German statistics for renewables
In 2011, Chancellor Merkel made the mistake of thinking that the sudden shutdown of eight of 17 nuclear reactors would not destabilize the power market. Since then, some critics of her decision have made a similar mistake – they take the temporary effects of those shutdowns as representative of the switch to renewables. A long-term perspective shows what is really happening.
Over at Nature, a new article once again attempts to describe what is happening in Germany and misses the mark in a number of respects – but don't worry, I'm not going to list them again here. My response is actually in the comments on that website.
There is one thing I do not cite there, however, and that's the claim that "renewables supplied more than one-quarter (sic) of Germany's gross electricity needs." The exact figure, as you can see from the first sentence in this official press release in English from the German Environmental Ministry, is 22.9 percent – up from 20.5 percent in 2011 and 17.1 percent in 2010. That's an increase of 5.8 percentage points (equivalent to 33 percent growth) in two years.
In fact, the share of "gross electricity" is misleading anyway. The difference between gross and net here is that power plants consume a chunk of the electricity they produce internally. What matters for consumers is really net power production, not gross. So if we factor out the direct consumption of electricity by power plants, the share of renewables increases by a few percentage points.
Those wishing to delve deeper into the data can start with this extensive PDF in English from the Environmental Ministry.
One could be tempted to assume that the giant leap of 5.8 percentage points from 2010 to 2012 is somehow the result of the nuclear phaseout, but that's not the case, at least not for wind power and solar power. By German law, all of this electricity has to be purchased, even if conventional plants need to be ramped down. So the share of solar and wind power in Germany is a factor of installed capacity x wind and solar conditions. The requirement of must-run power plants is irrelevant; even if Germany still had all 17 nuclear plants, all of that wind and solar power would still have been purchased.
The difference would merely have been greater competition between baseload coal plants, especially nuclear and brown coal. It is hard to say what the outcome would've been.
But clearly, the real battle has begun in Germany. Conventional utilities argued for years that renewables would never amount to much, but now renewables are making large corporations increasingly unprofitable. Up to now, conventional energy firms have been fighting merely in terms of ideology. Now, they are fighting for their lives. (Craig Morris)
Quoting the article:
"There is one thing I do not cite there, however, and that's the claim that "renewables supplied more than one-quarter (sic) of Germany's gross electricity needs." The exact figure, as you can see from the first sentence in this official press release in English from the German Environmental Ministry, is 22.9 percent – up from 20.5 percent in 2011 and 17.1 percent in 2010. "
The official statistics on (electric-) energy usage are not ready yet, the numbers for 2012 still contain guestimations. See
http://www.ag-energiebilanzen.de/viewpage.php?idpage=1
Further the statisticans want to see trends by comparing like with like. This means that influences of weather patterns and economical situations (national gross productivity) have to be eliminated. 2012 was a bit colder in Germany and the economy grew a bit faster than in the previous long-term average. Which resulted in a 'higher-than-usual' energy consumption, irrespectivly of the actual pattern of electric power plant installations and production.
The exports of electric power reached an unusual high as well. Old cold bangers where brought into production to help out 'failing' neighbours. Final statistics will be out for publication via AG-Energiebilanzen hopefully around 6/2013
The "gross-electricity" production is important for taxation purposes. For calculating grid stability and energy efficiency it makes sense as well.
I'm not aware that the switch-off/phase-out of German atomic powerplants cause any problems to the amount of electricity produced and sold. Or that these powerplant are having any impact on the electricity prices.
Futures and spot prices at the power exchange are dropping further, they do so since the atomic phase-out started in fact.
http://www.rechargenews.com/wind/article1323222.ece
Switching-off Grafenrheinfeld (2015) and Gundremmingen (2017) are already priced in into the futures.
http://www.iwr.de/news.php?id=23433
With the last atomic powerplants being switched-off in 2022 for good we should see free wholesale electricity in Germany, well, if following the trend :)
----------
Quote:
" In 2011, Chancellor Merkel made the mistake of thinking that the sudden shutdown of eight of 17 nuclear reactors would not destabilize the power market "
There was no sudden shut down. The phase-out was planned long time before CDU/ Merkel got into power. It was decided by the German parliament in 2000 and turned into law the same year. 2 atomic power plants were already idled before Merkel got into power.
-----------------
Despite heavily sabotaging the democratic decision to wean-off fossile and atomic power (Merkels gouverment reduced the FIT severly, legally) the Germans keep installing
http://www.photon.de/news_archiv/details.aspx?cat=News_Archiv&sub=Wirtschaft&pub=1&parent=5390
as much as the Americans do
http://www.solarserver.de/solar-magazin/nachrichten/aktuelles/2013/kw15/photovoltaik-in-den-usa-grosse-solarstromanlagen-mit-insgesamt-537-mw-im-ersten-quartal-2013-in-betrieb-genommen.html
This process can't be stopped no more. Get into the way of progress and you're crushed:
http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/can-the-utility-industry-survive-the-energy-transition
http://www.eei.org/ourissues/finance/Documents/disruptivechallenges.pdf
Even dictatorical A- and H-bomb manufacturers see their only future in wind and sun:
http://www.rechargenews.com/wind/asia_australia/article1323154.ece
The last atomic power plant this company turned on in January 2013 took 28 years to build. Amortisation of investment, ROI : never
There's something funny about the reported stagnation in renewable energy for heating. The report mentions the 13% p.a. increase in in heat pumps, but they don't appear in the charts, which are limited to geothermal, solar thermal, and biofuels. This gives a misleading impression. Heat pumps are a way of leveraging electricity for space heating, displacing oil and gas. 22% of that electricity (and rising) is renewable, so the effect of more heat pumps is to increase the renewable share of heating significantly.
Gross electricity can be a helpful way of counting consumption of nuclear fuel rods, coal, and natural gas
Strange concept, this 'gross electricity' .. if it just adds the electricity used by electricity plants that make electricity. That sounds more like an inefficiency in their conversion from fuels to electricity than anything else. Is all electricity used by electronics in wind turbines, and electricity consumed by not always 100% efficient inverters also counted into 'gross electricity'? That seems reasonable. But it would make 'gross electricity' an even more obviously ridiculous measure.