Germany's Ambitious Plan; Will US be Left Behind?

In an article titled Germany's Unlikely Champion Of a Radical Green Energy Path by Christian Schwägerl (See May 9th edition of Environment 360) outlined the benefits and risks of Chancellor Merkel's plan to eliminate all nuclear power while simultaneously cutting CO2 emissions.

Historically, Chancellor Merkel has been a staunch supporter of nuclear energy. In the 1980's she worked in East Germany as a quantum chemist "examining the probability of events in the subatomic domain. Her years of research instilled in her the conviction that she has a very good sense of how likely events are, not only in physics but also in politics. Opponents of nuclear energy were 'bad at assessing risks,' she told me in the 1990s."

In Chancellor Merkel's view the Chernobyl accident was due to soviet inefficiency not technological problems. The March accident at Fukushima radically changed her opinion. Japan is technologically highly advanced. If this can happen in Japan, then the probabilities are much higher than previously thought that something unexpected can cause a problem at nuclear facilities in other technologically advanced societies.

In addition the, "Chancellor now says she wants to slash the use of coal, speed up approvals for renewable energy investments, and reduce CO2 emissions drastically."

Norbert Röttgen Germany's environment minister said "Merkel's big bet is that environmental technology will be one of Germany's most important sources of income. Already, the country's share in the green-tech world market is 16 percent, which means billions of Euros in business. Renewable energy has generated 300,000 'green collar' new jobs in the past decade." Big companies like Siemens and Bosch are determined to become "green multinationals." Thousands of small- and medium-sized technology companies see green technology as an important part of their business and investment strategy."

The change does not come without risks.

Costs: Consumers in Germany pay about 5 U.S. cents per kilowatt hour as a surcharge to finance the feed-in tariffs, which enable owners of wind turbines or geothermal installations to sell renewably generated electricity back to the grid at favorable rates.

However, mass deployment is expected to drive down costs. Instead of spending billions to import energy Germany will be paying their local green-tech work force. Energy independence and a decentralized power grid also brings greater security.

Power Grid: "Experts estimate that more than 4,000 kilometers of new "eco-electricity highways" are necessary to connect renewable power plants to consumers and avoid power outages. Storing green electricity when the wind is blowing strongly or when there is ample sunlight is an unsolved challenge."

Environmental concerns: "The construction of offshore wind parks has been found to harm the ears of the harbor porpoise, a small whale species that is protected by law in Europe. Toxicologists are worried about dangerous level of cadmium, a heavy metal, in photovoltaic cells that might poison firefighters and create disposal problems in the future. And environmentalists are worried that the expansion of cornfields will dry out peaty soils, leading to greenhouse gas emissions, and be harmful for biological diversity. Germany would also have to rely more on natural gas, a fossil fuel, in the intermediate term if nuclear power will be phased out."

The benefits and challenges of converting to renewable energy in Germany are not that different from the challenges in the US. The political climate in the US is very different.

Efforts here to develop a national energy policy that would significantly cut carbon emissions are often stymied by special interests that influence legislation through lobbying. Unlike Germany the Obama administration sees nuclear energy as a necessary part of an overall energy policy.

The benefit of being a slow adopter is that the US can observe and learn from what transpires in Germany. The unfortunate consequence of being slow to change is that the US misses an opportunity that may never come again to become a world leader in green technology exports.

Allowing Germany, China and Denmark to take the lead means fewer jobs here in the US and a continuation of the trade deficit.