From Klimanachrichten

By KlimaNachrichten Editor

Monthly newsletter from Fritz Vahrenholt

As the chart above shows, global mean temperatures fell significantly in October compared to September. The average warming over the last 40 years was 0.15 degrees Celsius per decade, which would correspond to 1.5 degrees in 100 years.

Two small dark doldrums and the power supply reaches its limits

From 2.11 to 8.11 and from 10.12 to 13.12, the electricity supply from renewable energies collapsed in Germany. A general weather situation typical of winter, with a lull in wind and minimal solar radiation at the same time, led to supply shortages, high electricity imports and exploding electricity prices. At times, more than 20,000 MW, more than a quarter of Germany’s electricity demand, had to be imported. Electricity prices rose tenfold (93.6 €ct/kWh). Companies that did not have long-term contracts had to stop production. Wolfgang Große Entrup, Managing Director of the German Chemical Industry Association (VCI): “It is desperate. Our companies and our country cannot afford fair-weather production. We urgently need power plants that can safely step in.”

The cause: The traffic light government and the previous Merkel governments had shut down 19 nuclear power plants (30% of Germany’s electricity demand) and on April 1, 2023, alone, 15 coal-fired power plants went off the grid. €4.35 billions of taxpayers’ money in decommissioning premiums was distributed to RWE and LEAG (East Germany). In January 2025, RWE’s Weisweiler power plant will be taken off the grid. In January, of all times, when electricity consumption is highest in Germany and France may be able to deliver little. This is because France is the most heat-sensitive country in Europe, and even small temperature fluctuations have an impact on electricity consumption due to the large-scale use of electric heating systems. 1 degree Celsius less and consumption in France increases by 2400 megawatts!
But Germany’s failed energy policy of shutting down secured power is now also leading our neighbors into economic difficulties.

Southern Norway, southern Sweden, Austria, Holland had electricity prices similar to ours during the dark doldrums (see graph above, the figures are in €/MWh, to convert to €ct/kWh you have to divide by 10).

Denmark, whose electricity supply is also based on wind power (56%), also exacerbated the malaise there by importing electricity from Scandinavia.
Norway’s energy minister of the center-left government, Terja Aasland, wants to cut the power cable to Denmark and renegotiate the electricity contracts with Germany. He is responding to the demands of the right-wing Progress Party, which has been calling for this for a long time and is likely to win the next elections. The price infection from the south must be stopped, according to the Progress Party.

Swedish Energy Minister Ebba Busch was even more explicit: “It is difficult for an industrial economy to rely on the goodwill of the weather gods for its prosperity.” And directly to Habeck’s Green policy: “No political will is strong enough to override the laws of physics – not even Mr. Habeck’s.”
In addition, it is often forgotten that wind turbines consume electricity when they are stationary or shut down. This is because all technical components (oil pumps, fans, controls, etc.) must remain in operation even at a standstill. Vestas specifies an electricity consumption of 55,000 kWh per year at a standstill for a 4.2 MW plant. During production times, the system supplies itself with electricity. But it is almost at a standstill on 120 days of the year. If we assume an average self-consumption of 40,000 kwh per year of all German plants, we arrive at 1.2 terawatt hours, the generation of a medium-sized gas-fired power plant To transfer it to our dark doldrums: in order to supply the wind turbines, a power plant with about 400 MW would have to run or the same output would have to be imported for days to prevent the wind power plants from drowning.

The election program of the CDU – no significant change to be expected

Today we are devoting ourselves solely to the election program of the CDU, as it is in all likelihood the program of the future chancellor to be introduced into a coalition with the SPD or the Greens.

In short, the energy and climate section of the CDU election program is a complete disappointment for those who deal with the energy policy reality of life for companies and citizens.

There is no naming of the causes of the current energy crisis, neither the horrendous subsidies for renewable energies from the federal budget (€20 billion), nor the massively rising grid costs, which are a consequence of the fluctuations of wind and solar power, nor the excessively high electricity prices, which lead to de-industrialisation, are discussed.
Instead, a business as usual:

“The provisions of the Climate Protection Act (the traffic light, author) we have our sights firmly set on binding climate neutrality by 2045.” The Union has renounced the courage of the FDP to at least adapt the Climate Protection Act to the (flawed) demand of the Federal Constitutional Court for climate neutrality in 2050. Instead: “We want to significantly expand renewable energies” and “We will drive forward the climate-friendly production of electricity and hydrogen.”

Anyone looking for statements on CO2 capture in coal-fired power plants will be just as disappointed as those who expect a statement on the production of domestic natural gas (shale gas) in northern Germany and the North Sea.
The climate bonus (partial refund of the CO2 levy) can be found in the program as with the Greens.
Particularly annoying is the statement “We stand by our commitments to global climate finance and responsibility in international cooperation.” This pledge has just been tripled to 18 billion by Ms. Baerbock at the World Climate Conference in Baku. So that’s what the CDU/CSU wants, too. Noteworthy.

Overall, when reading the energy and climate policy part of the program, one gains that this part should be formulated in a dockable way for the Greens. Apart from the demand to enable research into four- or fifth-generation nuclear power technologies, there is no programmatic statement that would lead to difficulties with the Greens. Remarkably, the recommissioning of the remaining nuclear power plants is missing from the adopted version of the programme. That would have been the predetermined breaking point with the Greens. But everyone knew anyway that the assurance to bring back existing nuclear power plants from the party, whose representatives in the governments of Schleswig-Holstein, Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg helped to carry out the demolition as quickly as possible, was worth nothing.

So, it is understandable that the same hubris of the Greens, that Germany must save the world in terms of climate policy, is reflected in the CDU program: “Germany has one percent of the world’s population, 2 % of the CO2 problem (wrong dear CDU, it’s only 1.5 %, the author). But we want to contribute 20% to the solution… Germany must become the lead market for hydrogen technologies.” This is already strange: At times, Germany cannot even secure its own electricity supply and is dependent on electricity imports for up to 20%, but in addition to the electrification of transport and heat, it is also supposed to turn electricity into hydrogen. Those who want to finally put an end to Germany’s industry are relying on hydrogen, which is four times more expensive, like the Greens and the SPD and now also the CDU.
The expansion of cross-border electricity trade is to help with this.

Probably not everyone in the CDU/CSU leadership has noticed that Norway’s energy minister and Sweden’s energy minister have threatened to cut ties with Germany because in times of shortage we are also putting an extreme strain on their electricity price system through expensive electricity trading.

So, this is what the CDU/CSU energy policy program looks like in its purest form. It is easy to imagine what the black-red or black-green government programme will look like. We will see the debt brake lifted, because the Germany fund of the Greens and the SPD wants to be filled. For example, for the Greens’ demand that the grid costs of the transmission grids be covered by the state. That’s easily €38 billion per year, so €150 billion in the election period. In any case, the SPD and CDU are on the same path of having the grid costs borne by the taxpayer, instead of problematizing the failed energy policy on the basis of fluctuating, uncompetitive renewable energies, which are finally corrected in massively rising grid costs, the taxpayer is being called upon to pay new billions in debt.
There are certainly also good approaches in the Union programme, for example on tax policy; but in energy and climate policy, the clear motto was: do not decide anything that hinders the continuation of green policy with Chancellor Merz.

I wish you all a blessed Christmas season and a Happy New Year
,
Fritz Vahrenholt