Peter wrote:
Norway is doing well out of it but Norway is an “uncontroversial” country so (quite correctly) nobody will criticise it.
Only a year or two ago the gospel from EU (and UK) was that long term contracts of import of gas from Norway would be “difficult” because of transfer to “green” energy. All through the 2010s extensive lobbying was done in EU and UK to try to sell gas at a reasonable price, but in vain. Oil was lucrative, gas was, well we didn’t lose money. A year later, and the same EU ministers whines over Norway making profit on gas, while the EU is freezing and has to pay manyfold for gas (the gas they didn’t “need” a year ago 
) Everything has turned upside down, and the profit we are now making on gas (and oil) is insane. All time high this year, and it will only increase in the future.
The price of gas is likely to stay high for the foreseeable future now. The only thing that will help on the price of gas (a little) is more nuclear power in EU. The same goes for Russia. I guess Putin and company was more than fed up over the unwillingness of the EU to pay the real market energy price for gas. It’s not like it cost nothing to get the gas up, refine it and send it either. The current gas prices would happen sooner or later in any case due massive construction of expensive wind and solar, but it now happened with a bang A side effect is that LNG suddenly is super lucrative also. I don’t think Russia is actually losing money, it depends very much on how much China is willing to pay for gas, as well as the rest of the world. China is also building massive wind and solar at insane cost, financed with cheap oil and gas.
In essence, EU (Germany in particular) has been fueled by dirt cheap gas from Russia and Norway, while living in some sort of “green dream”. Now, everyone has to pay the actual price for energy in this green dream. How is EU going to survive that in the long run? And the fact of the matter still is that each wind turbine requires an equivalent of traditional power/energy to be able to function. Today this is oil and gas, and coal which the EU don’t have. Only massive construction of nuclear plants can achieve this green dream, and when/if that is finally done, every single wind turbine will be dismantled.
Anyway It will be interesting to see how things are in 5 years from now. Which political changes must take place before EU starts doing what is needed? That could go in every direction IMO.
MedEwok wrote:
The remaining three nuclear plants in Germany will be decommissioned on April 1. The chances of another expansion of their operational permits are very slim. The Green Party will not accept it, nuclear power plants are their archenemy and even their otherwise pragmatic economic minister has shown no indication of changing course. Nuclear power will be history in Germany soon.
It’s interesting how nuclear power seems to be an article of faith on both sides. The present Swedish government pushes nuclear power very hard as a solution to the current climate and energy crisis even though it will take at least 10 years before new plants are operational and the relevant power companies (some government-owned) have said more or less straight out that they don’t want to build new nuclear power plants.
MedEwok wrote:
The Green Party will not accept it
Not the first time a minority party has overpowered the German government… it appears to me that they are capable of considerable fanatism. Not new, but to go ahead with the shut down in a situation of crisis to me should tell the German people enough about this ideology driven party.
MedEwok wrote:
In fact it was Angela Merkel, a conservative physicist with a PhD, who ultimately pulled the trigger on nuclear after the 2011 Fukushima disaster, despite there being absolutely zero chance of similar events happening in Germany.
The same Angela Merkel who drove Germany into the dependence of Russia considering energy needs shuts down the only viable alternatives. Don’t forget that also in her tenure coal has been practically eliminated (which is a good thing provided you don’t cut the alternatives off as well). No wonder many people start to ask serious questions about the loyalties of this chancellor, particularly seeing where her predecessor went after his chancellorship and still is. To hand over energy dependence to someone who now has to be considered an enemy is no feat to be taken lightly.
In most countries by now, the environmentalist movements have reckognized that nuclear power is preferrable over gas and coal with regard to CO2 and other emissions, so nuclear power has gotten some sort of a revival. The fact that the Green party in Germany will strangle it’s own country in a time of war, should be something the German population should pay attention to.
If Germany wants to go as far as to cripple it’s own energy sources, they are welcome to it. Only then they need to be cut off from the international grid, so that not other countries who have their energy in order suffer from the Green fanatism. That on the other hand is not as easy as it sounds, as not only are contractual obligations to be fulfilled but also the grid stability issues. But neither France nor Switzerland will wish to suffer outages because of the German ideology wars.
LeSving wrote:
And the fact of the matter still is that each wind turbine requires an equivalent of traditional power/energy to be able to function.
A lot of people will dispute wheter that is a fact.
LeSving wrote:
Only massive construction of nuclear plants can achieve this green dream, and when/if that is finally done, every single wind turbine will be dismantled.
There is currently no conceivable scenario where a massive buildup of nuclear reactors would happen in Germany. The current situation is the closest possible scenario which would force such a shift, but alas it didn’t. LeSving wrote:
Anyway It will be interesting to see how things are in 5 years from now. Which political changes must take place before EU starts doing what is needed? That could go in every direction IMO.
I cannot speak for the entirety of the EU, but in Germany no party in parliament advocates building new nuclear power stations. The focus is on renewables. Gas is supposed to be replaced by Hydrogen generated through electrolysis. Electricity storage is often mentioned as an important aspect but the details are usually left vague, which is of course the weak point of the entire Energiewende plan from an engineering perspective.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
But neither France nor Switzerland will wish to suffer outages because of the German ideology wars.
Ironically, France, which relies heavily on nuclear, needed a lot of electricity imports from Germany throughout 2022 because several dozens of their reactors are shut down due to technical problems.
Germany still has a lot of excess energy generation capability. Renewable already make up 50% of electricity generation while some coal power plants have been recommissioned since the war began and a significant (around 10%) percentage is also made up by natural gas power plants.
The major weakness is that upgrading the grid hasn’t kept pace with the creation of new power plants, particularly wind power in Northern Germany. Northern Germany is already nearly completely self-sufficient on wind and solar, but the South is not and has obstructed the swift construction of power lines. Now we have to shut down wind power occasionally because it would overload the grid, but the South has to activate gas power plants at the same time. Ironic.
LeSving wrote:
Anyway It will be interesting to see how things are in 5 years from now. Which political changes must take place before EU starts doing what is needed? That could go in every direction IMO.
I agree. Germany in particular will be in a very difficult situation, once the surrounding countries realize they have to work frantically to cut Germany off the existing grid to survive themselves. France and Switzerland have been talking about how to accomplish that because both have enough energy for themselves but they can’t and are not willing to support the German green dream at the cost of shut downs of their own. The fact that Germany has kept the NPP’s going over winter is just delaying the problem, but at least and also due to the mild winter we are having, has prevented an energy meltdown now.
IMHO, once Germans will face power outages and people will freeze in their flats latest next winter, it will be very difficult for their politicians to justify the course of action they are taking, particularly if the gas situation with Russia is not resolved by then, which I personally think impossible. This might give a mighty push to opposition parties to topple the current government, which, given the fanatism displayed by some there, could well lead to civil unrest. Of course what happens in the war by then will be the decisive factor about that.
Norway certainly has not done anything wrong and should be rewarded for their foresight by cashing in on the market now. They may well need the money once Germans start flocking abroad to escape their green ideologists.
the relevant power companies (some government-owned) have said more or less straight out that they don’t want to build new nuclear power plants.
Who runs Sweden?
The elected govt or the company shareholders?
MedEwok wrote:
A lot of people will dispute wheter that is a fact.
Of course, and it’s coming right back at them in the form of soaring energy prices, if this wasn’t the idea all along.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
particularly if the gas situation with Russia is not resolved by then
It doesn’t matter anymore. The “way too low price of gas bubble” has burst. Nothing will get it down again. Nuclear power will help, because it will make you independent of gas to a large extent, but mostly because it will make you independent of what drives the energy prices now; wind power. It’s rather ridiculous the whole situation. Building more wind power is literally like poring gasoline on fire. That fire is now what makes it lucrative building wind power, more flames the merrier. Lots of people make lots of money on this Ponzi scheme or whatever one like to call it. It cannot go on forever though, not after the gas bubble has burst and it’s payback time
MedEwok wrote:
In fact it was Angela Merkel, a conservative physicist with a PhD
You mean ‘the best asset Putin ever cultivated’. Merkel did everything in her power to weaken Europe and especially Germany and make it more dependent on Russia.
172driver wrote:
You mean ‘the best asset Putin ever cultivated’. Merkel did everything in her power to weaken Europe and especially Germany and make it more dependent on Russia
Compared to other German politicians, Merkel was downright sceptical of Russia, but ultimately decided to play it softly with Putin after the 2008 and 2014 invasions of Georgia and Crimea because of convenience and opportunism. But as I wrote much earlier in this topic, this spineless behaviour towards Russia was shown by German leaders of both major parties for decades.
I only recently read a comment on Der Spiegel that Germany’s lenient stance towards Russia probably contributed to Putins decision to invade. During his military buildup, Germany only sent very weak and appeasing signals, like Neville Chamberlain in 1938.
