Content deleted Content added
→Post-2022: Federal Audit Office report |
updated the information about coal phaseout from the coalition treaty Tags: Visual edit Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
(32 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{short description|Ongoing energy transition in Germany}}
{{Italic title}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=January 2024|cs1-dates=y}}
[[File:Schneebergerhof 01.jpg|thumb|Photovoltaic array and wind turbines at the Schneebergerhof wind farm in the German state of [[Rheinland-Pfalz]]]]
The {{langnf|de|'''Energiewende'''|energy turnaround|paren-left}} ({{IPA-de|ʔenɐˈɡiːˌvɛndə|pron|de-Energiewende.ogg}}) is the ongoing [[energy transition]] by [[Germany]] to a [[Low-carbon economy|low carbon]], environmentally sound, reliable, and affordable energy supply.<ref name="bmwi-and-bmu-2010">{{cite book |author1 = Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi) |author2 = Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) |title = Energy concept for an environmentally sound, reliable and affordable energy supply |date = 28 September 2010 |publisher = Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology (BMWi) |place = Berlin, Germany |url = http://www.bmwi.de/English/Redaktion/Pdf/energy-concept,property=pdf,bereich=bmwi,sprache=en,rwb=true.pdf |access-date = 1 May 2016 |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20161006040920/http://www.bmwi.de/English/Redaktion/Pdf/energy-concept%2Cproperty%3Dpdf%2Cbereich%3Dbmwi%2Csprache%3Den%2Crwb%3Dtrue.pdf |archive-date = 6 October 2016 }}</ref> The new system intends to rely heavily on [[renewable energy]] (particularly [[Wind power|wind]], [[photovoltaics]], and [[hydroelectricity]]), [[Efficient energy use|energy efficiency]], and [[energy demand management]].
Legislative support for the ''Energiewende'' was passed in late 2010 and included [[greenhouse gas]] (GHG) reductions of 80–95% by 2050 (relative to 1990) and a [[renewable energy]] target of 60% by 2050.<ref name="bmwi-2015-b">{{cite book|url=https://www.bmwi.de/Redaktion/EN/Publikationen/vierter-monitoring-bericht-energie-der-zukunft-kurzfassung.pdf|title=The Energy of the Future: Fourth "Energy Transition" Monitoring Report — Summary|date=November 2015|publisher=Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWi)|place=Berlin, Germany|access-date=18 November 2017}}</ref>
Germany had
Germany's
== Etymology ==
{{More citations needed section|date=August 2020}}
[[File:Biogas Photovoltaik Wind.jpg|thumb|The main renewable energy sources in Germany: [[Biomass (energy)|biomass]], [[wind energy]], and [[photovoltaics]]]]
The term ''Energiewende'' was first contained in the title of a 1980 publication by
▲[[File:Biogas Photovoltaik Wind.jpg|thumb|The main renewable energy sources in Germany: [[biomass]], [[wind energy]], and [[photovoltaics]]]]{{More citations needed section|date=August 2020}}The term ''Energiewende'' is regularly used in [[English language]] publications without being translated (a [[loanword]]).<ref name="jungjohann-and-morris-2014">{{cite book|last1=Jungjohann|first1=Arne|url=http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/files/file/German_Coal_Conundrum.pdf|title=The German coal conundrum|last2=Morris|first2=Craig|date=June 2014|publisher=Heinrich Böll Stiftung|location=Washington, DC, USA|quote=The term ''Energiewende'' – the country's transition away from nuclear power to renewables with lower energy consumption – is now commonly used in English.|access-date=7 October 2016}}</ref>
▲The term ''Energiewende'' was first contained in the title of a 1980 publication by the German [[Öko-Institut]], calling for the complete abandonment of nuclear and petroleum energy.<ref name="krause-etal-1980">{{cite book
| first1 = Florentin
| last1 = Krause
Line 38 ⟶ 37:
}}</ref><ref name="jacobs-2012">
{{cite journal|first=David|journal=Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review|last=Jacobs|number=4|pages=223–233|title=The German ''Energiewende'': history, targets, policies and challenges|volume=3|year=2012}} In support of the claim that Krause et al. (1980) was the first use of the term ''Energiewende''.</ref>{{rp|223}}
The most groundbreaking claim was that economic growth was possible without increased energy consumption.<ref>{{Cite web | url=https://book.energytransition.org/origin-term-energiewende | title=Origin of the term "Energiewende" | access-date=9 March 2017 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181021232116/https://book.energytransition.org/origin-term-energiewende | archive-date=21 October 2018 }}</ref> On 16{{nbsp}}February 1980, the German Federal Ministry of the Environment
''Energiewende'' designated a significant change in [[energy policy]]. The term encompassed a reorientation of policy from demand to supply and a shift from centralized to distributed generation (for example, producing heat and power in small co-generation units), which
In a broader sense,
