The energy concept therefore does not provide orientation security for important future issues, but on the contrary helps to ensure that legal and investment uncertainties remain, which could endanger the development dynamics of renewable energies in the coming years. It is to be expected that investment decisions that are important and necessary for the rapid transition of the energy supply will be postponed. "

Nuclear energy and climate protection

The reason for the extension of the term was, among other things, climate protection arguments, since no direct CO 2 emissions occur during ongoing operation of a nuclear power plant . According to a working paper of the Öko-Institut 2007, the following CO 2 equivalents per kWh el arise when considering the entire life cycle of various forms of energy with the GEMIS computer program :

  • Nuclear power plant (uranium after import mix): 32 grams
  • Nuclear power plant (uranium only from Russia): 65 grams
  • Biogas cogeneration unit: -409 grams
  • Onshore wind farm: 24 grams
  • Offshore wind farm: 23 grams
  • Hydroelectric plant: 40 grams
  • Solar cell (multicrystalline): 101 grams
  • Solar cell import (Spain): 27 grams

(Only emissions from nuclear and renewable energies are cited.)

Popular protests

Mass rally in Cologne, March 26, 2011

The public protests against the threatened extension of the service life were as large as those against nuclear energy in the early 1980s, for example 100,000 people were on the streets of the Lower Saxony capital during a trek to Hanover in March 1980 against the construction of a reprocessing plant in Gorleben.

In September 2009 over 50,000 people demonstrated in Berlin, in April 2010 120,000 people formed an action and human chain from Krümmel to Brunsbüttel , in September 2010 over 100,000 people met to surround the Bundestag and in October 2010 50,000 people demonstrated in Munich. On March 12, 2011, according to the police, around 60,000 people formed a human chain from the Neckarwestheim nuclear power plant to the state parliament building in Stuttgart in order to then protest in the Baden-Württemberg state capital on Schlossplatz against the extension of the term and the energy policy of the coalition of CDU and FDP.

A petition : Nuclear supply and disposal - compliance with the contracts to shut down nuclear power plants by 2023 was submitted on August 17, 2010 and had 73,978 co-signers by October 22, 2010. The aim was to influence the decision in the Bundestag and to ward off the extension of the term, or to implement the nuclear phase-out and the decommissioning of the nuclear power plants already decided by the previous government.

The online campaign platform Avaaz started collecting signatures. The aim of the campaign is to hand over 200,000 signatures to the Bundestag for the nuclear phase-out.

According to survey results in the summer of 2010, 77 percent of Germans are against a term extension of 15 years or more, 48 percent are against any term extension.

In view of the Fukushima disaster, a total of 250,000 people came together on March 26, 2011 for large-scale demonstrations in Hamburg, Cologne, Munich and Berlin and demanded an immediate phase-out of nuclear energy.

economic aspects

Specific costs per installed kilowatt

In July 2009, the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) published a study it had commissioned. The authors wrote a short chapter on the subject of runtimes:

"III.3.4. Terms

One of the features of the generation III / III + line of nuclear power plants is their design for a period of around 60 years, while the predecessor reactors are designed for around half of this period. In the case of power plant technology that is characterized by high fixed costs , one should actually think that doubling the total runtime would significantly reduce the specific operating costs per kWh; but that is not the case. Bank loans must be repaid within 15-20 years. In a discounted cash flow calculation, costs and income no longer have great weight in the forecast of more than 10-15 years. Government loan guarantees, such as those provided by the US government, may have a. the great advantage that their term can be up to 30 years.

There is a tendency to extend the life of existing nuclear power plants. Reactors of the PWR type are considered suitable for extended operating times of over 40 years - despite their original design for only about 30 years. Runtime extensions can require substantial replacement investments, especially for large components such as steam generators or pressure vessel lids, as well as retrofitting to increase reactor safety. The entire reactor stock in the USA comes from construction contracts from 1963–1973, a time whose technology standards can hardly be compared with those of today.

In spite of such additional investments, from the power utility perspective, extending the term in the USA seem to be an economically sensible option, which is why many nuclear power plant operators are also pursuing this option. It remains to be seen whether this view will prove to be correct or whether high and perhaps prohibitive retrofits will be necessary in order to keep the systems in a correct and approvable condition.

