Note from I2M Web Portal Editors: Achilles wrote in this 2013 article on the social and physiological factors involved in Germany's retreat from their nuclear power program when about 18 nuclear power plants were in operation and a number more had been slated for construction. As a knee-jerk reaction to the Fukushima nuclear power plant damage by the 2011 tsunami in Japan, where some 30,000 people died (although no one died or was irradiated as a result of the damage to the Fukushima power plant), Germany decided to shutter it's fleet of power plants and began: 1) a hasty increase in construction of wind and solar projects, 2) an increase in dirty-coal burning, and 3) even began to consider buying natural gas from Putin, or 4) buy power from France's nuclear-based power grid, all to provide the increasing power demands of the the German people.
Other German academics also wrote extensively about the social Ludditic over-reaction to the use of nuclear power for domestic purposes after the Fukushima incident (more). However, based on the impact of "run-away" democracy of tens of thousands of ignorant German demonstrators, acting like the modern-day version of the Luddites, the German Government implemented a plan to shutter their nuclear power fleet, even though the government itself had held nuclear in high regard on many levels. As time passed, the renewables have not produced the needed power to date and the electricity costs are increasing rapidly, but Germany continues to "have faith" in renewables. These issues have been further addressed in Campbell (2020). For historical accounts to 2021, see (here).
But Achilles, and other writers, wrote in great detail on why the German populations have led Germany into the power issues it now faces (in 2021), although she inserts in her narrative on U.S. conditions, anti-nuclear misinformation and misinterpretation of nuclear planning in the U.S. by incorporating the typical rumors of the anti-nuclear (pro-renewable, pro-natural gas) groups scattered around the U.S. (more). Such inappropriate social analyses regarding ill-founded social opinions on technical and energy issues have come into question recently (more) and (more).
Nevertheless, she begins, as follows:
"When on March 11, 2011 the 9.0 Great East Japan Earthquake and resultant tsunami crippled the cooling systems at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power station, thus sending several reactors into core meltdown, the German outcry against nuclear energy was almost unanimous. On Saturday, March 12, some 60,000 people demonstrated against the continued operation of one of the country’s oldest nuclear power stations by forming a 45 kilometer human chain from the particular plant to the regional capital. Two days later, more than 100,000 demonstrators took to the streets in 400 towns and cities across the nation. Faced with the rising public pressure, the federal government shut down the country’s seven oldest reactors and imposed a technical audit on all nuclear power plants. In addition, the cabinet appointed an independent ethics committee on the safety of the nation’s energy future.
Upon completion of the review process, Chancellor Angela Merkel announced on May 30 that Germany would phase-out nuclear power by 2022. Parliament passed the respective bill with an overwhelming majority on July 8, 2011. A heated public debate had come to an end: nuclear power was done for and over with. Notably, this radical backlash against nuclear power did not occur in Japan but in a country over 5,500 miles (9000 kilometers) removed from the Fukushima accident and arguably not directly affected by the radioactive fallout.
The immediate formation of an inter-generational cross-party consensus against nuclear energy is stunning especially if one considers the economic risks of the phase-out decision. As this article is being written, Germany is the world’s fourth-largest economy and second-largest industrial exporter, with 1 million jobs in energy-intensive industries such as aluminum and steel. National prosperity relies, among other things, on the steady availability of cheap energy.
In abandoning nuclear power, Germany has committed to replacing one quarter of its electricity supply within a decade. How is the country to achieve this task? The easiest way to close the looming power gap would perhaps be to increase reliance on fossil fuels or buy electricity from France, which generates three-fourths of its electricity from nuclear sources and has significant excess capacity. German popular opinion, however, rejects these options. Although natural gas has gained currency as a “bridging technology,” the aim is to phase out nuclear power and at the same time meet the country’s ambitious domestic climate protection targets. The latter involves cutting carbon emissions by 40% by 2020, 55% by 2030, 70% by 2040, and 80-95% by 2050, relative to the 1990 levels.
To attain these targets, Germany needs to double the amount of electricity generated from renewable sources from 17% in 2011 to 35% by 2020. In addition, electricity consumption is to be reduced by 10%. The ultimate objective is to obtain 80% of all energy from renewable sources by 2050.2 Requiring large investments in alternative technologies, as well as in new power lines and energy storage systems, this radical transformation of the German energy sector amounts to nothing less than a veritable “energy revolution” and is increasingly described in these terms."
Read on ....
Managed & Built by I2M Consulting, LLC | © 2010-
