The energy transition under the traffic lights: The Atom

The race against climate change is getting close.

For a long time the topic seemed far away in terms of time and space, one heard of melting glaciers, sweating polar bears or South Sea islands threatened by flooding.

But since there has been more and more hot summers and floods in this country too, awareness of dangers has increased and with it the willingness to do something about climate change.

Be it through truancy or through the election of old and new eco-friendly parties: The “traffic light” wants to massively expand renewable energy sources and bring forward the phase-out of coal.

In addition to climate awareness, there is now a second, rather bitter realization in the public eye: that the switch to eco-energies has its price.

The electricity and gas tariffs are climbing everywhere in the special economic situation “after Corona”.

But they are particularly high in Germany, not least because of the EEG surcharge and the new CO2 tax.

Electricity is becoming more expensive at a time when industry, traffic and building heating are to be converted to electricity.

Ecological electrification of Germany

In addition, the lines from the windy north to the industrial regions are inadequate and the urban networks may not be able to withstand the planned heat pumps and charging stations. In the future, wind turbines will have to be located on two percent of the land area, and the existing ones already lead to resistance. How far from reality the exploratory paper is, is shown in the formulation, the solar regulations for new buildings served as an economic stimulus program for the craft. But that has more than enough to do anyway and can therefore demand almost any price without any state aid.

Even if the next government managed to accelerate the energy transition, ecological electrification of Germany, including “green” hydrogen production, will not succeed.

At least not within just eight years of the planned phase-out from coal, which will contribute a third to electricity production.

Nuclear power supplies a further eleven percent, but that will be over next year.

Weighing the advantages of nuclear energy against the disadvantages

The SPD, Greens and FDP now admit that without conventional generation, even if everything is running optimally for green electricity. In the exploratory paper they announce the construction of new gas-fired power plants. At the latest then the absurd plans of the “progressive coalition” become apparent: It wants to shut down established fossil fuel power plants, most of which run on domestic lignite, in order to open new fossil fuel power plants, which increase the dependence on foreign countries, in particular on Russia. How volatile gas prices are and how big Moscow's energy power is now, that too becomes evident in these weeks.

There is a more suitable "transition technology" than gas, which was called that long before: nuclear energy.

Their energy efficiency, the “harvest factor”, is much higher than that of renewables, and their carbon footprint is much better than that of coal and gas.

Nuclear power plants also run in "dark lulls", can stand where the need arises, and they would be able to produce huge amounts of hydrogen without CO2.

Of course, nuclear power has its pitfalls, especially the radiation risk and waste disposal.

But, as with all modern achievements, these must be weighed against the advantages.

Underestimated chemical production hazard

We agree with former BASF boss Jürgen Hambrecht that the dangers posed by climate change are much greater than those of nuclear power. Nobody would think of banning the production of chemicals because it produces poisons. The world's largest underground landfill for hazardous waste, Herfa-Neurode, is located in the middle of Hesse, but is far less known and controversial than Gorleben. The worst chemical catastrophe - much more serious than the meltdown in Fukushima - occurred in 1984 in Bhopal, India, with up to 25,000 deaths.

Nuclear power is far from over.

Great Britain and France have only just announced the construction of new reactors, with a sound reference to climate protection and security of supply.

Germany, however, basks in the dubious reputation of being the only industrialized country that has abandoned both nuclear and coal energy at the same time.

The previous governments have not thought this path through to the end.

If the future coalition were really interested in climate protection in connection with maintaining prosperity, competitiveness and a reliable energy supply, then it would of its own accord enter into the discussion about nuclear power.