In terms of capital costs , a term extension (PLEX) is much cheaper than building a new one. Some cost calculations suggest that the average cost of PLEX is only $ 10-50 / kW; the new investment for a natural gas power plant is approx. 400-500 $ / kW. In the case of the Duke Power nuclear power plant in the USA, the operator estimates the cost of obtaining a service life extension to be as little as $ 4-6 / kW.245 In addition, the provision fund for decommissioning at the end of the extension period should be sufficiently full to cover a large part of the operating costs to be covered by the released excess provisions. "

Lowering the electricity price

There is a controversial debate as to whether electricity prices, for example for private households, would fall in the event of term extensions . The energy suppliers point out that the electricity price is formed on the market ( electricity exchange ) and should not be determined by a contract. The former President of the Federal Environment Agency Andreas Troge (CDU) described a price reduction through an extension of the term as "unrealistic". He pointed out that the price of electricity on the electricity exchange in 2009 and 2010 was significantly lower than in 2008 and that the electricity suppliers increased the prices nonetheless. The same criticized, among others, the German Institute for Economic Research (DIW).

According to the Öko-Institut (2008), a three-person model household with an annual consumption of 3500 kilowatt hours results in monthly savings of 12 cents through the extension of the running time. In general, it is doubted that the perceptible dampening of electricity trading prices in the event of a term extension will also affect energy consumers (especially private households).

According to a study by the green electricity provider Lichtblick (2010), an average household would save a maximum of twelve euros per year. If the costs for the planned fuel tax are passed on from the energy suppliers to the consumers, a family of four would have to pay 60 euros more annually for electricity.

According to a joint study by the energy industry institute r2b energy consulting GmbH in Cologne and the EEFA Institute in Münster on behalf of the Federation of German Industries (BDI), a long-term extension to the 60 years currently set in many countries (shutdown 2035 to 2049) could, among other things Relieve private households by 144 euros per year and create around 62,000 new jobs. The EEFA creates u. a. also as a member of the working group energy balances this for the Federal Republic of Germany and coordinates the creation of the national energy statistics for the International Energy Agency (IEA).

In contrast to this, even the study on which the Federal Government's energy concept is based shows no long-term positive economic effects from an extension of the term. “The federal government's energy scenarios do not suggest any major macroeconomic advantages of extending the term either. The electricity price for private households is hardly influenced by the variation in the running times. In the medium term, the extension of the service life - assuming lower retrofitting costs for nuclear power plants (A-scenarios) - has a cost-reducing effect, especially on the electricity prices for the electricity-intensive industry. The study suggests, however, that this only shifts costs into the future: According to the study, the end consumer prices in 2050 for the electricity-intensive industry are lower, the shorter the term extension. "

The extension of the service life with the simultaneous undiminished rapid expansion of renewable energies could also lead to higher burdens. When there is a high supply of solar radiation or strong winds, the output of photovoltaic and wind power plants and simultaneously operated nuclear power plants can significantly exceed demand. Since nuclear power plants can only be regulated to a limited extent, regenerative power plants must then also be disconnected from the grid to compensate for the failure.

Additional profits for NPP operators

  • According to the Öko-Institut , they will make 63 billion euros in additional profits over the entire period of the extension (E.ON 27.5; RWE 17; EnBW 14; Vattenfall 4.5).
  • According to a study by the Landesbank Baden-Württemberg from 2009, the NPP operators would
    • earn an additional 44 to 119 billion euros with a term extension of 10 to 25 years and a moderate electricity price assumption of 51 euros per MWh;
    • assuming an electricity price of 80 euros per MWh, the additional income amounted to 233 billion euros (25 years).

Cancellation of the term extension

After the catastrophe in Fukushima (Japan) in March 2011, the German Bundestag passed the thirteenth law amending the Atomic Energy Act ( AtG ) on June 30, 2011, which reverses the lifetime extensions of German nuclear power plants. Among other things, the law regulates the individual remaining operating times of all German NPPs and specifies their temporal, gradual shutdown. According to the law, the last German NPP must be taken from the grid and shut down in 2022. The law came into force on August 6, 2011.

