Photo: Bjoern Schwarz (Flickr)
German Chancellor Angela Merkel has made an unprecedented decision to phase out all Nuclear power in Germany by 2022. In doing so, there is the possibility that Germany will act as a precedent for other countries to follow as Germany, the fourth largest economy and a major industrial power, seeks to shift its reliance on Nuclear for 23% of its energy to other renewable sources whilst maintaining its commitment to strong cuts in emissions.
Ms Merkel has even gone so far as to imply Germany could reap economic benefits from the move, when justifying a major policy reversal for the Centre-Right party. Ms Merkel set up a review of nuclear power after the Fukushima incident in Japan as mass anti-nuclear process spread across Germany; this movement also indirectly boosted the profile of Germany’s Green party which took control of the Christian Democrat stronghold of Baden-Wuerttemberg, in late March. Some analysts and cynics suggest Mrs Merkel may be eyeing a future coalition with the Greens.
Ms Merkel said; “We can be the first major industrialised country that achieves the transition to renewable energy with all the opportunities – for exports, development, technology, jobs – it carries with it.” She also implied the decision was linked to the crisis in Japan when she said that future electricity supply should be “safer and at the same time reliable and affordable”.
However, not everyone is ecstatic with Ms Merkel’s latest policy; the Industrial sector looks set to lose its reliable and cheap source of energy. The President of the Federation of German Industries was quoted saying ‘’it fills me with worry’’ on the topic of the recent policy statement.
The ambitious plan for Germany to shut down its nuclear reactors is ambitious and will cost money, both for the public purse and the price consumers are required to pay for the use of electricity.
The change in policy could also have a knock-on effect as Merkel is likely to encourage a Europe-wide standardisation of safety regulations, arguing that the 27-nation bloc which has standardised the size of cucumbers needs joint standards for nuclear power plants – in particular, a mandatory upgrade to force nuclear plants to reinforce their outer shell to withstand a crash of a commercial airliner.
So now that Germany has taken this course and the Swiss government appears to be following suit, should more governments jump on the bandwagon?
Germany’s position as a leading economy and manufacturing nation sends a strong message and makes the abandonment of nuclear energy more likely to succeed. Is this the United Kingdom’s cup of tea? I would argue that it may not be wise for all countries to follow suit at the first opportunity. There are several important factors to consider;
Firstly, as the fourth biggest economy, there is potential for German investment in renewable energy, efficient green technologies and a new ambitious target of cutting emissions by 40% to stimulate the green industry and economy and will serve to demonstrate how tackling climate change is possible and can be effective when taken on as a national project. Investment by the German government is also likely to continue to stimulate the German economy; in particular, it will serve to increase the number of jobs and businesses in the Green sector. However, it is possible that there will be mistakes made along the way; furthermore, Germany is a net-exporter of energy. The situation is not the same for us and as such it would be unwise for us to close down our nuclear power plants so arbitrarily without a plan in place to replace nuclear energy with renewable which would need to be developed beforehand to prevent the risk of supply shortages.
Secondly, we should be wary of committing ourselves to such an agenda unless we can do so in the knowledge that the government has the political resolve to see the project through and ensure appropriate investment in the green sector to stimulate this sector of the economy; at a time when Osborne is imposing stringent and harsh budget cuts this is unlikely; without proper government support such an ambitious plan would fail.
Thirdly, we must not let this encourage exploitation of other energy sources; for example, it would be foolish to commit to greater use of biofuels to replace our reliance on biofuels were this to be unsustainable in the long run as nothing would be saved from this movement. Likewise, we must not allow the use of coal or gas fired power stations to be used to replace reliance on nuclear energy as this will merely serve to increase our CO2 emissions.
Fourthly, the UK government must find the courage and resilience to brace itself against the influence of big Industry in the UK; it doesn’t bode well for the green credentials of our supposed ‘greenest government ever’ when they can do little but cave into Industry pressure rather than declare a Moratorium on new shale gas exploration.
With these factors in mind, it seems that whilst the Germans (and the Swiss) are leading the way, we must ensure our political culture and the government’s resolve are ‘man enough’ before we can go down the inevitable route of committing ourselves to a nuclear energy free future. In the meantime, the government must seek an end to the exploitation of the natural environment at unsustainable levels and seek greater investment in the green energy sector which will both stimulate the economy and promote job creation whilst giving us a stronger footing to compete with countries such as Germany who are yet again, although taking a risk; ultimately one step ahead of the pack.
Edward Sainsbury
Statisfied 