03.09.20 Germany should embrace technologies that make coal climate-friendlier.” Dr. Dietmar Lindenberger • 4 min.

Scroll to Read
Dr. Dietmar Lindenberger

Was Germany right to phase out coal? PD Dr. Dietmar Lindenberger, Director of Applied Research at Cologne University's Institute of Energy Economics, believes it puts the reliability of the country’s energy supply at risk. Instead, he advocates market-based incentives for investments in innovative technologies, including those that make coal-fired power generation more sustainable.

What do you think of Germany’s Coal Exit Law?

It’s the result of a democratic process and is therefore politically legitimate. But it’s not good policy. European countries are ill-advised to take additional climate-protection action for sectors of the economy that are already covered by the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. This sort of double regulation creates unnecessary costs, unnecessary burdens, and unnecessary conflicts. Moreover, the debate that led up to Germany’s phaseout legislation largely ignored some important issues, particularly supply security. Germany’s plans to exit both nuclear and coal will pose significant challenges in the years ahead.

But Germany isn’t fully phasing out coal until 2038. Doesn’t that give it enough time to find a solution?

In theory, yes. Going forward, renewables will indeed provide an increasing share of Germany’s electricity. But they’re not good at meeting peak load, which typically occurs on winter evenings when the sun isn’t shining and the wind doesn’t blow reliably. Electricity imports can close some of this gap. But the supply of imports is limited because neighboring countries typically need to meet their peak load. This means that nearly all of the gap will need to be closed by power plants that burn either natural gas or hydrogen. So technically it’s not a problem. The problem is that there currently aren’t enough incentives to build such power plants.

Dietmar Lindenberger

Dietmar Lindenberger

Why is that?

The market design in Germany is based largely on payment for energy actually delivered. However, the growth in renewables leaves other types of power plants with less and less revenue potential. So although these power plants are needed to meet peak load, they operate too few hours a year to be profitable. This increasingly acute dilemma can only be resolved by a different market design. Instead of being paid only for energy actually delivered, plants that are reliable sources of backup power should also be paid for their availability to provide this service. A good comparison is with the fire department, which isn’t paid for how many fires it puts out but for its uninterrupted availability to fight fires. This type of market design is feasible for power. However, it would need to be coordinated with the overall European electricity market, which would be a complex process.

Could coal be made less carbon-intensive so that it could continue to help ensure Germany and Europe’s electricity supply?

Obviously, renewables should provide an increasing share of Europe’s energy. But there are also technologies – like carbon capture and storage or use (CCS/CCU) – that would make it possible to continue using coal without jeopardizing climate targets. These technologies of course still need to be tested and perfected. One good place to do this would be in regions where a lot of coal is already being used for energy-intensive industrial processes. This would ensure that CCS/CCU infrastructure is fully utilized. In my opinion, North Rhine-Westphalia – which has both heavy industry and deep engineering expertise – could play pioneering role in this technology.

Does investing in technologically complex processes like CCS/CCU really make sense?

It’s true that CCS/CCU is complex. But so is green hydrogen: you need to use green electricity to run electrolysis equipment that transforms water into hydrogen, then store and transport the hydrogen, and ultimately use it in a fuel cell or in other complex industrial processes or burn it to convert it back into electricity. The decarbonization of an industrial system – whether through renewables, CCS/CCU, or green hydrogen – is inevitably complex and, initially, expensive. But the approach shouldn’t be either/or but rather both/and. CCS/CCU also needs to be viewed internationally: it’s unlikely that the massive, cheaply recoverable coal reserves in China, India, and other emerging countries will remain in the ground because of the countries’ climate concerns. Ultimately, CCS/CCU will probably be part of the global solution to reduce carbon emissions. That’s why I think that Germany should not only expand its renewables capacity but also embrace technologies that make coal-fired power generation more sustainable.

Disclaimer

The contents of this website are created with the greatest possible care. However, Uniper SE accepts no responsibility for the accuracy, completeness and topicality of the content provided. Contributions identified by name reflect the opinion of the respective author and not always the opinion of Uniper SE.

You might also like

Atomkraft, Atomkraftwerk
Energy • Economy • Innovation The future of nuclear power Thomas Schmidt • 8 min.
Energy • Economy Can electricity be both renewable and reliable? Hans-Joachim Ziegler • 5 min.
Energy • Climate Cutting carbon cost-effectively Hans-Joachim Ziegler • 6 min.
Energy • Innovation Will hydrogen’s future arrive? Hans-Joachim Ziegler • 7 min.
Energy • Climate • Economy Can our emissions be undone? Hans-Joachim Ziegler • 5 min.
Energy • Innovation • Science A British biologist’s uncanny clairvoyance Dariush Jones • 6 min.
Energy • Society • Climate A new era, a new color, a new world view Dariush Jones • 5 min.
Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
Energy • Society • Economy Russia modernizes its fossil power plants Dariush Jones • 7 min.
Energy • Society • Innovation Less fretting about jetting Thomas Schmidt • 4 min.
Energy • Innovation Harnessing more renewable energy, decarbonizing industry Thomas Schmidt • 3 min.
Energy • Event Debate.Energy Conference: Best of Jochen Brenner • 15 min.
Energy • Society “Corona is accelerating developments that we didn’t expect for several years” Hannah Meisters • 4 min.
Energy • Innovation “As green as hydrogen can get” Hans-Joachim Ziegler • 6 min.
Energy • Climate #Anthropause: is corona climate-friendly? Hans-Joachim Ziegler • 7 min.
Energy • Climate • Politics • Economy Gas is the ideal enabler of a successful energy transition Andreas Schierenbeck, Vorstandsvorsitzender Uniper SE • 4 min.
Joe Biden
Energy • Society • Climate • Politics Biden's climate plan: jobs, workers, unions. Oh, and clean energy too. Dariush Jones • 6 min.
Energy • Innovation • Economy A different incentive for energy efficiency Thomas Schmidt • 7 min.
Donald Trump
Energy • Society • Politics • Climate Donald Trump's climate policy: “A golden age of energy dominance” Dariush Jones • 7 min.
Bremst der Coronavirus die Energiewende aus?
Energy • Climate • Society Opportunity or obstacle? What corona means for the energy transition Hans-Joachim Ziegler • 9 min.
Energy • Innovation • Climate Podcast: "Städte spielen eine zentrale Rolle für die Energiewende" Jochen Brenner • 30 min.
Wasserstoff: Energieträger der Zukunft
Energy • Climate • Opinions Hydrogen: Jules Verne’s vision brought to life Andreas Schierenbeck, Vorstandsvorsitzender Uniper SE • 8 min.
Energy • Innovation Nuclear fusion: elation or illusion? Hans-Joachim Ziegler • 5 min.
Energy • Economy • Science Fuel cells for passenger cars: hope or hype? Hans-Joachim Ziegler • 8 min.
Follow us on Social Media
Follow us
on Social Media