See also

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology : "Agreement between the Federal Government and the Energy Supply Companies of June 14, 2000" ( Memento of September 15, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF; 1.4 MB)
  2. ↑ Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology: "Law on the orderly termination of the use of nuclear energy for commercial generation of electricity" ( Memento of October 20, 2016 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF; 707 kB)
  3. ↑ Bundestag : "Lifetime extension of nuclear power plants approved" . There links to the two amendments to the Atomic Energy Act (17/3051, 17/3052), the establishment of an energy and climate fund (17/3053) and the Nuclear Fuel Tax Act (17/3054)
  4. ↑ Federal government: 'Nuclear power: the necessary bridge technology' ( Memento from October 1, 2010 in the Internet Archive ), September 28, 2010. Since it decided to extend the term, the Federal Government has tried to use the term bridge technology to focus on its long-term energy generation goals
  5. ↑ Frankfurter Rundschau : "Brüderle for extension of the term" , June 20, 2010
  6. ↑ spiegel.de July 13, 2010: Term to be sold, highest bidder
  7. ↑ Rheinische Post : “Compromise in the nuclear dispute. - Old nuclear power plants could be shut down as early as 2011. In return, younger reactors should stay on the grid longer than planned ” ( Memento from February 11, 2013 in the web archive archive.today ), August 10, 2010
  8. ↑ ARD ( Memento of August 16, 2010 in the Internet Archive ), “Opposition condemns threat from corporations” of August 16, 2010, last accessed on March 16, 2011
  9. ↑ Die Welt : “The energy giants want to blackmail the government” , August 15, 2010
  10. ↑ Die Zeit : “Playing against time. - With a new expert opinion, the government can expect longer reactor lifetimes ” , No. 38 from August 19, 2010
  11. ↑ Der Spiegel : “Government expert is close to power companies” , August 27, 2010
  12. ↑ Die Zeit: “Playing against time. - With a new expert opinion, the government can expect longer reactor lifetimes ” , No. 34 of August 19, 2010
  13. ↑ Bundestag: "Draft law of the parliamentary groups of the CDU / CSU and FDP: Draft of an eleventh law amending the Atomic Energy Act" (PDF; 134 kB)
  14. ^ Der Spiegel: "Government tricks with nuclear power annual figures" , September 6, 2010
  15. ↑ a b Federal Government: "Fund to finance the funding measures for the implementation of the energy concept" ( Memento of October 21, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) of September 6, 2010
  16. ↑ a b Die Zeit: "Nuclear power plants should run twelve years longer" , September 6, 2010
  17. ^ Association of municipal companies : “The government's goals cannot be achieved in this way” ( Memento from February 12, 2013 in the web archive archive.today ), press release 46/10, September 9, 2010
  18. ^ Association of Municipal Enterprises: "Unilateral privilege not acceptable" ( Memento from February 13, 2013 in the web archive archive.today ), press release 47/10, September 10, 2010
  19. ↑ Die Zeit: “Revolution with Secret Agreements” , September 9, 2010
  20. ↑ Süddeutsche Zeitung : "I did not participate in the contract" , September 15, 2010
  21. ↑ "Resistance to the Merkel government's nuclear policy is growing: tens of thousands protested in Berlin against an extension of the running times - including many people who otherwise never demonstrate." Article by Fabian Reinbold in Spiegel Online on September 18, 2010
  22. ↑ Süddeutsche Zeitung: "Five Ministers and the Pentagram of Horror" , September 28, 2010
  23. ↑ bundestag.de plenary minutes 17/63 (PDF; 745 kB)
  24. ↑ - ( Memento from September 16, 2011 in the Internet Archive )
  25. ↑ Bundestag.de (PDF; 134 kB)
  26. ^ Senate of Beust III = May 7, 2008 to August 25, 2010; Senate Ahlhaus until March 7, 2011
  27. ^ Frankfurter Rundschau: "Karlsruhe has the last word" , September 6, 2010
  28. ↑ a b Der Spiegel: “Legal expert opinion on the need for approval of a law to extend the life of nuclear power plants” , PDF, 12 pages
  29. ↑ Die Zeit: Röttgen was not involved in atomic consensus. September 15, 2010
  30. ↑ Die Zeit: Constitutional lawyers raise concerns about nuclear plans. September 14, 2010
  31. ↑ Der Spiegel: “Ex-constitutional judge questions black and yellow nuclear plans” , June 3, 2010
  32. ↑ a b Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung : “Extension of the term becomes a case for lawyers” , November 10, 2010
  33. ↑ Bundesrat : “The Bundesrat passes numerous laws” ( Memento of June 25, 2011 in the Internet Archive ), accessed on December 1, 2010
