Yusef Jalali, PhD, PE —
One of the unintended consequences of the Russian war in Ukraine, is the emergence of a political consensus among the European Union (EU) countries, including its largest economy, that of Germany, to forge speedily ahead with transfer to renewable energy and reduction of fossil fuel usage.
Recently, the International Energy Agency (IEA) reported that the sum of the renewable energy budgets by governments across the world, had increased by 50% within the past 5 months, to a tune of more than $710 billion dollars. More than half of this budget that is allocated by the advanced industrial countries, will be spent in the current year, putting these countries in-line with the net zero carbon emission trajectory by 2050.
Inside Climate News reports that the center-left government of Chancellor Olav Scholz of Germany announced in the Bundestag (federal parliament) that the only responses to energy dependency and high prices, are renewable energies and energy efficiency. Scholz added: “Our goal of achieving climate neutrality in Germany by 2045 is more important than ever.”
Climate neutrality, or net zero carbon (Greenhouse Gas) emission, relates to a condition when the carbon emissions from all economic activity in a country is equal to, or less than the amount of carbon absorbed by natural processes, such as photosynthesis by plants.
Clean Energy Wire reports that, while Russia produces about 11% of the world production of fossil fuels, it exports about 15% of the world’s fossil fuel exports, comprising 26% of the natural gas, 11% of the crude oil, and 18% of the coal.
On the other hand, IEA reports that for the current year, as a result of commitments by IEA member countries to gradually release a total of 120 million barrels of crude oil from their respective emergency petroleum reserves, the Russian crude oil market has thus far plummeted by about 700,000 barrels per day, and IEA projects this decline to further plummet to 3 million barrels per day in the second half of this year.
Notwithstanding the IEA projections, obviously the cash flow to the Russian war-coffer from the sales of fossil fuels have increased dramatically, as a result of the drastic fuel price hikes, not to mention the opening of the additional non-petrodollar market for the Russian fossil fuel, that is particularly eyed by clients such as China and India, looking for special deals.
Not to be biased, as a matter of fact, all of the petroleum producing countries, and all of the petroleum companies worldwide, are joyously reaping the unheard-of multi-billion-dollar profits, in the midst of this chaotic market, created by the Russian invasion and destruction of Ukraine.
Such are the so called “external costs”, that weigh heavily on the backs of the downtrodden people across the world, which do not enter the economic calculations for the development of fossil fuels.
Obviously, the ravages of this war are not limited to the drastic fuel price hike, or its ripple effect on the basic needs of the people. It just seems foul and abhorrent, given the human suffering in the Ukraine war, while the fossil fuel producers, basically blackmailing the world-over, laugh all the way to the bank.
The European countries are severely dependent on the Russian fossil fuels. In aggregate, the 27 countries comprising the EU, import about a third of its fossil fuel needs from Russia. Even Germany, which in the first decade of 2000 initiated a policy of incentives for innovative development of renewable energies, nonetheless, it imported some 35% of its crude oil needs, and 55% of its demand for natural gas from Russia last year.
Coalition with the Greens:
The Green Party, or simply the Greens, was initially forged following the German reunification in 1990 by a merger with the East-German Green Party, which was then followed by another merger with Alliance 90 in 1993. Currently, the Greens is the fastest growing political party in Germany, with the youngest membership, being anti-war with strong environmental sentiment, demanding radical and immediate solutions.
The Greens leaders, Annalena Baerbock now Germany’s first ever female Foreign Minister, and Robert Habeck, the Vice Chancellor, and Minister of Economy & Climate Protection came to office amidst the COVID crisis at home, and Ukraine war abroad. The Climate Protection postfix to the Economic Ministry was deliberate, to direct and facilitate renewable energy legislations.
Already, the Greens demonstrated a lot of resiliency by consenting to a 100 billion Euro defense budget increase, a most drastic defense policy change since WWII for Germany, and approving of military arms and equipment aid to Ukraine.
The vacated Greens leader’s positions seem to befall on the Co-chairman, Omid Nouripour, 46 years old, pragmatist realpolitik of the last generation of the Greens, Iranian-born foreign policy expert, and Bundestag member for 15 years elected from Frankfurt, the banking capital of Germany. Also, Co-chairwoman Ricarda Lang, 28 years old, new generation feminist and women-policy spokeswoman, squarely on the left-wing, representing the new young voters.
However, in light of the current plan to speedily eliminate fossil fuel imports from Russia, achieving the goal of carbon neutrality by 2045, which had been established by Angela Merkel government, seems to portend huge challenges ahead. While Olav Scholz refused to issue an operation permit for Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, completed over six months ago, which was planned to be the main gas supply line to Germany. Nonetheless, the rest of the existing gas and crude pipelines have been operational so far.
