…at the request of a reader, I am updating my charts on the electricity mix in Germany from 1990 through 2012. These charts are from public information, easily accessible with rudimentary German.
First, the total mix.
As can be seen, renewables continue their steady increase. No surprises there. Hard coal arrests its decline and there’s a slight uptick in brown coal generation.
Total generation of electricity in Germany remains relatively constant at 617 TWh in 2012.
In 2012 there was a slight uptick in coal-fired generation, mostly from brown coal. Generation from hard coal increased from 112 TWh to 118 TWh, about as much as the 117 TWh produced in 2010. Generation from brown coal increased from 150 TWh in 2011 to 158 TWh in 2012. Total coal-fired generation has increase about 25 TWh from a low of 254 TWh at the height of the Great Recession in 2009.
Despite a steady increase in gas-fired generation from the early 1990s through 2008, generation dropped dramatically in 2012 following a more gradual decline in 2011. Critics of the nuclear phase-out have charged that Germany is simply replacing nuclear with gas-fired generation. Apparently that’s not the case. Despite a slight increase in total generation in 2012, gas-fired generation dropped from 83 TWh in 2011 to 70 TWh. Gas-fired generation in Germany is now at the level last recorded in 2005 during the boom years prior to the Great Recession.
Now on to the oft-repeated but never substantiated charge that Germany may be phasing out its nuclear plants but it is just turning around and importing nuclear-generated electricity from France. There was concern that German electricity exports would continue their fall from 2011, but that appears unwarranted. German exports of electricity surged in 2012. Net exports reached 23 TWh in 2012 for nearly 4% of total generation.
German nuclear generation continues to fall. For the first time in at least two decades nuclear generation fell below 100 TWh. Nuclear generation is now well below generation by new renewables (wind, solar, and biomass).
Total renewable generation grew steadily to about 135 TWh, 35 TWh more than that from nuclear generation. Total renewable generation includes existing hydro about 20 TWh per year depending upon rainfall.
New renewable generation continued its remarkable growth in Germany in 2012, reaching nearly 115 TWh. Most growth has taken place since the country introduced a modern system of feed-in tariffs in the year 2000. New renewables now compares with the generation from hard coal and exceeds that from natural gas, nuclear, oil, and existing hydro.
Solar photovoltaics (solar PV) continued its meteoric growth in 2012. Solar PV generated 29 TWh in 2012 or nearly 5% of total generation. Wind accounted for a little more than 7% of generation and biomass provided nearly 6% of generation.
Renewable generation provided nearly 22% of total generation in 2012. Within a few years, renewables will account for one-fourth of all German electricity generation. New renewables accounted for nearly 19% of total German generation in 2012.
These comparisons are based on total generation and may not compare to other reports comparing the contribution of renewables to electricity consumption, 594 TWh.
Wow, awesome post mr Greenman! Thanks!
more like this at Paul Gipe’s windworks site
http://www.wind-works.org/cms/
And the dark side of the story is wealth destruction as the old school utilities try to anticipate power needs vs. supply and get it wrong:
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-03-11/europe-gas-carnage-shown-by-eon-closing-3-year-old-plant-energy
***
And in related news, Gazprom has just announced a 37% drop in profit YoY for 2012. The Economist has more on why this Russian giant is in trouble:
http://tinyurl.com/c6tzkxz
Fossil fuel emissions still increasing.
Only a one-eyed view would see this as a win; true concern for climate would want to see coal decreasing, not nuclear.
in a magical world where nuclear could compete, I would agree. If I were making the decision, I might have gone a little slower on closing the nukes – but too late. Nuclear is inevitably becoming irrelevant, the renewables are drowning it out. soon the price of gas will rise again as well, and we’ll see even more progress.
Closing these existing nuclear plants was not an economic decision. Existing plant producing electricity without carbon dioxide – closing that is a slap in the face of the climate.
it was a political decision, one I think might have been hasty, but the Germans made it. operating nuclear plants have many advantages, and if run correctly, are cheap. building new ones is problematic for reasons of economics and security.
anti nukers will not stop a nuclear rebuild – the economy did that 30 years ago.
barring some kind of technical miracle, this is not going to help us.
I think that Germany may have to delay the closing of the nuke plants that remain.
If it were up to me, I would start reprocessing as much as possible and keep the existing plants going until there’s not a significant amount of nuke waste left.
And there would also have to be some reasonable guidelines as to when the costs or risks of running a plant is no longer worth it.
They do seem to be shutting the oldest, dirtiest coal plants, which is commendable. There’s an EU agreement to shut the worst by 2023 or install filtration systems but I’d like to see a more aggressive timeline.
reprocessing has its own problems in regard to proliferation issues, and plants like that have a very long lead time.
Germany and the rest of Europe may have higher electricity prices than North Am but they make good use of it.
See chart of GDP per unit energy below
http://goo.gl/ljHzY
average business or household in a place like Denmark is about 2.5 times more efficient than the US – good to keep in mind when comparing electric prices per unit. The most important number is the monthly bill to consumers.