“We will not continue to operate our nuclear power plants” – CFO of German company RWE (German article, translation in the comments)

19 comments

  1. >_RWE’s CFO opposes plans to revive nuclear power – growth with renewables_

    >The explosion in gas and electricity prices has fueled discussion in parts of the EU about a revival of nuclear power. RWE, however, thinks little of this debate. “We will not continue to operate our nuclear power plants,” Michael Müller, the power producer’s chief financial officer, states in an interview with the Börsen-Zeitung. “In Germany, the discussion is over.” There is nothing to dispute about this, and not just from a legal point of view. There are also economic reasons for ending nuclear power: “Incidentally, it’s much more attractive economically to invest in renewables than in nuclear power.”

    >At the same time, Müller can warm to a faster phase-out of coal-fired power generation, as the SPD, Greens and FDP are currently advocating in their exploratory paper. “What is currently being discussed in politics fits in with our strategy, because an earlier phase-out will be accompanied by more and faster growth in renewable energies. We are excellently positioned for this with our portfolio,” explains the CFO. However, in the case of a faster exit from coal, an overall construct must be found that is acceptable to all parties involved. Müller does not comment on the fact that this also involves questions of compensation.

    >RWE is currently in the midst of its transformation from a coal-fired power generator to a pure-play green power provider. Nevertheless, more coal is being used to generate electricity this year – even though the prices for CO 2 certificates have risen noticeably. The reason for this is that less wind is blowing this year and gas-fired power plants are running less due to high gas prices. “The use of coal-fired power plants depends on whether enough renewables and gas-fired power plants are producing electricity. Supply and demand on the electricity market are decisive for the actual use of power plants,” Müller explains.

    >Against the higher prices for pollution rights, RWE stocked up early on with CO 2 certificates. “We have hedged financially until 2030. But hedging transactions never influence power plant operations. By hedging, we are merely protecting ourselves economically,” says Müller, adding that hedging transactions in no way lead to higher CO 2 emissions.

    >However, RWE benefits only to a limited extent from the high electricity prices, as most of the electricity is sold two to three years in advance. “Electricity prices have risen, but so have the prices for fuel and CO 2 certificates. That means the margin has changed little,” the RWE executive explains. In economic terms, however, the rise in electricity prices should be viewed with concern. This makes it all the more important that politicians now accelerate the expansion of renewables. The more electricity comes from wind and sun, the less gas and CO 2 prices play a role. In general, however, weather dependency is increasing in the new energy world.

    All three operators of Germany’s remaining nuclear plants had already stated in [2019](https://m.tagesspiegel.de/wirtschaft/akw-betreiber-gegen-laengere-laufzeiten-die-nutzung-der-kernenergie-hat-sich-erledigt/24422262.html) that they strictly oppose running the plants after 2022.

  3. Funny how nobody mention the actual carbon content of electricity. Isn’t that the goal here?

    France is around 50gCO2/kWh, when can we expect that low from Germany?

  4. If Germany wants to have an unstable and unreliable electricity, they should be free to do so. The only problem is that they are spreading the instability to other countries, importing 90% of the power…

  6. Well, it’s the consensus of all German nuclear power providers. Nuclear is simply more expensive than renewable energy – including or excluding subsidies. Compare for example the [stock prices of energy](https://www.rte-france.com/en/eco2mix/market-data) between France (primarily nuclear) and Germany (decent share of renewables) – Germany isn’t always cheaper, but quite a lot on average. In regards to end customer prices, these differ heavily from actual market prices due to taxes and subsidies.

    Nuclear is also a far more risky investment, as it takes ages to pay off. Just compare at the newest reactor in France, Flamanville 3. Budget went from 3.3 billion estimated to around 20 billion, it’s 10 years behind schedule and the power it produces is going to be 50% more expensive than currently running nuclear power plants.

    Yet even if you discount building: As this article states, from a capitalistic perspective it’s not useful to extend the lifetime of currently build nuclear power plants, as the investment to prolong their lifetime has less return than just building renewable. It’s also not like this is likely to change – It was said that building large reactors like Flamanville 3 would be economically good, cause one large plant is cheaper than many smaller. Now it’s said that the polar opposite will be true in 10 years with modular reactors with the first project supposedly finishing 2035 in Europe. While at the same time renewable energy is becoming cheaper and more efficient every year. Before anyone says “Ofc a German would say that” – even the French agency for an ecological transition (ADEME) said so multiple times since 2015 ([Example](https://www.reuters.com/article/france-nuclearpower-idUSL8N1YF5HC)).

  7. I say sanction Germany for their ignorance. Ruining the energy market in Europe because of their unholy relationship with Gazprom.

  10. Basically Germany is betting on a race against time: Can they get their ideal, perfect solution working in less than fifteen years? If yes, they’ll have worsened the effect of Global Warming on the short term but solved the energy crisis on the long term. If no, then they’ll have worsened the effect of Global Warming on the long term.

    The problem is, even if it doesn’t work, they’ll probably go with the “if we invest just a little more we can do it” mentality.

  13. Just wait till next year when landlords start sending out NK bills depending on how cold he winter is the shits gonna hit the fan. I think a 30 % increase in heating cost isn’t unrealistic

  15. He is just talking what people in Germany like to listen. He doesn’t want to loose his post.

  17. Yes, Yes, Yes to Nuclear Power!!! Not great not terrible… Anyways let’s build nuclear powerplants and store all the radioactive shit in the backyards of the fanboys and those opposing build of renewables

  18. > „Wir werden unsere Atomkraftwerke nicht weiter betreiben“, stellt Michael Müller, Finanzchef des Stromerzeugers, im Interview der Börsen-Zeitung fest. „In Deutschland ist die Diskussion durch.“

    The Nuclear Revivalist will accuse him of lying, still. That he lies, and they absolutely want to have nuclear. I know, because that is what the revivalists have been telling me for the past days.

Leave a Reply