As Germany prepares to shut down its last three nuclear reactors on April 15th, the long-standing debate surrounding the country’s nuclear energy policy has been rekindled. Critics from the government coalition party FDP and opposition parties have voiced concerns about the phase-out, which has been met with skepticism from some scientists, industries, and citizens. Government ministers have responded, asserting that the calls to reconsider the nuclear phase-out are primarily politically motivated and that power supply security, price stability, and climate targets will not be negatively impacted by the decision, which has garnered broad political support.
The penultimate week of the technology’s usage in Germany has been used by supporters and opponents of the country’s nuclear power phase-out to highlight their various positions. With the decommissioning of the last three plants imminent, the government ministers for the environment, Steffi Lemke, and for the economy and climate action, Robert Habeck, have confirmed the phase-out will proceed as planned. “Germany ends the age of nuclear power,” declared the Green Party ministers. They assured that the closure of around four gigawatts of power generation capacity, which made up approximately five percent of electricity production in 2022, would not jeopardize energy supply security.
Initially scheduled to be completed by the end of 2022, the phase-out was extended by about three months due to the European energy crisis caused by Russia’s war on Ukraine. Chancellor Olaf Scholz of the Social Democrats (SPD) granted the remaining reactors a runtime extension to ensure adequate power generation capacity throughout the winter. Given the current state of uncertainty in energy policy, critics from the FDP, opponents of the conservative CDU/CSU alliance, and business organizations have claimed that the phase-out is still unwise. They have called for a further extension or placing the plants into a security reserve before dismantling begins.
A group of prominent international scientists, including Nobel laureates and esteemed climate researchers, penned an open letter to Chancellor Scholz urging a delay in the phase-out and the continued operation of the remaining plants “in the interest of the citizens of Germany, Europe and the world.” They claimed that the three power plants could supply over 10 million German households with electricity, reducing the demand for coal-fired power plants and saving up to 30 million tons of CO2 per year.
Several surveys, including one by public broadcaster ARD, indicated that a majority of citizens also oppose the phase-out at this stage and would prefer another limited extension. However, one of the remaining nuclear plant operators stated at the end of last year that further extensions are technically infeasible due to a lack of fuel rods, staff shortages, and pending safety checks. Lemke, Germany’s environment minister, stated that the nuclear phase-out will make Germany safer, saying that “nuclear power’s liabilities ultimately can’t be controlled.” She emphasized that the country must now focus on dismantling old reactors and safely storing highly radioactive nuclear waste.
As Germany enters a new era of energy generation, Lemke urged continued efforts to expand renewable power sources. She dismissed calls from FDP policymakers to revisit the phase-out decision, stating that they lack legal basis and are “rather politically driven.” Lemke also noted that renewables have become the most cost-effective form of power production, which should alleviate concerns about rising prices following the phase-out.
Economy and climate action minister Habeck emphasized the government’s legal obligation to complete the phase-out based on the nuclear exit law, which was established by a CDU/CSU and FDP coalition after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan. He promised that the “massive expansion” of sources of clean energy in the upcoming years, along with additional LNG import capacity, upgraded transmission grids, and other measures, would preserve the security of the energy supply. “By 2030, we aim to generate 80 percent of our electricity in Germany using renewables,” Habeck stated. Analyses conducted by transmission grid operators and the Federal Network Agency (BNetzA) have confirmed that the transition will not compromise the security of supply.
A study by consulting firm Enervis, commissioned by the nuclear-skeptical environmental NGO Greenpeace, found that the runtime extension granted at the end of last year was not necessary to ensure power supply security. According to Tim Höfer, an analyst at Enervis, “the already reduced power production of the three nuclear reactors may have been substituted with any readily accessible gas-fired power plants at any given time.” He added that the extension had a negligible impact on gas savings and national consumption, which decreased by only about 0.3 percent. Furthermore, the reactors did not meaningfully contribute to carbon emissions reduction. “Fossil power plants produced about 2.4 terawatt hours less electricity thanks to the additional nuclear power in the grid. However, the corresponding CO2 emissions only decreased by 0.2 percent of total emissions,” Höfer said.
As Germany prepares to close the final chapter on nuclear power, the focus now shifts to expanding renewable energy sources and addressing the long-term challenges of dismantling reactors and safely storing nuclear waste. Despite the ongoing debate, the government remains committed to moving forward with its ambitious renewable energy goals and transitioning to a safer, more sustainable energy future.
