European Nuclear
Disaster |
IEA Misguides
Governments |
Wind & Solar Outpace
Nuclear & Fossil
Fuels
| |
Dear Colleagues
and Friends,
| |
 Energy Watch
Group (EWG) is an
international network of scientists
and parliamentarians. We commission
research projects and publish independent
studies on global energy developments.
Our mission is to provide energy policy - and
you via this newsletter - with objective
information on global energy
developments! | |
The European Pressurized
Reactor (EPR), proclaimed in the 1990s as a new
impetus for the renaissance the European nuclear
industry, proved to be a financial disaster,
fulfilling none of the industry promises, a new
brief by the Energy Watch
Group shows. The EPR construction sites
in Flamanville (France), Olkiluoto (Finland) and
Hinkley Point C (UK) are exemplary of the failed
nuclear industry with no single EPR having been
completed to date. All existing EPR projects are
characterized by years of commissioning delays,
grave technical and security problems and
exploding construction costs of up to tens of
billions Euros.
| |
IEA Misguides
Governments’ Energy
Decisions
The International Energy
Agency (IEA) scenarios are ‘inconsistent’ with
Paris Agreement climate goals and hold back the
governments from achieving them, a new
analysis by Oil Change International
and the Institute for Energy Economics and
Financial Analysis finds. It shows that the IEA
has wrongly guided governments into decisions
about oil, gas and coal use that would cause
severe climate change, EurActiv reports. The
IEA’s New Policy Scenario (NPS) would
make the Paris climate goals unachievable,
exhausting the carbon budget for the 1.5 C limit
by 2022, and for the 2 C limit by
2034.
In his interview to Deutsche
Welle (DW) EWG President Hans-Josef Fell said
the IEA acts "on behalf of the OECD governments
that ultimately oversee it," and reflects their
ongoing commitment to the fossil fuels sector.
"It is likely these scenarios are a major
culprit in the global community's failure to put
a sufficiently intensive focus on renewable
energy over the last ten to 20 years," he told
DW. The Energy Watch Group analysed
the IEA’s misleading energy scenarios in a series of its
studies.
| |
Great news comes from
Portugal this week. In March, the country
produced 103.6% of power from renewable energy
sources, Euractiv reports.
Portugal has topped its earlier record of 99,2%
in 2014. This result shows how ridiculous the
EU’s 27% renewable energy target for 2030 is,
MEP and Member of the Energy Watch Group Claude
Turmes commented on Twitter.
Meanwhile,
the country’s location on the very edge of
mainland Europe and the fact it only shares a
land border with Spain, means its isolation
could stymie its clean energy efforts. On March,
11, Portugal generated 143% of its power from
renewables but without a connected energy grid
or advanced storage systems that energy could go
to
waste. | |
A new sandbag analysis of the
emissions under the EU’s Emissions Trading
Scheme (ETS) shows a worrying growth of lignite
emissions by 3%, the first rise since 2012. For
the first time lignite emissions overtook
ha rd coal emissions.
A former energy transition forerunner Germany
accounted for three times higher lignite
emissions than any other European
country.
Meanwhile, the data from
the Federal
Environment Agency (UBA) shows that German
greenhouse gases dip slightly in 2017 mainly
driven by thriving wind power and declining hard
coal power, Clean Energy
Wire reports. Several environmental
groups called for more action and a coal phase
out. Especially in the transport sector no
progress is being made. Euractiv provides a good
overview about the merits of electric vehicles
to reduce carbon emissions already
today. | |
United States
Could Be Powered by Renewables
Only
In 2017, electricity
g eneration from fossil fuels
in the US declined whereas generation from
renewables increased, Cleantechnica reports.
According to the US Energy Information
Administration, natural gas generation fell by
7.7% and coal generation fell by 2.5%, whereas
generation from hydro, wind, and solar all
increased, compared to 2016. Meanwhile,
another study, which analysed 36 years of hourly
weather data in the US came to a conclusion that
wind, solar and storage can power most of the
country, the Guardian reports.
The
deadlock of relying on coal and nuclear plants
and failure to diversify into renewable energy
was recently demonstrated by the bankruptcy of
FirstEnergy Solutions, ThinkProgress reports.
The company had to declare an power emergency
asking for financial subsidies of the
state. | |
 Windfarms and solar panels
in the UK produced more electricity than the
country’s eight nuclear power stations at the
end of last year, The
Guardian reports. That means the share
of renewables accounted for 29% whereas nuclear
sources only reached 21%, the Independent writes. Wind
and solar now account for the second largest
source of electricity as coal usage declined
simultaneously by 19%, which lead to an overall
emissions drop of 2.6% in 2017, Cleantechnica writes. The
costs for new offshore wind halved in 2017 and
onshore wind is already the cheapest power
source in the
UK.
Meanwhile, solar
PV has become the cheapest energy source in
Germany, the Clean Energy
Wire reports. The study by the
Frauenhofer ISE Institute shows that solar PV
costs ranged between 3.71 and 11.54
eurocents/kWh, followed by onshore wind.
Offshore wind is more expensive due to higher
construction and maintenance cost, whereas
lignite and gas are even more expensive.
According to Fraunehofer ISE, field solar PV
installations and onshore wind turbines will
undercut the average power generation costs of
all fossil plants by
2035.
| |
Top Banks Keep
Pumping Billions In Fossil
Fuels
Despite the global
commitments to combat climate change some of the
biggest banks are still investing enormous sums
in the dirtiest fossil fuels, The
Guardian reports. The annual “Banking on Climate
Change” report by a network of environmental
organisations, which tracked 36 of the world’s
biggest banks, found that they funneled $115
billion into extreme fossil fuels in 2017, an
increase of 11% from 2016. Coal mining financing
has more than doubled since 2015. In Europe, and
in spite of a raft of coal finance restrictions
introduced in recent years by most of the 14
assessed European banks, coal financing (mining
and power) rose by more than $2 billion in 2017,
with HSBC the biggest culprit by far.
Meanwhile, a new paper by
the London School of Economics and the Australia
Institute makes a strong case for cutting off
the subsidies to fossil fuels, Vox reports. The paper
summarizes the economic and political benefits
of restrictive supply-side (RSS) climate
policies and argues that they deserve a place
alongside carbon prices and renewable energy
supports in the climate policy
toolkit. | |
A new study by
Prof. Dr. Christian Breyer, EWG Co-Chairman and
Professor for Solar Economy at the Lappeenranta
University of Technology, and his colleagues
simulated a transition towards a 100%
renewable energy (RE) power sector in Europe by
2050. The study results indicate that the
levelised cost of electricity falls from a
current level of 69 €/MWhe to 51 €/MWhe in 2050
through the adoption of low cost RE power
generation, improvements in efficiency, and
expanded power interconnections. Additionally,
flexibility of and stability in the power system
are provided by increasing shares of energy
storage solutions over time, in parallel with
expected price decreases in these
technologies. | |
 The Baltic Sea Region
could become the first area of Europe to reach a
100% renewable energy (RE) power sector, a new
study by Prof.
Dr. Christian Breyer and his colleagues
shows. Simulations of the system transition from
2015 to 2050 were performed using an hourly
resolved model which defines the roles of
storage technologies in a least cost system
configuration. A 100% RE system can be an
economical and efficient solution for the Baltic
Sea Region, one that is also compatible with
climate change mitigation targets set out by
COP21. | |
The shipping industry
alone accounted for 2.1% of global greenhouse
gas emissions in 2012, however, due to energy
requirements and weight restrictions, batteries
and direct electrification cannot be used
much to mitigate emissions, in particular
for long-distance shipping. Synthetic fuels, as
an indirect electrification option, are a viable
solution to achieve emission reduction
goals.
A new study of
Prof. Dr. Christian Breyer of the Lappeenranta
University of Technology and his colleagues
determines the most cost effective combination
of synthetic fuels and fuel cells or internal
combustion engines to replace fossil oil as the
main propulsion fuel in the shipping industry in
2030 and 2040. The fuels, namely
RE-FT-Diesel, RE-LNG, RE-LH2 and RE-MeOH, are
analysed for both an internal combustion engine
and a fuel cell. The scenarios were analysed by
comparing the levelised cost of mobility
(LCOM). | | | | |
