The FDP wants to let the nuclear power plants run longer. But the Green Habeck sets the direction. He declares himself to be non-partisan on the issue and calls for a definitive end in April. But not all arguments are as objective as the Economics Minister claims.
In a nocturnal tour de force over the weekend, the traffic light parties cleared up the disputed topic of relief package 3 and, according to their own statements, found a very good compromise. But the next conflict broke out as early as Monday evening: Federal Economics Minister Robert Habeck presented the results of another stress test and derived from this the recommendation to grant two of the three remaining nuclear power plants a lifetime extension to secure the power supply.
The Isar 2 and Neckarsulm power plants are to be kept in operation for an additional three and a half months until April 2023 as an emergency reserve. But then it should finally be over with the chapter on nuclear energy in Germany. After the FDP campaigned enthusiastically for an extension of nuclear power throughout the day, the conflict at the traffic light is unavoidable.
Habeck appears at the somewhat unusually late time of 6 p.m. in the federal press conference. The journalists of the print media and the evening news have some trouble capturing the minister's most important message. Due to the approaching printing times or existing broadcasting obligations, only very few have enough time to follow the complex justifications for the decision.
Habeck has a small armada of experts in tow: the bosses of the four companies and organizations commissioned with the "Special Analyzes Winter 2022/2023". They are intended to prove that the minister decided on this issue strictly on the basis of the facts and not on the basis of the party book. "What is necessary must be done. That is the only yardstick I have," says the Green politician, who is non-partisan and repeats this statement in different variations.
At first glance, the stress test presented seems to confirm - and the assembled journalists are only in very few cases energy market experts - that the electricity supply in Germany will be guaranteed in the coming winter even without nuclear power plants. "We have a high level of security of supply in Germany," Habeck notes with satisfaction and explains how bleak the chosen scenario is, after which security is no longer that far off. There are "very unlikely scenarios" in which there could be brief power outages. "We're not in a situation where we can hope for the best, we have to expect the worst," said Habeck.
And improbable doesn't mean impossible. And so even the bleakest scenario is based on premises that, taken by themselves, are already amazingly realistic: A particularly frosty winter like in 2012 and a failure of a quarter of the gas-fired power plants in southern Germany were assumed, plus a continuous electricity price of 300 euros per megawatt hour (which had recently reached 350 euros), furthermore that the many French nuclear power plants, which are currently not available due to technical problems or a lack of cooling water due to low levels in the rivers, are not returning to the grid and that coal-fired power plants are also not doing so due to persistently low levels sufficient coal can be supplied.
In short: the extreme situation of this summer meets an extremely cold winter and all this without reducing consumption. In this scenario, the experts determine a shortfall in demand for three to twelve hours in Germany, with a peak of seven to eight gigawatts of electricity missing. That would correspond to the electricity needs of more than seven million people, explains Werner Götz from the transmission system operator TransnetBW.
In order to cope with such bottleneck situations, national electricity markets can exchange up to a certain amount with each other (so-called redispatch). According to the stress test, at least 5.1 gigawatts of electricity from abroad would be needed to compensate for the shortcomings in the tested crisis scenarios. If the three nuclear power plants, Isar 2, Neckarsulm and Lingen near Emden remain in operation, they would only reduce the crisis requirement by 0.5 gigawatts to 4.6 gigawatts. The authors of the stress test therefore primarily recommend other means of organizing this missing quantity.
Habeck also sees the numbers on his side when it comes to the contribution of the three nuclear power plants to reducing gas consumption. In order to reduce gas consumption in Germany by 0.09 percent, the continued use of "high-risk nuclear power technology is disproportionate". And this statement, correct as it may be, is political after all. In fact, Habeck has all sorts of things on his side. For example, that the nuclear power plants have been running without the prescribed periodic safety inspection for a long time and have recently only been superficially checked for their safety. Such deep checks would also not be feasible within the remaining months until mid-April. The question of "high risk" is answered very differently by the FDP, for example.
In addition, the invited experts do not use this term either. Stefan Kapferer from the transmission system operator 50Hertz admits that the experts also recommended the continued operation of the third power plant in Lingen. Although that would not have helped to avoid power outages because there are no threats of shortages in the north, it would have contributed to a higher base load. The risk-benefit assessment that Habeck made was "a political decision," says Kapferer. FDP and Union will have heard it.
