The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry

Massive Protest Planned Against New Atomic Weapons In Germany

flag_germanyUS Nuclear Weapons In Europe: Massive Protest Planned Against New Atomic Weapons In Germany, IBT,  By  @Charress on October 01 2015 Nearly 100,000 people in Germany have signed a petition protesting a plan to introduce U.S. nuclear weapons on German soil. The U.S. military was supposed to place new weapons in the country toward the end of 2015, but a statement from officials said that the transfer would likely take place closer to 2020.

However, this has not stopped the mass petition from moving forward, according to report by Russian state news site Sputnik. “Since this is about strengthening offensive weapons, we call on the federal government, the Parliament, the chancellor and the federal president to stop nuclear armaments on German soil,” the petition said……


The U.S. continues to maintain nuclear carrying facilities in Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy and Turkey through a NATO sharing program. Host countries make decisions on weapons policy, maintain equipment required for the use of nuclear weapons and carry out consultations. France and the United Kingdom are the only countries in Europe that maintain state-owned nuclear arsenals.

In March 2010, a majority of German MPs decided that the government should “urge American allies to withdraw US nuclear weapons from Germany.” But instead of eliminating the weapons, the U.S. made plans to deploy 20 more, according to Sputnik.

October 2, 2015 Posted by | Germany, opposition to nuclear | Leave a comment

German public strongly support renewables, not coal or nuclear

flag_germanyGerman support for renewables still high, low for nuclear and logo-Energiewendecoal  By  on 24 September 2015 Energy Transition

A recent survey conducted among the German public finds continuing support for the Energiewende. Furthermore, only a third said the cost was too high. Craig Morris says a closer look also reveals that people who already have systems close by are less likely to oppose them. The average German household currently pays 18 euros per month for the renewable energy surcharge. A survey conducted in August by TNS Emnid for renewable energy organization AEE finds that only 31 percent of the participants believe that is too much, compared to 57 percent who believe that amount is acceptable and six percent who think more needs to be paid. Overall, a whopping 93 percent of those surveyed said that further growth of renewables was “important” or “very important.”

The survey also included a question about the acceptability of specific electricity generation systems. While 68 percent support renewable energy systems in general, only seven percent like coal plants – and only four percent nuclear. Note that in all cases, acceptance increased when people already had experience living close to such plants.

Acceptance of solar power plants was the greatest at 77 percent, compared to only 59 percent for wind turbines. But notice the huge discrepancy: a far higher number (72 percent) of people who have experienced wind farms nearby support the technology.

In contrast, support for biogas units was the lowest at a mere 39 percent, rising only to 53 percent among those who already have experience or live close by to those units. This low level of support is one reason for why the government has clamped down on bioenergy in general; the other reason is cost.

Finally, the survey asked what people expect of the Energiewende. The top answer was “making the future safer for our children and grandchildren” at 77 percent, followed by “”protecting the climate” at 73 percent. In contrast, only 33 percent believe the energy transition will “lower costs for consumers in the long term.”

Questions about energy democracy – “citizens can take part in energy supply” and “more competition with power corporations” – revealed middling expectations at 57 and 50 percent, respectively. Note, however, that the question was not why people supported the Energiewende, but what outcome they expected it to produce.

Similar questions were asked in a survey from September 2013, which also found exactly 93 percent in support for the growth of renewables. Likewise, support for the various technologies has only shifted slightly, as have the expectations, which had the exact same order (with slightly different numbers) two years ago. In other words, over the past two years, support for the Energiewende has hardly changed.


September 25, 2015 Posted by | Germany, politics | Leave a comment

German utility E.ON gives up plan to set up anew nuclear company, in view of new liability law proposed

E.ON Faces Massive Loss After Scrapping German Nuclear Spinoff
Utility said it would post a hefty net loss this year after booking billions of euros in impairments
, WSJ,  MONICA HOUSTON-WAESCH and FRIEDRICH GEIGER Sept. 10, 2015  BERLIN—E.ON SE will post a massive loss this year after ditching plans to unload its German nuclear operations into a new company, in a nod to government proposals to saddle utilities with liabilities related to nuclear energy.