{{cite web|access-date=14 June 2016|first=Henrik|language=de|last=Paulitz|title=Dezentrale Energiegewinnung — Eine Revolutionierung der gesellschaftlichen Verhältnisse|trans-title=Decentralized energy production — a revolution in social relations|url=http://www.ippnw.de/atomenergie/energiewende/artikel/de/dezentrale-energiegewinnung-eine-r.html|website=International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War (IPPNW)}}</ref> In the traditional energy industry, a few
== Status ==
[[File:Ghg-emissionsgrafik-trend-1990-2019-nach-ksg-einteilung.png|400px|right]]
The
In 2011, the Ethical Committee on Secure Energy Supply was tasked with assessing the feasibility of the nuclear phase-out and transition to renewable energy, and it concluded:<ref>{{Cite web|date=30 May 2011|title=Deutschlands Energiewende – Ein Gemeinschaftswerk für die Zukunft|url=https://www.nachhaltigkeitsrat.de/wp-content/uploads/migration/documents/2011-05-30-abschlussbericht-ethikkommission_property_publicationFile.pdf |website=Ethik-Kommission Sichere Energieversorgung}}</ref>
Line 55 ⟶ 54:
In 2019, Germany's [[Bundesrechnungshof|Federal Court of Auditors]] determined the program had cost €160 billion over the last 5 years and criticized the expenses for being "in extreme disproportion to the results." Despite widespread initial support, the program is perceived as "expensive, chaotic, and unfair", and a "massive failure" as of 2019.<ref name=":5">{{cite news|access-date=16 February 2021|date=13 May 2019|first1=Gerald|first2=Stefan|first3=Alexander|first4=Frank|language=en|last1=Traufetter|last2=Schultz|last3=Jung|last4=Dohmen|location=Hamburg, Germany|title=German failure on the road to a renewable future|url=https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-failure-on-the-road-to-a-renewable-future-a-1266586.html|work=Der Spiegel International}}</ref>
Russian fossil gas was perceived as a "safe, cheap, and temporary" fuel to replace nuclear power in the initial phase of ''Energiewende''
{{See also|Ostpolitik|Wandel durch Handel}}
Line 61 ⟶ 60:
=== Initial phase 2013–2016 ===
[[File:Energy transition scenario in Germany.png|thumb|Energy transition scenario in Germany from 2012]]
After the 2013 federal elections, the new [[Christian Democratic Union of Germany
As of 2013, Germany was spending €1.5 billion per year on energy research to solve the technical and social issues raised by the transition,<ref name="Schiermeier-2013">{{cite news|last=Schiermeier|first=Quirin|date=10 April 2013|title=Renewable power: Germany's energy gamble: an ambitious plan to slash greenhouse-gas emissions must clear some highly technical and economic hurdles|work=Nature|url=http://www.nature.com/news/renewable-power-germany-s-energy-gamble-1.12755|access-date=1 May 2016|doi=10.1038/496156a}}</ref> which are provided by the individual federal states, universities, and the government, which provided €400 million per year.<ref name=":0">{{Cite journal|last=Curry|first=Andrew|date=27 March 2019|title=Germany faces its future as a pioneer in sustainability and renewable energy|journal=Nature|language=en|volume=567|issue=7749|pages=S51–S53|doi=10.1038/d41586-019-00916-1|pmid=30918376|bibcode=2019Natur.567S..51C|doi-access=free}}</ref> The
Important aspects included ({{as of|2016|November|lc=yes}}):
Line 120 ⟶ 119:
| url = http://www.bmwi.de/English/Redaktion/Pdf/gesetzeskarte,property=pdf,bereich=bmwi2012,sprache=en,rwb=true.pdf
| access-date = 29 April 2016
| archive-date = 2016-10-06
}}</ref>▼
| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20161006040914/http://www.bmwi.de/English/Redaktion/Pdf/gesetzeskarte,property=pdf,bereich=bmwi2012,sprache=en,rwb=true.pdf
| url-status = dead
▲ }}</ref>
{{cite news
| title = Germany's energy transformation Energiewende
Line 130 ⟶ 132:
| access-date = 14 June 2016
}}</ref>
Producers have been guaranteed a fixed [[feed-in tariff]] for 20 years, guaranteeing a fixed income. Energy co-operatives have been created, and efforts were made to decentralize control and profits.
{{cite news
| first1 = Gunther | last1 = Latsch
Line 146 ⟶ 148:
Nuclear power plants were closed, and the existing nine plants were scheduled to close earlier than planned, in 2022.
The
{{cite news
| title = Troubled turn: Germany's national energy project is becoming a cause for disunion
Line 157 ⟶ 159:
}}</ref> In comparison, its neighbours (Poland, Sweden, Denmark and nuclear-reliant France) have some of the lowest [[cost]]s (excluding taxes) in the EU.<ref name="esIndu">[http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Electricity_price_statistics#Electricity_prices_for_industrial_consumers Electricity prices for industrial consumers] ''[[Eurostat]]'', October 2015</ref><ref>[http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/images/4/4f/Half-yearly_electricity_and_gas_prices_%28EUR%29.png Electricity prices (table)] ''[[Eurostat]]'', October 2016</ref>
On 1 August 2014, a revised [[German Renewable Energy Sources Act|Renewable Energy Sources Act]] entered into force.