  34. ↑ spiegel.de: "Nuclear dispute leads to scandal in the Bundestag" , October 27, 2010
  35. ^ Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung: Constitutional action by the opposition
  36. ^ Constitutional lawsuit by Greenpeace ( Memento from July 24, 2012 in the web archive archive.today )
  37. ↑ greenpeace.de: Constitutional complaint against the extension of the term ( memento of February 5, 2011 in the Internet Archive )
  38. ↑ application for judicial review against the term extension ( Memento of 7 September 2014 Internet Archive ), written application (pdf) ( Memento of 7 September 2014 Internet Archive ), application for judicial review ( Memento of 7 September 2014 Internet Archive )
  39. ↑ stern.de: "Five federal states submit constitutional complaint" , February 28, 2011
  40. ^ Rheinische Post : "Opposition officially files a lawsuit" ( Memento from March 6, 2011 in the Internet Archive ), March 4, 2011
  41. ↑ a b Stern: “Germany disputes over nuclear energy” , March 12, 2011
  42. ↑ Die Zeit: “Röttgen reveals doubts about nuclear policy” , March 13, 2011
  43. ^ SZ of March 12, 2011
  44. ↑ Tagesschau : “Bridge technology is shaking” ( Memento from March 16, 2011 in the Internet Archive ), March 14, 2011
  45. ↑ Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung: "Merkel announces 'Moratorium'" , March 14, 2011
  46. ↑ Merkel's nuclear moratorium: seven nuclear power plants will be taken offline for the time being - faz.net of March 15, 2011: "Merkel's nuclear moratorium: seven nuclear power plants will be taken offline for the time being."
  47. ↑ tagesschau.de ( Memento from March 16, 2011 in the Internet Archive )
  48. ^ ARD broadcast ( memento of March 17, 2011 in the Internet Archive ), “Can the government just decide?” Of March 16, 2011, last accessed on March 16, 2011
  49. ↑ Legal experts consider the shutdown of the nuclear power plant to be unconstitutional without a change in the law, beck-aktuell-Redaktion, Verlag CH Beck, accessed on March 17, 2011
  50. ^ Zeit-Online , March 17, 2011
  51. ↑ Press release of the SPD parliamentary group from March 15, 2011
  52. ^ Spiegel Online , March 16, 2011
  53. ↑ - ( Memento from August 23, 2011 in the Internet Archive )
  54. ↑ - ( Memento from October 21, 2013 in the Internet Archive )
  55. ↑ Ethics committee for secure energy supply established ( Memento of April 3, 2011 in the Internet Archive ), bundesregierung.de, March 22, 2011.
  56. ↑ Sueddeutsche Zeitung of March 23, 2011: Atomic policy and state elections Brüderle: Nuclear power moratorium is just election campaign tactics
  57. ↑ Energy summit in the Chancellery Lightning nuclear phase-out - faz.net April 15, 2011
  58. ^ Draft of the government coalition to amend the Atomic Energy Act (Bundestag printed paper 17/6070), PDF
  59. ^ Öko-Institut : Statement , November 20, 2000
  60. ↑ Neue Energie: “Atomic Provisions - The Bank of Electricity Corporations” , April 1999. The billions were already criticized in 1991 by the Deregulation Commission .
  61. ↑ Eurosolar : “Extension of the service life of nuclear power plants makes tax-free provisions finally unacceptable” , August 17, 2005
  62. ↑ European Court of Justice : "Judgment of November 29, 2007 - C-176/06 P." , on: lexetius.com
  63. ↑ Bundestag: "Nuclear provisions amount to 27.5 billion euros" ( Memento from July 21, 2012 in the web archive archive.today ), June 8, 2010
  64. ↑ a b c d e Council of Economic Experts for Environmental Issues : "Commentary on Environmental Policy No. 8" , September 15, 2010, last accessed on February 24, 2011
  65. ↑ spiegel.de August 1, 2011: The incident. - Bundestag President Norbert Lammert has long been considered the gray mouse of politics. Today he is fighting against the loss of importance of Parliament and is a vehement critic of the Chancellor.
  66. ↑ Focus on the energy market - nuclear energy - special edition for the 2010 annual edition (PDF; 2.1 MB; p. 10) BWK DAS ENERGIE-FACHMAGAZIN, May 2010, accessed on May 27, 2015 .
  67. ↑ a b c Holger Ludwig, Tatiana Salnikova and Ulrich Waas: Load changing capabilities of German NPPs. (PDF 2.4 MB p.2, 7) International Nuclear Energy Journal, atw Volume 55 (2010), Issue 8/9 August / September, archived from the original on July 10, 2015 ; Retrieved October 26, 2014 .
  68. ^ Matthias Hundt, Rüdiger Barth, Ninghong Sun, Steffen Wissel, Alfred Voss: Compatibility of renewable energies and nuclear energy in the generation portfolio - technical and economic aspects. (PDF 291 KB, page 3 (iii)) University of Stuttgart - Institute for Energy Economics and Rational Energy Use, October 2009, accessed on July 23, 2015 .
