sinn103_INA FASSBENDERAFP via Getty Images_germanypowerplant

Economics

德国的能源败局

Mar 28, 2022 Hans-Werner Sinn

发自慕尼黑—与其他西方工业化国家相比，德国一直都被视为能源转型的排头兵。政策制定者们预计该国能够通过可再生资源来保证自身全部能源供应，因此决定同时淘汰煤炭和核能——德国17座核电站中的最后三座也将在今年关停。

德国的绿色政治家们总是希望这一能源议程的良好效果能引来其他国家纷纷效仿。但在乌克兰战争爆发后世界反而见证了德国的做法是如何制造了一场政策灾难。

为缓冲淘汰煤炭和核电的双重影响并在向可再生能源的长期过渡中弥补供应缺口，德国决定大量增建天然气发电厂。甚至在俄军入侵乌克兰之前政策制定者还依然假设这些设施所需的天然气将始终来自俄罗斯，因为德国一半以上的需求都是由俄方供应的。

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

Subscribe to PS Digital

Access every new PS commentary, our entire On Point suite of subscriber-exclusive content – including Longer Reads, Insider Interviews, Big Picture/Big Question, and Say More – and the full PS archive.

Subscribe Now

Hans-Werner Sinn

Writing for PS since 2002
110 Commentaries

Hans-Werner Sinn, Professor Emeritus of Economics at the University of Munich, is a former president of the Ifo Institute for Economic Research and serves on the German economy ministry’s Advisory Council. He is the author of Casino Capitalism: How the Financial Crisis Came About and What Needs to be Done Now (Oxford University Press, 2010).

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 5 Comments on this article

vic lai Mar 31, 2022

If Russia insists the payment of natural gas in rubles in the near future, Germany or the EU can raise the necessary rubles through a neutral offshore financial centre like Hong Kong or Singapore, by setting up a special purpose vehicle (SPV) and issuing ruble bonds there.
---
Through China as the intermediary, Russia's rubles can be exchanged for China's yuan (renminbi) through the bilateral swap line between Russia and China, and the rubles so gotten by China can be sent to Hong Kong or Singapore to fund the new issuance of EU's ruble bonds in the primary market.
The rubles so gotten by Russia can be used to buy China's manufacturing exports.
Europe can repay those ruble debts in the future by simply canceling an appropriate amount of Euro debts owed now by Russia to Europe, using a mutually-agreed-upon Euro-Ruble exchange rate.
---
In essence, Russia is using her natural gas to repay her debts currently owed to the EU.
---
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Matthew McCarthy Mar 29, 2022

There is a description of a conflict between moving toward renewables and continuing with coal and nuclear. That conflict is false. There is no reason for Germany NOT to invest in renewables, and it will contribute to a level of energy independence. The issue is that the green movement descriptions of what renewable can and cannot do are unrealistic to the point of dishonesty.. An example of this is "Committed Greens claim ... would not have been a problem..." when there was no possibility that could have been the case with current technology. The Greens have to stop pretending a miracle would have occurred if we had wished hard enough. Push for renewables was good. Pretending that coal and nuclear were not needed was bad and contributed to the current problems.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Paul Friesen Mar 29, 2022

Any decision can go wrong, but decisions must be made. Often, we are far too hard on those who made the decisions in the past without the benefit of the hindsight which we now possess. This is certainly the case with this article.

Relying on Russian gas was not a bad decision at the time. Russia seemed likely to be a reliable supplier, and, indeed, it could have been. We, in the "west", chose to alienate Russia through many insults and aggressions, large and small, over many years. It did not have to be like this.

If Germany had decided to continue with nuclear, there is always the possibility that we would be discussing what a bad decision that was, because there has been an accident, or because spent fuel has fallen into the hands of terrorists who have detonated a "dirty" bomb with it. If it had continued to burn coal, there is a virtual certainty that we would be sitting around discussing what a bad idea that was in a few years, as the climate degenerates into unpredictable instability. That seems likely to happen anyway, but Germany will be less to blame than many other countries.
- Alistair Newton Apr 1, 2022
  
  Any decision can go wrong and often does as a result of unforeseen circumstances. But Frau Doktor Merkel and her government were being reminded constantly by the UK & US about the dangers of over reliance on the trustworthiness of a totalitarian state like Russia.
  
  Germany should never have given permission for the development of NS2, which would have committed it to complete reliance on gas supply from Russia. As soon as a delay to NS2 was suggested, Russia immediately countered by refusing to sign any new long term gas supply agreements and instead relied more and more on the spot market which gave the total control of the volumes delivered and thereby the price payed.
  
  As a direct result not only has the gas price spiked in Europe but the storage facilities in Germany and Austria are sitting at around 25% capacity, with the majority of that volume owned by Gazprom. Russia thus has Germany and the EU in general over a barrel.
  
  Meanwhile, the Ukraine has been unable to export the majority of last years wheat harvest and its ability to plant this years crop will be severely hampered, added to which the cost of gas now being manipulated by Russia means that the cost of ammonia based fertiliser will greatly reduce next years worldwide yields.
  
  This means inevitably that millions upon millions of people from Pakistan and Afghanistan in the east to Morocco in the west, all of whom rely to some extent on imported wheat for their staple bread are either going to starve at home in the next 12 months or begin a trek north into Europe in order to find sustenance.
  
  God help us, and them!
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
hans goessl Mar 28, 2022

Hallo Herr Sinn, danke für den aufschlussreichen Artikel.sie sehen den Zeitraum für den Bau von Terminals bei 2-5 Jahren.Angesichts der Bauzeit des Berliner Flughafens wage ich das zu bezweifeln.Es sei denn Die USA bauen diese ,die wären nämlich Motiviert um ihr Gas schneller an Deutschland verkaufen zu können.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/7n2gZvLzh

德国的能源败局

Subscribe to PS Digital

Green Nuclear Power

New Comment

Contact us

Log in/Register

德国的能源败局

Subscribe to PS Digital

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification