Tilmann's Blogging
October 2, 2009
New government - outdated energy policy?
Germany held its federal election last Sunday. The result was not much of a surprise: The historical demise of the Social Democratic Party and a considerable rise of the libertarian Free  Democratic Party have led us to a new government. Chancellor Angela Merkel  (Christian Democrats) will stay on but now with the latter instead of the former as coalition partner.

Naturally, a  new government brings shifts in policy. Now, shortly before the Copenhagen  climate summit, nothing less than Germany’s leadership position in the shift towards green energy could be at stake. One of the big differences between the new governing parties and the new opposition lies in their views on the future role of nuclear energy. The background: In 2000, after long negotiations with the nuclear energy industry, the Social Democrat-Green Party government reached a nuclear phase out consensus accroding to which the last nuclear plant will go offline in 2023.[1]

The new, explicitly pro nuclear government is now challenging this consensus. It would be one thing to give in to the nuclear lobby a bit by granting them a few more years operating time, but quite another to throw the whole consensus out the window by allowing the construction of new nuclear plants. Just this is what a recently leaked report commissioned by – surprise, surprise – the Christian Democrat Science Minister recommends.[2] The report was completed in June but kept secret due to concerns it might influence election results.[3] Also worrying is that the Economics Ministry is investing more than one billion Euros to conduct research on the newest nuclear technology abroad.[4] That the future does not bode well for renewables with the new government became clear the day after the elections: The markets responded with rising “nuclear” stocks and falling “solar” stocks.[5]

With the upcoming Copenhagen negotiations and the threat that climate change represents for humanity, it is imperative that Germany expands, not reduces, its leadership role in the shift towards a renewable energy future. Building new nuclear plants would go in the exact opposite direction. Energy expert Gregory Unruh wrote how carbon investments “lock us into” a carbon-intensive development path.[6] In the same fashion, nuclear investments lock us into a nuclear path. Besides security and safety issues, the main problem here is that nuclear sucks up investments that would otherwise flow into renewables. Once a plant of any energy type has been built, it will supply energy for several decades, during which one is locked into that energy type. With limited government – and for that matter private – resources for energy investments, policy influencing where these investments flow should be wisely chosen.

There is no single solution that will lead us to the desperately needed green energy shift, but there is one technology that should receive much more attention (and investment): Concentrating Solar Power, or CSP. In short, this technology works by reflecting (concentrating) sun beams onto a certain spot where the extremely high temperature is used to activate a turbine to produce electricity.

CSP is considered one of the renewable energy sources with the highest potential. The major reason is that CSP is a “proven technology with an industrial base”,[7] with the world’s first plant dating back to the 1980s in California, where installations have been expanded over time, as well as large-scale commercial plants in southern Spain.[8] Moreover, plants can reach a scale that most other renewables cannot compete with.[9] Another major competitive advantage over other renewables, especially photovoltaic and wind power, is the fact that CSP plants can store energy for use during the night or cloudy periods. They thus provide a reliable electricity supply. Needless to say, there are no radioactive waste or major safety issues with CSP.

Just as nuclear power does, CSP requires substantial government support. However, a major difference between non-renewables, such as nuclear, and renewables, particularly CSP, is that for the latter costs fall as time passes due to economies of scale and maturing technology. Rather than a subsidy, support for CSP should be seen as an investment into Germany’s future. The respected German DLR writes that CSP “will be competitive with mid-load fossil fuel plants within the next 15 years.”[10] For a graph showing (projections) of cost (in euro-cents) and capacity for CSP, see Figure 1. These projections are based on the status quo; the right government incentives would accelerate progress.




Figure 1 - Solar electricity cost of concentrating solar power plants and installed capacity.[11]


The best example of how seriously the private sector takes CSP is the simply staggering Desertec project initiated by the Club of Rome and run by a consortium of mainly German companies. The plan is to construct CSP plants of unprecedented scale in North Africa, which would supply 15% of Europe’s energy need by 2050.[12]

Besides providing a climate friendly source, a positive side effect would be the creation of stabilizing mutual interdependence not based on fossil fuels between the Middle East-North Africa region and the EU, as well as employment in the southern countries. Additionally a clean power source would be provided for the desert countries to desalinate water to counter the looming water crisis there.[13] See the map on the top of this page for the desert areas required to power different regions.

As Desertec appropriately puts it in its Red Paper:[14] “The technology is ready to go, and investors are interested. What are we waiting for?” The right answer is provided as well: “changes are needed in government policies [,] laws and regulations to create a favourable commercial environment for Desertec developments.” It is in Germany’s utmost economic interest to support – not cripple – its promising renewables industry by powering up CSP.

In face of the upcoming Copenhagen climate negotiations, a clear signal of support for clean technologies is crucial if mitigation efforts by developed countries are to be taken seriously. If Germany does not push innovation and deployment of clean energies, who will? Investing into nuclear energy instead of high potential renewables such as CSP would mean nothing less than going backwards to the very outdated energy policies we thought we had gotten rid of for good.


I wrote this annotated op-ed for the course Climate Change Policy, which I am taking with Professor Kelly Sims Gallagher at The Fletcher School, Tufts University.

_________________________

[1] Loreck, Charlotte. “Atomausstieg und Versorgungssicherheit.” Umweltbundesamt [German Federal Environment Agency]. March 2008. P. 2-3.
[2] “Schavan soll brisante Atom-Studie verschweigen.” Die Welt. September 16, 2009. (See also here.)
[3] Ibid.
[4] “Guttenberg lässt neue Super-Reaktoren erforschen.” Spiegel Online. September 18, 2009. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/0,1518,649786,00.html.
[5] Schulz, Stefan. “Energiebranche erwartet gewaltige Umbrüche.” September 28, 2009. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from: http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/soziales/0,1518,651847,00.html.
[6] Unruh, Gregory C. 2000, “Understanding carbon lock-in,” Energy Policy, Vol. 28(12): 817-830 (BB).
[7] Pitz-Paal, Robert (of DRL, Germany’s aerospace research center and space agency). “Power from the Deserts for Sustainable Electricity and Water Supply”. Public lecture held at the ISU energy summer university, Falera, Switzerland, August 27, 2009. Slide 14.
[8] Taggart, Stewart. 2008, "Hot stuff: CSP and the Power Tower," Renewable Energy Focus, Vol. 9(3): 52.
[9] Ibid.
[10] See footnote 7, slide 34.
[11] See footnote 7, slide 21.
[12] DLR. “DESERTEC: Solar power from the desert.” July 30, 2009. Retrieved September 28, 2009 from: http://www.dlr.de/en/desktopdefault.aspx/tabid-5885/9548_read-18787.
[13] Desertec Foundation. “Red Paper - An Overview of the Desertec Concept.” 2nd ed., 2009. Pp. 4-13.
[14] Idem. P. 9.

Labels: , , , , ,