Market redesign was perceived as a key part of the ''Energiewende''. The German [[electricity market]] needed to be reworked to suit.<ref name="agora-2013">
Line 169 ⟶ 171:
| access-date = 29 April 2016
}}</ref>
{{cite book
| author = Agora Energiewende
Line 179 ⟶ 181:
| access-date = 29 April 2016
}}</ref>
The German
{{cite book
| title = Making a success of the energy transition: on the road to a secure, clean and affordable energy supply
Line 199 ⟶ 201:
| url = http://www.agora-energiewende.de/fileadmin/Projekte/2015/Kohlekonsens/Agora_Kohlekonsens_KF_EN_WEB.pdf
| access-date = 29 April 2016
}}</ref> but as German minister of economy noted, "we cannot shut down both our nuclear and coal-fired power plants".<ref>{{Cite news|last=SPIEGEL|first=Melanie Amann, Gerald Traufetter, DER|title=The Climate Activist vs. the Economics Minister: 'My Generation Has Been Fooled' – DER SPIEGEL – International|url=https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/the-climate-activist-vs-the-economics-minister-my-generation-has-been-fooled-a-1258429.html|access-date=21 July 2020|newspaper=Der Spiegel|date=19 March 2019|language=en}}</ref> Coal comprised 42% of electricity generation in 2015.
{{cite book
| first = Volker | last = Quaschning
Line 213 ⟶ 215:
}}</ref>
The ''Energiewende'' is made up of various
{{cite book
| author = Agora Energiewende
Line 236 ⟶ 238:
| url = https://www.econstor.eu/dspace/bitstream/10419/108856/1/820492299.pdf
| access-date = 9 June 2016
}}</ref> As of 2019,
[[Efficient energy use|Energy efficiency]] plays a key but under-recognised role.<ref>{{cite book
Line 248 ⟶ 250:
| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160602080036/https://www.agora-energiewende.de/fileadmin/Projekte/2012/positive-effekte-energieeffizienz/Agora_ECF_RAP_System_Benefit_Study_short_version_web.pdf
| archive-date = 2 June 2016
}}</ref>
{{cite book
| author = Agora Energiewende
Line 269 ⟶ 271:
| doi = 10.1038/496156a
}}</ref>
The social and political dimensions of the ''Energiewende'' have been subject to study. Sebastian Strunz argues that the underlying technological, political and economic structures will need to change radically — a process
{{cite journal
| last = Strunz | first = Sebastian
Line 280 ⟶ 282:
| pages = 150–158
| doi = 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2014.01.019
| bibcode = 2014EcoEc.100..150S
| hdl = 10419/76875
| s2cid = 41888814
| url = http://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/34620
| hdl-access = free
}}</ref>
Eva Schmid, Brigitte Knopf, and Anna Pechan
{{cite book
| last1 = Schmid | first1 = Eva
Line 296 ⟶ 299:
}}</ref>
On 3 December 2014, the German
{{cite web
| title = National Action Plan on Energy Efficiency (NAPE): making more out of energy
Line 313 ⟶ 316:
The areas covered are the energy efficiency of buildings, energy conservation for companies, consumer energy efficiency, and transport energy efficiency. German industry is expected to make a sizeable contribution.
An official
* energy consumption fell by 4.7% in 2014 (from 2013) and at {{val|13132}}{{nbsp}}petajoules reached its lowest level since 1990
* renewable generation is the number-one source of electricity
Line 341 ⟶ 344:
=== Slowdown from 2016 ===
[[File:2018-01-GerPowerData-Changes-01.png|thumb|Electricity generation, demands and exports in Germany, 2003–2017]]
Slow progress on transmission network reinforcement
{{cite news
| first = Philip | last = Oltermann
Line 351 ⟶ 354:
| access-date = 13 October 2016
}}
</ref> The German cabinet
{{cite news
| first = Madeline | last = Chambers
Line 381 ⟶ 384:
| access-date = 8 November 2016
}}
</ref> In November 2016, Agora Energiewende reported on the impact of the
{{cite news
| title = Energiewende: What do the new laws mean?