On the other hand, Scholz has resisted an immediate cut off of the Russian gas, indicating such action will plunge Germany and the rest of Europe into deep economic recession. Meanwhile, the German Foreign Minister announced that by the end of the current year, all imports of Russian coal, crude oil, and petroleum by-products will be ceased.
The current climate program of Germany is largely based on the near complete elimination of fossil fuels usage in powerplants by 2035. In a country that used fossil fuels for production of 43% of its electricity (15% gas plus 28% coal) last year, and is on course to shut down three remaining nuclear power plants by the end of the current year that supplies 12% of Germany’s electricity, achieving such a high bar will not be a slam dunk.
Following the nuclear disaster at the Fukushima powerplant in Japan in 2011, the German government at the time eventually decided to gradually eliminate all nuclear powerplants. Notwithstanding, continued operation of the existing powerplants will require substantial rehab and mitigation, which entails significant costs and construction time.
In fact, the Ukraine war intensified Germany’s apprehension regarding the safety of nuclear energy. Following a month-long occupation of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster site, the Russian armed forces were heavily contaminated by radioactive materials inadvertently, as a result of constructing bunkers at the highly contaminated site.
The Russian forces also demolished parts of the safety and cooling systems of the three remaining reactors before departure, which could result in another nuclear meltdown, threatening Ukraine and the neighboring countries with radioactive contamination, had it not been for the timely intervention by the plant maintenance personnel.
Temporary coal usage increase
Two years ago, the Merkel government legislated a program to gradually ban all coal-fired powerplants by 2038. The plan included stipends for a wide range of affected people and companies, including the residents and the workers.
Afterwards, the Greens campaigned to speed up the dismantling of all the coal-fired powerplants by 2030, which now constitutes a mandate for the German government.
However, in order to avoid blackouts, a temporary expansion of the coal-fired powerplants will be needed. Potentially, some of the coal-burning factories and powerplants that are currently non-operational as emergency reserves, will need to become operational for a few more years.
Sascha Muller-Kraenner, director of a leading environmental advocacy group, Deutsche Umwelthilfe says, contingent on the government remaining steadfast to shut down the coal-burning powerplants on schedule by 2030, the temporary increase in coal usage should be acceptable.
A Double Challenge
Data from the Clean Energy Wire indicate, within the time span of 2000 to 2020, the contribution of renewable energy to generate electricity in Germany increased by about 625%, that by the nuclear and coal energies reduced each by about 50%, while the contribution of the natural gas increased by about 190%.
Overall, the greater challenge for Germany is developing a replacement for the Russian gas to heat homes and businesses, and for industrial use. While renewable energy accounts for about 44% of electricity generation, its share in the overall energy demand is only about 16%, which includes transportation, heating buildings, and industrial uses.
Clean energy advocates suggest expanding renewable energy powerplants, coupled with incentives for electric automobiles, could render the power generation and the transportation sectors independence from fossil fuels within several years.
Canary Media reports, due to the technological improvements and mass production, the cost of solar energy systems has decreased by 89% in the last decade.
Bloomberg reports that currently, the least expensive large scale energy plants are the solar and the wind energy systems, with unit costs of between $30-50 per megawatt hour, while the nuclear power cost is estimated at $80 per megawatt hour.
In addition, contrary to the fossil fuels, or nuclear powerplants, the wind and the solar powerplants do not require specific locations and massive natural resources, and could be installed at most locations.
Nonetheless, reducing the usage of fossil fuels for heating buildings and for industrial uses is a major challenge. Researchers and policy advocates often suggest the use of geothermal or heat pumps for heating buildings, and green hydrogen gas for the industrial uses.
Inside Climate News quotes Nikos Tsafos, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies saying: “Buildings are probably the hardest sector, that requires a gradual retrofit and retooling towards heat pumps. That will take time.”
Other advocates indicate that most energy needs for transportation, building heating & ventilation, and many industrial uses can be met by electricity generated by renewable energies
In the current urgent situation, the German leaders are also seeking potential new energy sources in the Middle East. Also, the feasibility of constructing liquid natural gas (LNG) terminals to import gas by ships is being evaluated. Aside from the anticipated resistance by the environmental groups, the construction of LNG terminals, and the facilities required for its conversion to the gas phase for usage, could easily take over 6 or 7 years.
Nonetheless, results from extensive polls indicate that the general public in Germany, overwhelmingly approve the performance of Scholz government so far, in spite of the unexpected challenges that confronted the newly formed coalition-government.
The climate and clean energy program of Germany could also be considered for the United States, given that the gigantic economic systems of both countries are based on heavy industry and fossil fuels.
Inside Climate News quotes Tsafos saying: “There is more social and political consensus in favor of decarbonization in Europe, and the plans and strategies are far more developed… By contrast, climate legislation remains highly politicized in the United States, and the instinct among many is to merely increase oil and gas production.”