  69. ^ Written question from the MP Ludwig Wörner SPD from July 16, 2013 - Regulability of Bavarian nuclear power plants. (PDF; 15.1 KB) www.ludwig-woerner.de, July 16, 2013, archived from the original on May 24, 2016 ; accessed on May 27, 2015 .
  70. ↑ German Bundestag Printed Matter 17/882, Large request the SPD parliamentary group of 25 February 2010
  71. ↑ load change ability German NPP, Ludwig / Salnikova / Waas, Areva NP Erlangen, published in atw, born 55 (2010), No. 08/09 August / September.
  72. ↑ Volker Quaschning: Base load power plants: Krücke or Brücke In: Sonne Wind & Wärme 05/2010 pp. 10–15.
  73. ↑ atomsicherheit.de ( Memento from May 23, 2011 in the Internet Archive ).
  74. ↑ ARD magazine "kontraste" from July 15, 2010: Nuclear power - extended service life despite safety deficits
  75. ↑ Joachim Wagner: Close your eyes and through. - Unsettled rights, expropriations, more garbage - the extension of the running times of the nuclear power plants exacerbates the problems of disposal. In: The time. No. 38, September 16, 2010, p. 6.
  76. ↑ Government triples the garbage. - Experts expect more than 700 castors through the extensions of the nuclear power plant. The permits designate the Gorleben exploration shaft as a permanently planned repository for nuclear waste. In: Frankfurter Rundschau. September 7, 2010.
  77. ↑ Government triples the garbage . In: Frankfurter Rundschau . September 7, 2010. Retrieved December 1, 2010.
  78. ↑ Hazardous waste, hazardous waste and waste requiring special supervision . In: Federal Environment Agency . Retrieved January 20, 2011.
  79. ↑ Berliner Zeitung of September 7, 2010 , “Outrage over the extension of the term”, link last accessed on February 24, 2011
  80. ↑ www.bmu.de: Greenhouse gas emissions and avoidance costs of the nuclear, fossil fuel and renewable electricity supply . Working paper, March 2007. PDF, 20 pages
  81. ↑ GEMIS (Global Emissions Model of Integrated Systems) is a life cycle and material flow analysis model with an integrated database for energy, material and transport systems. Free download of the model etc. from www.iinas.org ( Memento from November 19, 2015 in the Internet Archive )
  82. ↑ "Thousands of people are forming human chains against nuclear power" , handelsblatt.com of March 12, 2011, last accessed on March 16, 2011
  83. ^ Website of the co-organizer .
  84. ↑ Petition: Nuclear Supply and Disposal - Compliance with the contracts to shut down nuclear power plants by 2023 .
  85. ↑ The petition has been under parliamentary scrutiny since October 22, 2010; Since then, German citizens can still sign it by letter or fax.
  86. ↑ Collection of signatures "CITIZENS AGAINST THE ATOMIC LOBBY"
  87. ↑ The majority of the population rejects the extension of the running time (survey by TNS Emnid for ZEIT) .
  88. ↑ The world status report on the nuclear industry 2009. With special consideration of economic issues (project no. UM0901290) (PDF; 4.2 MB)
  89. ↑ Mycle Schneider, Independent Expert, Paris, project management. Steve Thomas, Professor of Energy Policy, Greenwich University (UK). Antony Froggatt, Independent Expert, London. Doug Koplow, Director of Earth Track, Cambridge (USA)
  90. ↑ Duke Energy plans to build a nuclear power plant : In June 2009, the American utility Duke Energy announced that it intends to build a nuclear power plant in Piketon in the US state of Ohio.
  91. ↑ Claudia Kemfert, Thure Traber: Sustainable Energy Supply: Don't lose sight of the goal when building bridges . Weekly report of DIW Berlin No. 23/2010 of June 9, 2010 ( Memento of November 25, 2011 in the Internet Archive ) (PDF; 304 kB).
  92. ↑ a b Zeit-Artikel (2008): Minimal savings through longer nuclear power plants .
  93. ↑ Study refutes cheap electricity promises made by the nuclear giants on spiegel.de, June 11, 2010.
  94. ↑ Press release of January 17, 2010 ( memento of January 16, 2011 in the Internet Archive ): “BDI presents study on extending the life of German nuclear power plants” with a link to the original study, last accessed on February 25, 2011.
  95. ↑ Energy scenarios for an energy concept of the federal government ( memento of April 28, 2011 in the Internet Archive ), last accessed on February 25, 2011.
  96. ↑ Volker Quaschning: Pay twice? . Sonne Wind & Wärme 01/2011, pp. 12–16 .
  97. ↑ Extension of the term: Billions for the nuclear companies in zeit.de 9/2009
  98. ↑ 13. AtG , draft law of the government groups (CDU / CSU, FDP) in the German Bundestag (PDF; 149 kB)