Line 410 ⟶ 413:
</ref>
The 2016 [[German Climate Action Plan 2050|Climate Action Plan]] for Germany, adopted on 14{{nbsp}}November 2016, introduced sector targets for [[greenhouse gas emissions|greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions]].<ref name="bmub-2016a">{{cite book
| title = Klimaschutzplan 2050: Kabinettbeschluss vom 14. November 2016
| trans-title = Climate protection plan 2050: Cabinet decision of 14 November 2016
| language = de
| date = 14 November 2016
| publisher = Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reaktorsicherheit (BMUB)
| location = Berlin, Germany
| url = http://www.bmub.bund.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Klimaschutz/klimaschutzplan_2050_bf.pdf
| access-date = 17 November 2016
| archive-date = 2017-09-19
}}▼
| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20170919021410/http://www.bmub.bund.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Klimaschutz/klimaschutzplan_2050_bf.pdf
</ref><ref name="bmub-2016b">▼
| url-status = dead
▲ }}</ref><ref name="bmub-2016b">{{cite book
| title = Climate Action Plan 2050: Principles and goals of the German government's climate policy
| date = 14 November 2016
| publisher = Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz, Bau und Reaktorsicherheit (BMUB)
| location = Berlin, Germany
| url = http://www.bmub.bund.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Klimaschutz/klimaschutzplan_2050_kurzf_en_bf.pdf
| access-date = 17 November 2016
| archive-date = 2017-12-15
| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20171215072622/http://www.bmub.bund.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Klimaschutz/klimaschutzplan_2050_kurzf_en_bf.pdf
</ref> The goal for the energy sector is shown in the [[#table-climate-action-plan-targets|table]]. The plan states that the energy supply must be "almost completely decarbonised" by 2050, with renewables as its main source. For the electricity sector, "in the long-term, electricity generation must be based almost entirely on renewable energies" and "the share of wind and solar power in total electricity production will rise significantly". Notwithstanding, during the transition, "less carbon-intensive natural gas power plants and the existing most modern coal power plants play an important role as interim technologies".<ref name="amelang-etal-2016">▼
| url-status = dead
▲ }} This document is not an extract translated from the official plan.</ref> The goal for the energy sector is shown in the [[#table-climate-action-plan-targets|table]]. The plan states that the energy supply must be "almost completely decarbonised" by 2050, with
{{cite web
| first1 = Sören | last1 = Amelang
Line 470 ⟶ 475:
|}
The fifth monitoring report on the ''Energiewende'' for 2015 was published in December 2016. The expert commission which wrote the report warns that Germany will probably miss its 2020 climate targets and believes that this could threaten the credibility of the entire endeavour. The commission puts forward a number of measures to address the slowdown, including a flat national
| date = December 2016 | publisher = Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWi) | location = Berlin, Germany | url = http://bmwi.de/BMWi/Redaktion/PDF/Publikationen/fuenfter-monitoring-bericht-energie-der-zukunft,property=pdf,bereich=bmwi2012,sprache=de,rwb=true.pdf | access-date = 15 December 2016}}</ref>
=== After 2017 ===
[[File:V4 Web BOeLL-FF Energiewende (page 16 crop) jobs.jpg|thumb|Jobs in the renewable energy sector in Germany in 2018]]
Since 2017, it had become clear that the ''Energiewende'' was not progressing at the anticipated speed, with the
A 2018 European Commission case study report on the ''Energiewende'' noted 27% decrease in {{CO2}} emissions against the 1990 levels with a slight increase over the few preceding years and concluded achieving of the intended 40% reduction target by 2020 in unfeasible, primarily due to the "simultaneous nuclear phase-out and increased energy consumption".
In 2018 the slow-down of deployment of new renewable energy was partially attributed to high demand for land, which has been highlighted as a potential "downside" by a WWF report.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Land set to become "new currency" of Germany's energy transition – study|url=https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/land-more-precious-money-future-energiewende-audi-fined/land-set-become-new-currency-germanys-energy-transition-study|access-date=5 October 2021|website=Clean Energy Wire|language=en}}</ref>
Line 483 ⟶ 488:
{{See also|Surface power density}}
In March 2019, Chancellor Merkel formed a
As result of phasing out nuclear power and, in long term, coal, Germany declared increased reliance on [[fossil gas]].<ref name=":4">{{Cite web|title=Speech by Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel at the 49th World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos on 23 January 2019|url=https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en/news/speech-by-federal-chancellor-angela-merkel-at-the-49th-world-economic-forum-annual-meeting-in-davos-on-23-january-2019-1574188|website=Home Page|language=en|access-date=18 May 2020}}</ref>
Line 489 ⟶ 494:
{{Blockquote|text=We will have phased out nuclear energy by 2022. We have a very difficult problem, namely that almost the only sources of energy that will be able to provide baseload power are coal and lignite. Naturally, we cannot do without baseload energy. Natural gas will therefore play a greater role for another few decades. I believe we would be well advised to admit that if we phase out coal and nuclear energy then we have to be honest and tell people that we'll need more natural gas.|author=Angela Merkel|title=|source=Speech at 49th World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos on 23 January 2019}}
A similar statement was voiced by SPD MP [[Udo Bullmann]] who explained that Germany has to stick with fossil fuels as it's trying to replace both coal and nuclear "at the same time", while countries that rely on nuclear power have "easier task replacing fossil fuels".<ref>{{Cite web|last=Michalopoulos|first=Sarantis|date=19 March 2021|title=German MEP: Nord Stream 2 needs a 'European' perspective|url=https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/german-mep-nord-stream-2-needs-a-european-perspective/|access-date=19 March 2021|website=www.euractiv.com|language=en-GB}}</ref> In 2020 [[Agora Energiewende]] also declared a number of new fossil gas plants will be also required to "guarantee supply security as Germany relies more and more on intermittent renewable electricity".<ref>{{Cite web|date=22 April 2021|title=EU indecision over gas as green investment imperils supply security – German utilities|url=https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/eu-indecision-over-gas-green-investment-imperils-supply-security-german-utilities|access-date=25 April 2021|website=Clean Energy Wire|language=en}}</ref> In January 2019, Germany's Economy Minister [[Peter Altmaier]]
[[File:Energiemix Deutschland.svg|thumb|right|In the late 2010s, there starts to be a significant decline in the use of (brown) coal and therefore in emissions.]]
Line 497 ⟶ 502:
* reducing greenhouse gas emissions
The following climate goals
* increasing renewable energy share in the transport sector
* reducing primary energy consumption
* final energy productivity.
In 2020, a number of previously shut down [[Natural gas|fossil gas]] plants ([[Irsching Power Station|Irsching]] units 4 and 5) were restarted due to "heavy fluctuations of level of power generated from the wind and sun"<ref>{{Cite web|title=StackPath|url=https://www.uniper.energy/news/uniper-and-co-shareholder-decide-to-return-irsching-4-and-5-gas-power-plants-to-the-market/|access-date=28 May 2020|website=www.uniper.energy}}</ref> and a new [[Natural gas|fossil gas]] power plant was announced by RWE near the former [[Biblis Nuclear Power Plant|Biblis nuclear power plant]] shut down in 2017. The project is declared as part of "decarbonization plan" where renewable energy capacity is accompanied by fossil gas plants to cover for intermittency.<ref>{{Cite web|last=nicholasnhede|date=19 November 2020|title=RWE gas-fired plant to supply German nuclear decommissioning project|url=https://www.powerengineeringint.com/gas-oil-fired/rwe-gas-fired-plant-to-supply-german-nuclear-decommissioning-project/|access-date=19 November 2020|website=Power Engineering International|language=en-US}}</ref> In 2020, a new coal power plant unit, [[Datteln Power Station|Datteln]] 4, was also connected to the grid.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Proctor|first=Darrell|date=2 June 2020|title=Germany Brings Last New Coal Plant Online|url=https://www.powermag.com/germany-brings-last-new-coal-plant-online/|access-date=24 October 2021|website=POWER Magazine|language=en-US}}</ref> A new fossil gas power plant will be also opened from 2023 in [[Leipheim]], [[Bavaria]] to compensate for loss of power caused by "nuclear exit" in
In June 2021, professor {{Interlanguage link|André Thess|de}} from Stuttgart university published an open letter accusing [[Klaus Töpfer]] and [[Matthias Kleiner]], the authors of the 2011 Ethical Committee for Secure Energy Supply report that served as the scientific background of the "nuclear exit" decision, of disregarding the basic rules of scientific independence. The analysis promised that phase-out of nuclear energy and full transition to
High average amounts of wind in 2019 and 2020 were presented in Germany as a success of
Projections Report published in 2021 predicted that Germany will miss its 2030 target by 16
In October 2021, over 20 climate scientists and activists signed an open letter to the German
The new coalition formed after the [[2021 German federal election|2021 elections]] proposed earlier phase-out of coal and internal combustion cars by 2035, 65% energy generated from renewables by 2030 and 80% by 2040. In addition, 2% of land surface is to be set aside for on-shore wind power, and off-shore wind capacity is to be increased to 75 GW. Fossil gas role was reinforced as "indispensable" transition fuel with low-carbon nuclear power imported from France to ensure stability of supplies.<ref>{{Cite web|date=25 November 2021|title=The catch with Germany's green transformation|url=https://www.politico.eu/article/the-catch-with-germanys-green-transition-transformation-coalition/|access-date=29 November 2021|website=POLITICO|language=en-US}}</ref>
By end of 2021, the single largest source of electricity in Germany was coal (9.5% hard and 20.2% brown), increase of 20% compared to 2020 due to significant drop in wind (−14.5%) and solar (−5%) power output in that year. Solar power only produced 9.9% electricity, while nuclear power produced 13%
In 2022, [[Agora Energiewende]] warned that Germany has missed its 2020 emission targets and is likely going to miss the 2030 targets, and increase of total emissions after 2022 is likely. Previously celebrated 2020 record low emissions were described as one-off effect of favorable weather and lower demand due to COVID-19 pandemics.<ref>{{Cite web|date=7 January 2022|title=Germany off course to 2030 climate target – think tank|url=https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/germany-course-2030-climate-target-think-tank|access-date=15 January 2022|website=Clean Energy Wire|language=en}}</ref> Nuclear phase-out, skyrocketing gas prices, and low wind and solar output resulting in increased reliance on coal were also attributed to the increase in emissions.<ref>{{Cite news|last=Millard|first=Rachel|date=8 January 2022|title=Germany's meltdown over nuclear power risks a costly winter|language=en-GB|work=The Telegraph|url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/01/08/germanys-decision-abandon-nuclear-power-epic-mistake/|access-date=15 January 2022|issn=0307-1235}}</ref>
In January 2022 the new coalition government reiterated its opposition to the inclusion of [[nuclear power]] in the [[Nuclear power debate#EU Taxonomy|EU sustainable taxonomy]], but also requested that fossil gas is instead included as a "transitional" fuel and carbon intensity thresholds for gas are relaxed.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Kurmayer|first=Nikolaus J.|date=24 January 2022|title=Germany takes firm pro-gas stance in green taxonomy feedback to EU|url=https://www.euractiv.com/section/energy-environment/news/germany-takes-firm-pro-gas-stance-in-green-taxonomy-feedback-to-eu/|access-date=25 January 2022|website=www.euractiv.com|language=en-GB}}</ref> As the subsidies for gas were
