Slashdot Mirror
Germany To Phase Out Coal Use By 2038, Says Report (abs-cbn.com)
Germany has laid out a $91 billion plan to phase out its use of coal by 2038, a government-appointed commission said Saturday. "Under the plan, half of the up to $91 billion will go to the regions shuttering plants in the west and east of the country, while the other half will be spent on preventing electricity prices from rising," ABS-CBN News reports. From the report: The commission agreed to the deadline after months of bitter wrangling as pressure mounts on Europe's top economy to step up its commitment to battling climate change. The panel, consisting of politicians, climate experts, unions and industry figures from coal regions, announced the deal after a final marathon session ended on Saturday morning. The commission's findings will now be passed on to the government, which is expected -- barring a surprise -- to follow the recommendations of the panel it set up. The plan will be discussed at a meeting between Chancellor Angela Merkel, Finance Minister Scholz and regional leaders on Thursday, national news agency DPA said.
Several plants using lignite or brown coal, which is more polluting than black coal, would be closed by 2022. Other plants will follow until 2030, when only 17 gigawatts of Germany's electricity will be supplied by coal, compared to today's 45 gigawatts. The last plant will close in 2038 at the latest, the commission said, but did not rule out moving this date forward to 2035 if conditions permit. The affected regions, where tens of thousands of jobs directly or indirectly linked to brown- and black-coal energy production, will receive 40 billion euros as compensation over the next two decades. Two billion euros will also be spent each year over the same period to stop customers from facing rising electricity prices.
Several plants using lignite or brown coal, which is more polluting than black coal, would be closed by 2022. Other plants will follow until 2030, when only 17 gigawatts of Germany's electricity will be supplied by coal, compared to today's 45 gigawatts. The last plant will close in 2038 at the latest, the commission said, but did not rule out moving this date forward to 2035 if conditions permit. The affected regions, where tens of thousands of jobs directly or indirectly linked to brown- and black-coal energy production, will receive 40 billion euros as compensation over the next two decades. Two billion euros will also be spent each year over the same period to stop customers from facing rising electricity prices.
Although getting rid of coal is a nice effort from the standpoint of pollution, if you are truly serious about climate change, why is Germany getting rid of THIER use of coal.
I mean, whatever coal fired power plants they already have probably have really strict emission control equipment, right?
Meanwhile, what if you took 98 *billion* dollars and used that money all to improve the electrical power grid in India. From solar projects to simply putting CO2 and emission scrubbers on coal plants they have, would that not be a vastly more efficient use of money?
The whole point of the Paris accord was to shift money from rich to poor nations anyway. So why not make that shift a lot more direct, and actually focused on improving the worst emissions?
As it is the Germany effort just looks like virtue signaling that will have almost no real impact on worldwide CO2 levels.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The people making the decisions will be long gone by then, anything can happen.
If this was the US I'd agree with you since in the US you have a culture of electing Republicans who then tear down everything the Democrats did, them you elect the Democrats who tear down everything the Republicans did, then you elect the Republicans who tear down everything the Democrats did .... and repeat this ad infinitum in the expectation that eventually something will change for the better. However, this is German and here Liberals and conservatives can actually agree and work together on sensible policies. If the CDU (the conservatives) are willing to do this, the Social Democrats and Greens (aka. the evil liberals) will be even more willing to do it. Coal is a dead and uneconomical way of producing energy and it looks to me like the Germans have accepted that and moved on to technologies that have a future.
Germany is increasing its consumption of imported natural gas, mostly from Russia. The Nord Stream II pipeline is under construction at the moment, to bypass/supplement the trans-Ukranian pipeline currently feeding Western Europe as well as increasing supply capacity generally by about 55 billion cubic meters of gas a year. It's pretty certain that capacity will find eager customers in various European countries that are nominally pro-renewable but don't want to freeze to death in the dark.
Annual German carbon dioxide emission per capita went from 12.93 tonnes in 1995 to 8.88 in 2016. That is a reduction of 32% (Wikipedia)
Population increased from 77.619 million to 82.5 million during that time, so the relative total reduction is a bit less.
Still I wouldn't call that "hasn't made nearly any dent". Still, in the face of global warming, more effort is required; and keeping some nuclear reactors running a bit longer to shut down lignite power plants a bit earlier would have helped. But doing so would probably have been hard given the political climate - there seems to be a strong anti-nuclear sentiment among the population; on the other hand opposition to open-pit mining of lignite is counterbalanced by the jobs it creates, and thus support from unions and local politicians.
Emissions-wise, natural gas (0.20 g CO2 per Wh) is a much better energy source than coal (0.34 to 0.41 g CO2 per Wh). Also, gas power plants can be adjusted very quickly, making them particularly suitable to balance the varying output from wind and solar energy (both of which Germany has a lot of).
Uuuuh, how does that contradict what I am saying? You can look it up yourself. New coal stations: http://airclim.org/acidnews/ge...
Expanding coal mines: https://qz.com/1389135/germany...
Complete idiot.
Nonsense. Germany closed it's last hard coal mine in 2015 and electricity production from hard coal declined from 127 TWh in 2013 to 83 TWth in 2018. Lignite is still surface-mined and power production is more stable but also on decline (161 TWh in 2015 to 146 TWh in 2018).Source: https://www.ag-energiebilanzen... With this just announced plan, it is clear it is on it's way out.
Actual numbers on coal use for electricity production in Germany in TWh from 2008-2018
lignite: 150.6 145.6 145.9 150.1 160.7 160.9 155.8 154.5 149.5 148.4 146.0
coal: 124.6 107.9 117.0 112.4 116.4 127.3 118.6 117.7 112.2 93.6 83.0
I know it is an annoying inconvenience to look at actual data before having an opinion, for those who want to learn, the source is here:https://www.ag-energiebilanzen.de/ (PDF below "STROMMIX")
So basically very little change, with some of the 2018 numbers explained by unusually mild weather. Yeah, success that.
Interesting: that article mentions the coal plant Datteln: in Datteln 3 blocks were already shutoff in 2014. Construction of the fourth block began in 2007 but was haltet by court in 2013. Since then block 4 in Datteln is the only coal-plant "under construction" in whole western Europe! Uniper (the owner of the plant) is fighting to complete it, and maybe will be able to complete that plant - but it will be the only one.
Meanwhile Uniper shut off other plants in Shamrock (2013), Knepper (2014), Veltheim (2015) and Irsching (2016). New plants are not in sight!
So for "New Coal Stations" you cite an article that talks about (as the first example) a coal plant that's been in planning and construction for over a decade, and as of now (nearly 8 months after that article was written) still isn't commissioned and won't be for at least another year. Meanwhile, that project is to build a 4th unit to replace the three that were decommissioned years ago. Three out, one new. That's a net decrease innit?
The other examples are even dumber; A plant that was completed in 2013, one that was completed in 2015, and a plant that's been in construction since 2008 with no completion date yet.
I suppose the time travelers didn't succeed in telling the planners not to bother.
The article closes with a few paragraphs about a plant commissioned in 1996 that is nearing end of contract and presents it as an opportunity to replace it with something other than coal power.
So instead of "Germany is building new coal plants" your article just demonstrates that Germany has built coal plants - past tense - and that even some of those may never see operation. Forgive me if I'm not as convinced as you are on this point.
=Smidge=
It may not be a huge reduction, but a reduction of 46 TWh is in no way a little change.