E.ON expects to book impairment costs this quarter of as much as €9 billion ($10 billion), triggering a multibillion-euro loss. Its shares plunged to an all-time low on Thursday, dropping 6% to €9.09.

The German utility had planned to move its nuclear operations into Uniper, a company being established to operate conventional power, trading, exploration and production. The spinoff will proceed but without German nuclear activities, said E.ON, which also has Swedish nuclear operations……..

E.ON’s decision was prompted by government proposals for legal changes that would make utilities permanently liable for the costs of nuclear waste and plant decommissioning……..

E.ON now plans to bundle its German nuclear operations into an independent unit within E.ON. Its Swedish nuclear operations will be spun off into Uniper as planned……

September 11, 2015 Posted by | business and costs, Germany | Leave a comment

German govt to change nuclear liability law – to make utilities pay up for nuclear exit costs

nuke-reactor-deadGermany proposes changes to nuclear liability law- draft law BERLIN, SEPT 2 The German government has proposed changes to a law to prevent German utilities from evading the payment of billions of euros needed to fund the country’s nuclear exit, according to a copy of the draft law seen by Reuters.

The document says that utilities will be liable for the costs of shutting down power plants and disposing of nuclear waste even if they give up control of subsidiary companies or spin-offs.

A spokesperson for the economy ministry said the draft law was currently being discussed by government departments.

Under current corporate laws, companies are liable for spun off units for five years, but there has been concern utilities might break up to avoid paying for the dismantling of Germany’s nuclear plants, the last of which will be shut for good in 2022. (Reporting byGernot Heller; Writing by Caroline Copley; Editing by Madeline Chambers)

September 4, 2015 Posted by | Germany, politics | Leave a comment

Germany’s new nuclear waste plan shows how dangerous radioactive trash is

radioactive trashthe plan for dealing with the waste has a much longer time-scale, one which makes clear just how dangerous nuclear waste is to dispose of.

an actual location won’t be chosen until 2031, and it will take until 2050 to convert that site until it is ready to store the waste. The process of moving the waste there will then take several more decades.

Germany draws up new plan to dispose of nuclear waste 12 Aug 15  The German government has presented its plan for permanently disposing of nuclear waste. Critics say the proposal is a tacit admission that it is a bigger problem than it has ever acknowledged before. Pausing only to get the okay from the cabinet, Environment Minister Barbara Hendricks gave a press conference on Wednesday to present the government’s brand new plan for dealing with radioactive waste. Continue reading

August 15, 2015 Posted by | Germany, wastes | Leave a comment

Smart economics: Germany’s decision to phase out nuclear power

Why Germany’s decision to phase out nuclear power is smart economics , REneweconomy, By  on 4 August 2015 London School of Economics

Germany has made a formal commitment to phase out the use of nuclear power by 2022. Erik Gawel and Sebastian Strunz write on the implications of the strategy for Germany’s future energy mix and whether the approach adopted in the country could function as a model for other European states. They argue that while the target is undeniably challenging, long-term it is economically sensible and feasible to phase out both fossil fuels and nuclear energy in favour of renewables.

Political responses to climate change and other negative consequences of conventional energies within Europe (e.g. oil spills, radioactive waste, open pit coal mining) are highly diverse. While the UK is promoting nuclear as a carbon-free energy source, for instance, Germany has embarked on a completely different path with its plan to phase out nuclear energy altogether. What is the background of Germany’s phase-out decision and how sensible is it from an economic point of view?

In order to fully answer this question, several aspects need to be acknowledged. First, the phase-out is no impulsive reaction to the Fukushima incident, which came out of the blue. Germany’s powerful anti-nuclear movement dates back to the 1970s; it bred the Green Party which entered the Parliament in 1983 and ascended to the government in 1998 by forming a coalition with the Social Democrats. In 2000 this centre-left coalition put a nuclear phase-out into law for the first time. The early 2020s were identified as the target date for a nuclear free energy system. While subsequent revisions of the law have changed the specifics, the currently stipulated year for the last plant to be shut down, 2022, is well in line with this original perspective. Thus, the phase-out project has always been crafted as a long-term and step-wise process.