In 2023, Germany achieved its lowest [[greenhouse gas emissions]] since the 1950s with a 20% reduction, largely impacted by a decline in industrial production due to economic factors like the [[Russo-Ukrainian War|Ukraine war]] and high energy prices. The Berlin-based think-tank [[Agora Energiewende]] attributed approximately half of the reduction to decreased coal-fired power generation, while only 15% resulted from technological improvements such as enhanced renewable energy utilization. Despite these gains, with over 50% of Germany's electricity now derived from renewable energy, concerns persist about the industrial sector's competitiveness and sustainability, as emission levels in construction and transport have not changed, putting Germany at risk of missing its EU emission targets.<ref>{{Cite web |title=German emissions fall by a fifth amid stagnant industrial output |url=https://www.ft.com/content/c9aa5a8e-cd6d-4583-b0af-131c8c448913 |access-date=2024-04-16 |website=www.ft.com}}</ref>
=== Post-2022 ===
Following the [[2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine]], Germany announced they would re-open 10 GW of coal power to allegedly "conserve [[natural gas]]" following the
From February 2022, there was a heated debate about pausing the nuclear phase-out and restarting still operational reactors in order to better cope with the [[2021–present global energy crisis|energy crisis]] caused by the [[2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine|Russian invasion of Ukraine]].<ref>{{Cite news |date=26 July 2022 |title=Germany rethinks nuclear power exit due to threat of winter energy crunch |work=Financial Times |url=https://www.ft.com/content/cc422ece-92b3-41fa-a05c-900270bfe824?sharetype=blocked |access-date=3 August 2022}}</ref>
In October 2022, Germany ministry of energy approved extension of RWE [[brown coal]] [[open pit mine]] in [[Lutzerath]], claiming it's "necessary for energy security".<ref>{{Cite web |date=14 October 2022 |title=Duits dorp bij Roermond verliest strijd tegen bruinkoolmijn |url=https://nos.nl/artikel/2448356-duits-dorp-bij-roermond-verliest-strijd-tegen-bruinkoolmijn |access-date=18 October 2022 |website=nos.nl |language=nl}}</ref> In October 2022, the
In 2023,
In 2023 Energy Economics Institute (EWI) warned that around 50 new fossil gas powered plants need to be built to "compensate for the weather-dependent production of wind and solar power" with the overall cost reaching €60
In March 2024, Federal Audit Office published a report in which it assessed the policy as not meeting goals on a number of points: the planned 80% share of renewable energy requires [[Dispatchable generation|dispatchable sources]] but the assumed 10 GW in fossil gas generation is neither sufficient nor on schedule; extension of electric grid is behind the schedule by {{Convert|6000
== Criticism ==
[[File:Electricity-price-germany-components.png|alt= Components electricity price Germany|thumb|Components of the German electricity price for households in 2016<ref>{{cite web|title=Electricity Prices in Europe – Who Pays the Most?|url=https://1-stromvergleich.com/electricity-prices-europe/|access-date=5 September 2016|website=Stromvergleich}}</ref>]]
The ''Energiewende'' has been criticized for the high costs, the early nuclear phase-out which increased carbon emissions, continuation or
German association of local utilities VKU said "the strategy creates significant risks to the stability of power supply in case of
After introduction of the original [[German Renewable Energy Act|Renewable Energy Act]] in 2000, there was a focus on long term costs, while in later years this has shifted to a focus on short term costs and the "financial burden" of the ''Energiewende'' while ignoring environmental externalities of fossil fuels.<ref name="lauber-and-jacobsson-2016">{{cite journal|last1=Lauber|first1=Volkmar|last2=Jacobsson|first2=Staffan|year=2016|title=The politics and economics of constructing, contesting and restricting socio-political space for renewables – The German Renewable Energy Act|journal=Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions|volume=18|pages=147–163|doi=10.1016/j.eist.2015.06.005|bibcode=2016EIST...18..147L }}</ref> Electricity prices for household customers in Germany have been generally increasing in the last decade.{{Clarify|date=May 2024}}<ref name="bmwi-2015-b" /> The renewable energy levy to finance green power investment is added to Germans' electricity unit price. The surcharge (22.1% in 2016) pays the state-guaranteed price for renewable energy to producers and is 6.35 cents per kWh in 2016.<ref name="rueter-2015">
{{cite news|date=May 2016|title=Components of the German electricity price|url=https://1-stromvergleich.com/electricity-prices-europe/#germany|access-date=15 August 2016}}
</ref>
A comprehensive study, published in ''Energy Policy'' in 2013, reported that Germany's [[nuclear power phase-out]], to be complete by 2022, is contradictory to the goal of the climate portion of the program.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Bruninx|first1=Kenneth|last2=Madzharov|first2=Darin|last3=Delarue|first3=Erik|last4=D'haeseleer|first4=William|year=2013|title=Impact of the German nuclear phase-out on Europe's electricity generation — a comprehensive study|url=https://www.mech.kuleuven.be/en/tme/research/energy_environment/Pdf/wpen2012-1|journal=Energy Policy|volume=60|pages=251–261|doi=10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.026|bibcode=2013EnPol..60..251B |access-date=12 May 2016}}</ref>
In June 2019, an open letter to "the leadership and people of Germany", written by almost 100 Polish environmentalists and scientist, urged Germany to "reconsider the decision on the final decommissioning of fully functional nuclear power plants" for the benefit of the fight against global warming.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Polish academics urge end to Germany's nuclear phaseout – World Nuclear News|url=https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Polish-academics-urge-end-to-Germany-s-nuclear-pha|access-date=27 June 2019|website=www.world-nuclear-news.org}}</ref>
As nuclear and coal power plants are being phased out, the
Germany's [[electrical grid|electricity transmission network]] is currently inadequately developed, therefore lacking the capability of delivering offshore wind energy produced on the Northern coast to industrial regions in the