Second, the Fukushima disaster effectively killed the narrative that nuclear power was necessary as a ‘bridging technology’ toward a renewables-based energy system. While conservatives had previously argued in line with this logic (and the government led by Chancellor Merkel in 2010 diluted the first phase-out law from 2000 by extending the running times of nuclear plants), they reversed their position after Fukushima. The most immediate consequence of Merkel’s shift on nuclear was the prompt shutdown of seven nuclear power plants in spring 2011. Due to overcapacities, this drop has neither proven to be problematic for the security of supply (contrary to the conservatives’ claims before 2011) nor has it led to an enduring increase of wholesale prices or a requirement to import foreign nuclear power. In fact, Germany is still a net exporter of electricity.

Third, Germany is not alone in phasing out nuclear power. As can be seen from Table 1, [in original] there are several countries in Europe that do not rely on nuclear power or have also declared their intention to stop nuclear energy production. While some of the countries without nuclear are smaller EU member states, it is noteworthy that Italy, another highly industrialised economy and member of the G7, has never used nuclear power. The highly diverse picture of nuclear energy in Europe becomes complete when the huge differences in nuclear-shares among countries are considered, as well as the fact that countries such as Poland intend to enter this form of energy………..

Is nuclear power a necessary part of a future energy mix?

All things considered, is nuclear power necessary for decarbonising the energy supply while also ensuring security of supply? The German experience shows that renewable energies may contribute major shares of the electricity supply – without jeopardising energy security in a highly industrialised economy and even under challenging natural frame conditions in Germany for renewables, provided that there is a long-term transition perspective and a stable political consensus.

Moreover, it may be questioned whether the long-term risks associated with nuclear power really fit the requirements of any sustainable energy system which demands being more than simply carbon-free. But even apart from such sustainability issues, the apparent need for heavy subsidies to render new nuclear plants economically viable undercuts the claim that nuclear is cheaper than renewable energy sources, even in terms of financial costs only. On the contrary, a recent Prognos study estimates that “new wind and solar can provide carbon-free power at up to 50 per cent lower generation costs than new nuclear”. Accounting for backup requirements in times without wind or sun, a combined system of wind, solar and gas is still 20 per cent cheaper than a system of nuclear and gas.

Sure enough, Germany has to cope with the side-effects of the transition (e.g. current rises in retail electricity prices) and interactions with other developments (e.g. increasing electricity production from lignitemainly due to high gas prices and the record low emission allowance prices). Yet, nuclear energy is rarely an inevitable part of decarbonising energy provision. Until now, Germany’s political consensus is very solid in this respect – and while the transition effort is indeed challenging, this does not diminish its merits from an economic point of view: in the long run, it seems both sensible and feasible to phase out fossil and nuclear energies in favour of renewables, thus treading a long but well-considered path towards comprehensive sustainability of energy provision, including long-term cost-effectiveness.

Source: This article was first published at the LSE’s Europblog

August 5, 2015 Posted by | business and costs, Germany, politics | Leave a comment

Germany sets new record for renewable energy – 78% renewable electricity July 25



According to an analysis by German energy expert Craig Morris at the Energiewende blog, a stormy day across northern Europe combined with sunny conditions in southern Germany led to the new record, the exact figures of which are still preliminary. Morris writes that most of Germany’s wind turbines are installed in the north and most of its solar panels are in the south.

If the figures hold, it will turn out that wind and solar generated 40.65 gigawatts (GW) of power on July 25. When this is combined with other forms of renewables, including 4.85 GW from biomass and 2.4 GW from hydropower, the total reaches 47.9 GW of renewable power — occurring at a time when peak power demand was 61.1 GW on Saturday afternoon. To bolster his analysis, Morris points to early figures from Agora Energiewende, a Germany energy policy firm, that have renewables making up 79 percent of domestic power consumption that day.

Renewable sources accounted for 27.8 percent of Germany’s power consumption in 2014, up from 6.2 percent in 2000. The expansion of renewables and another weather phenomenon — a relatively mild winter — led to Germany’s greenhouse gas emissions falling for the first time in three years in 2014, a 4.3 percent year-over-year drop. Greenhouse gas emissions are now down to their lowest level since 1990, according to analysts at Agora Energiewende.

This made 2014 a big year for Germany’s renewable energy transition, known as Energiewende, which requires the phasing out of nuclear energy by 2022 and reducing greenhouse gases at least 80 percent by 2050. The government also wants the at least double the percentage of renewables in the energy mix by 2035………..

As more and more wind turbines and solar panels come online there is a major technology push to create better forecasting software and to increase the efficiency and enhance the location of these forms of power. IBM and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) recentlyannounced that they are working on a producing solar and wind forecasting that’s at least 30 percent more accurate than conventional methods.

“There is good reason to believe that with better forecasts, it might be possible to push solar’s energy contribution up to 50 percent [by 2050],” IBM Research Manager Hendrick Hamann recently said about the United States. “As we continue to refine our system in collaboration with the DOE, we hope to double the accuracy of the system in the next year. That could have a huge impact on the energy industry — and on local businesses, the economy and the natural environment.”

July 31, 2015 Posted by | Germany, renewable | Leave a comment

German government requiring nuclear utilities to pay up in costs for disposing of radioactive trash

nuke-reactor-deadBerlin says utilities can’t dodge responsibility for nuclear waste

German Economy Minister Sigmar Gabriel said on Friday that if the provisions by utilities for shutting down nuclear power plants were not sufficient, the government needed to discuss asking the companies to make further payments.

Gabriel also said that Berlin wanted to rule out quickly by law the possibility for utilities to reduce their financial liability regarding the de-nuclearization of the country.

Germany’s four nuclear operators — E.ON, RWE, EnBW and Vattenfall — have set aside around 36 billion euros ($39.99 billion) in provisions for shutting down nuclear power plants and building a safe disposal site for highly radioactive waste.

(Reporting by Gernot Heller; Writing by Michael Nienaber; Editing by Michelle Martin)

July 4, 2015 Posted by | Germany, wastes | Leave a comment

Grafenrheinfeld nuclear reactor closes, as Germany’s renewable energy surges ahead

with the closure of this reactor, we see the victory of renewables over nuclear power. Germany is leading the way globally to the safe, clean energy future. The rest of the world needs to follow.
Germany-1013-renewGermany’s Energy Revolution goes from strength to strength as the Grafenrheinfeld nuclear reactor closes

 by Justin McKeating – 25 June, 2015 

One less nuclear reactor threat to the people of Europe with the early closure of the Grafenrheinfeld nuclear reactor. Germany’s 33 year-old Grafenrheinfeld nuclear reactor will be shut down permanently on June 27th as the country’s phase out of nuclear power continues. It’s the first reactor to close since Germany passed its Atomic Energy Act in July 2011 which requires the closure of all commercial nuclear reactors by the end of 2022.

The reactor is being shutdown seven months early as the disastrous economics of nuclear power and Germany’s drive for clean and sustainable energy have made it impossible for its owner E.ON to operate the reactor and make a profit.

E.ON and other large nuclear utilities only have themselves to blame. They failed to anticipate the growth of renewable energy and so they failed to invest in it. At the same time, electricity prices have fallen making their nuclear power plants even less profitable.

That said, even E.ON is waking up to the new energy future of Germany. “The transformation of Europe’s energy system continues to offer us attractive growth opportunities in renewables and distributed energy,” said the company in a report from March this year.

But what are the implications of the closure of Grafenrheinfeld? Won’t it leave an energy gap?

In short: no. Continue reading

June 27, 2015 Posted by | ENERGY, Germany | Leave a comment

Germany closes a nuclear power plant, moves ahead on renewable energy

logo-Energiewende‘Green superpower’ Germany plots the way to a low-carbon world by closing Grafenrheinfeld nuclear power plant, SMH,  June 20, 2015  Environment Editor, The Sydney Morning Herald

 Many countries face challenges in cutting greenhouse emissions but few set their bar as high as Germany. Germany will permanently close the Grafenrheinfeld nuclear power plant in the country’s south on Saturday, the latest in a phase-out that is scheduled to see the European powerhouse’s last nine fissile fuel plants closed by about 2022.

Leaving nuclear is not without its critics, especially among big utilities: Sweden’s Vattenfall is reportedly suing the German government for €4.7 billion ($6.9 billion) to compensate for its losses.

And yet, German policymakers seem determined to stick to an ambitious – and unilateral – goal of slashing greenhouse gas emissions by 40 per cent on 1990 levels, even if that means shutting near zero-carbon nuclear plants along the way. The cuts deepen to 55 per cent by 2030 and 80-95 per cent by 2050.

The country is also betting big that renewable energy mainly from wind, solar and hydro power will continue to surge beyond its current share of about 28 per cent of total supply…….

The dramatic plunge in renewable energy prices – with solar panels becoming about 20 per cent cheaper for every doubling of output – has undermined whatever business case existed for nuclear energy, Kraemer says.

“Solar is competitive with new coal and new nuclear [power plants], and even with old coal if you price the carbon emissions properly,” Kraemer says.  [Andreas Kraemer, founder and director emeritus of the Ecologic Institute, a Berlin-based think tank.]

Germans freely admit that overly generous feed-in tariffs paid to those supplying renewable energy to the grid meant the country paid billions of euros too much to install solar panels on the roofs of some 3.5 million homes and small businesses in a country not known for its bounteous sunshine. Sunshine hours in Berlin, a relatively northern city, peak at an average of eight hours a day in May-July, but drop to just one hour by December, according to a local tourist guide.

The levy now costs users 6.17 euro cents (9¢) per kilowatt-hour, boosting residents’ costs for power to about 26 euro cents/KW-hour. [By contrast, this correspondent pays about 31¢ in Sydney for 100 per cent renewable power.]

The subsidies underpin Germany’s Energiewende, or energy transition, a policy which is gaining international attention. The word is apparently the most commonly searched-for German word, eclipsing angst and blitzkrieg, according to one local supporter.

Renewable energy’s share of the country’s total electricity supply has almost quadrupled. Nuclear’s share has roughly halved over the same period from 27 per cent to about 14 per cent………

June 20, 2015 Posted by | Germany, renewable | Leave a comment

Court rules in favour of Germany’s nuclear fuel tax

German nuclear fuel duty is legal, says European court, World Nuclear News 05 June 2015 Germany’s tax on nuclear fuel conforms to European Union laws, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled yesterday.

Since January 2011, each gram of fissile nuclear fuel loaded into a German reactor has carried a levy of €145 ($161). The tax is expected to bring in about €2.3 billion ($2.6 billion) in revenues annually.

That tax was imposed by the state as a consequence of an amendment to the 2002 Atomic Energy Act that allowed longer operating lives for German reactors. However, the government adhered to the new tax even though, in reaction to the 2011 Fukushima accident in Japan, it took away the longer lives and forced the early closure of older units. Power companies were quick to take the matter to court……..

The ECJ has now ruled that the duty on nuclear fuel is indeed compatible with EU law. It said, “By today’s judgement, the Court of Justice replies that EU law does not preclude a duty such as the German duty on nuclear fuel.”

The court rejected a claim that nuclear fuel must be exempt from taxation under the European directive on taxation of energy products and electricity. This directive exempts energy products subject to harmonized excise duty and used to produce electricity. The court noted that nuclear fuel is not included in the list of fuels set out in that directive. “In essence, the court rejects the idea that a duty cannot be levied at the same time on the consumption of electricity and on the sources from which it is produced which are not energy products within the meaning of the directive,” the ECJ said in a statement.

The ECJ also determined that the EU directive concerning the general arrangements for excise duty does not preclude the German duty on nuclear fuel. It said Germany’s tax is levied on a fuel for electricity production and not levied on the consumption of the electricity produced. It therefore does not constitute excise duty or ‘other indirect taxes’ on that product within the meaning of the directive, the court ruled.

Germany’s tax on nuclear fuel does not also constitute state aid, the court said…….

June 6, 2015 Posted by | Germany, Legal | Leave a comment

Coal fired energy ‘s decline in Germany, and Europe generally

we still occasionally see rubbish published around the place that there are all these coal fired power plants about to begin operation in Germany. The Carbon Tracker report points out that since 2008 there were more than 100 new coal plants announced that have not been built. Once you take into account closures, not just openings, since 2000 there has been a new reduction of 19 gigawatts of coal capacity.

The reality that blogosphere and the conservative press don’t seem to have caught up with is that with wholesale power prices stuck at low levels, construction of a new coal fired power station is a licence to haemorrhage money.  

The circumstances surrounding this European utility decline look eerily familiar to the situation here in Australia. Electricity demand has stagnated, while solar PV in particular has taken off. 

Could this be AGL and EnergyAustralia’s horrible fate?, Climate Spectator TRISTAN EDIS 5 JUN, “……………….A report released by the Carbon Tracker Initiative has collated a huge array of data which provides a striking summary of how Europe’s conventional power utilities have been thrown into financial turmoil since 2008 due to being squeezed at one end by improved energy productivity and at the other end by growing use of renewable energy.

As the chart below [in original article] illustrates the stock market value of the EU’s largest 5 power generators has plunged by over 100 billion euros (or 37% of their value) between 2008 to 2013. The other big utility in the chart below that has beaten the trend has been Enel which moved into renewables….

logo-EnergiewendeThis hasn’t been simply a function of a broader economic downturn in Europe. By contrast with the plunge in these utilities’ stock value Germany’s stock market increased 18% over the same period with a major divergence emerging in performance…..

at the same time as electricity demand was stagnating, renewable energy was being pushed into the system driven by governments’ responding to public concern about climate change and a future industrial opportunity. The chart below [in original article] illustrates that while power demand has stagnated, renewables gained 10% market share from nuclear and fossil fuel generators……… Continue reading

June 6, 2015 Posted by | climate change, Germany | Leave a comment

Germany’s coal power production in decline, along with nuclear exit

text-renw-GermanyZero German coal plants as a reaction to Fukushima, Energy Transition, [excellent diagrams]  27 May 2015   by   Reading headlines like “Germany’s nuclear cutback is darkening European skies” makes Craig Morris despair over the state of journalism……

..there has been no surge in coal power during the nuclear phase-out. In fact, total coal power production (both lignite and hard coal) fell by six percent last year alone. ……….

We are left with no coal plants in the pipeline as a reaction to Fukushima accident and Germany’s nuclear phase-out. Nor has there been a boom in new coal plants and coal electricity generation in Germany since the Fukushima accident. All of this information is publicly available,……Craig Morris (@PPchef) is the lead author of German Energy Transition. He directs Petite Planète and writes every workday for Renewables International

May 30, 2015 Posted by | climate change, Germany | Leave a comment

Nazi radiation experiments on humans

Nazi Human Experimentation NMR’s Blog  29 May 2015 Nazi human experimentation was medical experimentation on large numbers of people by the German Nazi regime in its concentration camps during World War II. At Auschwitz, under the direction of Dr. Eduard Wirths, selected inmates were subjected to various experiments which were supposedly designed to help German military personnel in combat situations, to aid in the recovery of military personnel that had been injured, and to advance the racial ideology backed by the Third Reich.After the war, these crimes were tried at what became known as the Doctors’ Trial, and revulsion at the abuses perpetrated led to the development of the Nuremberg Code of medical ethics…………..