Slow reduction of {{CO2}} emissions in Germany,
German federal audit office report published in March 2021 highlighted the very high costs of ''Energiewende'' for the household users, where taxes and fees account for 50% of the bills, and the energy price is 43% higher than the EU average. It
A study found that if Germany had postponed the nuclear phase out and phased out coal first, it could have saved 1,100 lives and €3 to €8 billion in social costs per year. The study concludes that policymakers would have to overestimate the risk or cost of a nuclear accident to conclude that the benefits of the phase-out exceed its social costs.<ref>{{Cite journal |vauthors=Jarvis S, Deschenes O, Jha A|title=The Private and External Costs of Germany's Nuclear Phase-Out |journal=Journal of the European Economic Association |volume=20 |issue=3 |date=June 2022 |pages=1311–1346 |doi=10.1093/jeea/jvac007}}</ref> An open letter by a number of climate scientists published in 2021 calls against the shut-down of the remaining nuclear reactors in Germany, that would lead to 5% increase in {{CO2}} emissions from the electricity sector.<ref>{{Cite news|date=27 September 2021|title=Letter: Germany should postpone nuclear exit to help climate|work=Financial Times|url=https://www.ft.com/content/e7e08182-6749-44df-9594-23ba84ba6dd5|access-date=28 September 2021}}</ref>
The Renewable Energy Act had a significant impact on businesses and industries and had been met with criticism, resulting in increased costs and slowed-down growth.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Eddy |first1=Melissa |title=German Business Is Tangled in Red Tape |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/09/world/europe/german-business-bureaucracy.html |access-date=9 April 2024 |work=The New York Times |date=April 9, 2024}}</ref>
=== Biomass ===
[[Biomass]] made up 7.0% of Germany's power generation mix in 2017.<ref>{{Cite news|date=11 January 2018|title=Germany's energy consumption in 2017|language=en-US|work=Energy Transition|url=https://energytransition.org/2018/01/german-energy-consumption-2017/|access-date=10 April 2018}}</ref> Biomass has the potential to be a [[carbon-neutral]] fuel because growing biomass absorbs carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and a portion of the carbon absorbed remains in the ground after harvest.<ref>https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41603.pdf {{Bare URL PDF|date=March 2022}}</ref> However, using
Between 2004 and 2011 policies lead to around {{convert|7000
There are
== Citizen support and participation ==
Line 582 ⟶ 589:
| url = http://strom-report.de/renewable-energy
| access-date = 14 June 2016
}}</ref>]]Estimates for 2012 suggested that almost half the renewable energy capacity in Germany was owned by citizens through energy cooperatives and private initiatives.<ref name="amelang-2016">{{cite news | first = Sören | last = Amelang | title = The reform of the Renewable Energy Act: Germany's energy transition revamp stirs controversy over speed, participation | date = 29 June 2016 | website = Clean Energy Wire (CLEW) | location = Berlin, Germany | url = https://www.cleanenergywire.org/dossiers/reform-renewable-energy-act | access-date = 2 July 2016}}</ref>
According to a 2014 survey conducted by TNS Emnid for the German Renewable Energies Agency among 1015 respondents, 94 percent of the Germans supported the enforced expansion of Renewable Energies. More than two-thirds of the interviewees agreed to renewable power plants close to their homes.<ref name="aee-2014">
{{cite web|title=Akzeptanzumfrage 2014: 92 Prozent der Deutschen unterstützen den Ausbau Erneuerbarer Energien|trans-title=Acceptance survey 2014: 92 percent of Germans support the development of renewable energy|url=http://www.unendlich-viel-energie.de/themen/akzeptanz2/akzeptanz-umfrage/akzeptanzumfrage-2014|access-date=14 June 2016|website=Agentur für Erneuerbare Energien (Renewable Energies Agency)|place=Berlin, Germany}}</ref>
The share of total
{{cite book|author=REN21|url=http://www.ren21.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/REN12-GSR2015_Onlinebook_low1.pdf|title=Renewables 2015: global status report|publisher=REN21 Secretariat|year=2015|isbn=978-3-9815934-6-4|place=Paris, France|access-date=14 June 2016}}</ref>{{rp|137}}
The Renewable Energy Sources Act provides compensation to wind turbine operators for every kilowatt-hour of electricity not produced if wind power surpasses peak grid capacity, while grid operators must splice electricity from renewable sources into the grid
By 2019, Germany also saws a significant increase of organized opposition against on-shore wind farms,<ref name=":5" /> especially in [[Bavaria]]<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.politico.eu/article/an-ill-wind-blows-for-the-onshore-power-industry/|title=An ill wind blows for the onshore power industry|date=20 August 2019|website=POLITICO|access-date=28 February 2020}}</ref> and [[Baden-Württemberg]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305518625|title=Against the wind: Local opposition to the German 'Energiewende'|date=2015}}</ref>
== Computer studies ==
Line 601 ⟶ 608:
</ref>
A number of computer studies confirm the feasibility of the German electricity system being 100% renewable in 2050. Some investigate the prospect of the entire energy system (all energy carriers) being fully renewable
=== 2009 WWF study ===
In 2009 [[World Wide Fund for Nature
The study presumes a 95% reduction in greenhouse gases by the year 2050 and covers all sectors. The study shows that the transformation from a high-carbon to a low-carbon economy is possible and affordable. It notes that by committing to this transformation path, Germany could become a model for other countries.
Line 636 ⟶ 643:
The [[Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project]] (DDPP) aims to demonstrate how countries can transform their energy systems by 2050 in order to achieve a [[low-carbon economy]].
The 2015 German country report, produced in association with the [[Wuppertal Institute]], examines the official target of reducing domestic GHG emissions by 80% to 95% by 2050 (compared with 1990).<ref name="hillebrandt-2015">{{cite book
| editor-last = Hillebrandt
| display-editors = etal
| title = Pathways to deep decarbonization in Germany
Line 645 ⟶ 652:
| url = http://deepdecarbonization.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/DDPP_DEU.pdf
| access-date = 28 April 2016
| archive-date = 2016-09-09
| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160909131930/http://deepdecarbonization.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/DDPP_DEU.pdf
</ref> Decarbonization pathways for Germany are illustrated by means of three ambitious scenarios with energy-related emission reductions between 1990 and 2050 varying between 80% and more than 90%. Three strategies strongly contribute to GHG emission reduction:▼
| url-status = dead
* energy efficiency improvements (in all sectors but especially in buildings)▼
▲ }}</ref> Decarbonization pathways for Germany are illustrated by means of three
* increased use of domestic renewables (with a focus on electricity generation)
* electrification and (in two of the scenarios
In addition, some scenarios use controversially:
* final energy demand reductions through behavioral changes ([[mode of transport|modal shift]] in transport, changes in eating and heating habits)
Line 668 ⟶ 677:
| pages = 1003–1018
| doi = 10.1016/j.rser.2013.09.012
| bibcode = 2014RSERv..30.1003H
▲ }}
</ref> this 2015 [[Fraunhofer ISE]] study investigates several system transformation scenarios and their related costs.<ref name="henning-and-palzer-2015">
{{cite book
Line 680 ⟶ 690:
| access-date = 29 April 2016
}}
</ref> The guiding question of the study is: "how can a cost-optimised transformation of the German energy system — with consideration of all [[energy carrier]]s and consumer sectors — be achieved while meeting the declared [[climate protection]] targets and ensuring a secure energy supply at all times." [[Carbon capture and storage]] (CCS) is
{{blockquote|From the macroeconomic perspective, the transformation of Germany's energy system demands a significant shift in cash flow, moving the cash spent on energy imports today to spend it instead on new investments in systems, their operation and maintenance.
=== 2015 DIW study ===
A 2015 study uses DIETER or Dispatch and Investment Evaluation Tool with Endogenous Renewables, developed by the [[German Institute for Economic Research]] (DIW), Berlin, Germany. The study examines the power storage requirements for renewables uptake ranging from 60% to 100%. Under the
{{cite book
| last1 = Zerrahn | first1 = Alexander
Line 702 ⟶ 712:
=== 2016 acatech study ===
A 2016 [[acatech]]-lead study focused on
| editor1 = acatech
| editor2 = Lepoldina
Line 714 ⟶ 723:
| url = http://www.acatech.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Baumstruktur_nach_Website/Acatech/root/de/Publikationen/Kooperationspublikationen/ESYS_Position_Paper_Flexibility_concepts.pdf
| access-date = 10 June 2016
| archive-date = 2016-10-06
| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20161006041130/http://www.acatech.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Baumstruktur_nach_Website/Acatech/root/de/Publikationen/Kooperationspublikationen/ESYS_Position_Paper_Flexibility_concepts.pdf
</ref><ref name="lunz-etal-2016">▼
| url-status = dead
▲ }}</ref><ref name="lunz-etal-2016">
{{cite journal
| last1 = Lunz | first1 = Benedikt
Line 735 ⟶ 746:
| url = https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:bsz:wup4-opus-62770
}}
</ref> Set in 2050, several scenarios use [[
{{blockquote|Assuming that the price of emissions allowances in 2050 will significantly surpass its current level, a power generation system boasting a high percentage of wind and photovoltaics will, as a rule, come
=== 2016 Stanford University study ===
Line 789 ⟶ 800:
| access-date = 26 July 2016
}} Direct URL: [https://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/AllCountries.xlsx xlsx-spreadsheets].
</ref>
== See also ==
|