Sterilization experiments
From about March 1941 to about January 1945, sterilization experiments were conducted at Auschwitz, Ravensbrück, and other places by Dr. Carl Clauberg.The purpose of these experiments was to develop a method of sterilization which would be suitable for sterilizing millions of people with a minimum of time and effort. These experiments were conducted by means of X-ray, surgery and various drugs. Thousands of victims were sterilized.
Aside from its experimentation, the Nazi government sterilized around 400,000 individuals as part of its compulsory sterilization program.Intravenous injections of solutions speculated to contain iodine and silver nitrate were successful, but had unwanted side effects such as vaginal bleeding, severe abdominal pain, and cervical cancer.
Therefore, radiation treatment became the favored choice of sterilization. Specific amounts of exposure to radiation destroyed a person’s ability to produce ova or sperm. The radiation was administered through deception. Prisoners were brought into a room and asked to complete forms, which took two to three minutes. In this time, the radiation treatment was administered and, unknown to the prisoners, they were rendered completely sterile. Many suffered severe radiation burns……..
Many of the subjects died as a result of the experiments conducted by the Nazis, while many others were murdered after the tests were completed or to study the effect post mortem.Those who survived were often left mutilated, suffering permanent disability, weakened bodies, and mental duress.On August 19, 1947, the doctors captured by Allied forces were put on trial in USA vs. Karl Brandt et al., which is commonly known as the Doctors’ Trial. At the trial, several of the doctors argued in their defense that there was no international law regarding medical experimentation………
Eventually, the minister for religious, educational, and medical affairs issued a directive stating that medical interventions other than for diagnosis, healing, and immunization were excluded under all circumstances if “the human subject was a minor or not competent for other reasons” or if the subject had not given his or her “unambiguous consent” after a “proper explanation of the possible negative consequences” of the intervention. However, this was not legally binding.
In response, Drs. Leo Alexander and Andrew Conway Ivy drafted a ten point memorandum entitled Permissible Medical Experiment that went on to be known as the Nuremberg Code.The code calls for such standards as voluntary consent of patients, avoidance of unnecessary pain and suffering, and that there must be a belief that the experimentation will not end in death or disability.However, the Code was not cited in any of the findings against the defendants and never made it into either German or American medical law.

May 30, 2015 Posted by | Germany, history, radiation | 1 Comment

German nuclear utilities don’t have enough money for decomissioning reactors

nuke-reactor-deadGerman utilities have ‘set aside too little’ for nuclear exit   Andrew Lee  May 28 2015 Provisions set aside by German utilities for nuclear decommissioning aren’t sufficient and should be transferred into a public fund for safe keeping, says a study by the respected DIW Berlin economic think-tank.

Germany’s top four utilities E.ON, RWE, EnBW, Vattenfall have set aside €38bn ($41.4bn) to pay for the decommissioning of the country’s remaining nuclear power stations and the final storage of highly radioactive waste.But preliminary estimates assume the costs for the nuclear decommissioning and waste storage to cost at least €50-70bn, the DIW says.

Also, the provisions aren’t protected from insolvencies, and the utilities could also try to escape their responsibility by restructuring their businesses, claim the authors of the DIW study – energy experts Claudia Kemfert, Christian von Hirschhausen and Cornelia Ziehm.

It is also questionable what value the provisions will have in a couple of years given the declining profitability of large utilities.”Seen these great risks, the provisions of the nuclear corporations should be transferred into a publicly administered fund as soon as possible,” von Hirschhausen proposes.

German utilities have always said their provisions for the nuclear exit are sufficient. But Germany’s largest utility, E.ON, late last year announced its split into a company for renewables, grids and customer solutions that will keep its current brand name, and another one to be named Uniper that will bundle its current nuclear and fossil activities.

Although debt-free at its onset next year, there are doubts whether Uniper can stay profitable over the long run, while the remaining E.ON may be exempt from the nuclear responsibility.

The DIW study also said that Germany’s electricity supply will be safe also after the last nuclear plant has been switched off in 2022 as the country currently is producing far more power than it needs, a situation that isn’t expected to change even with the nuclear phase-out.

E.ON will switch off its 1.3GW Grafenrheinfeld nuclear power plant in Bavaria state in the second half of next month. The 10 terawatt hours it produces per year can be compensated by coal and gas-fired energy, the DIW says. Separately, Vattenfall and E.ON today said they have closed a cooperation agreement for the decommissioning and dismantling process of joint nuclear plants.

May 29, 2015 Posted by | decommission reactor, Germany | Leave a comment


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,060 other followers