Shouldn’t the Ruhr region have articulated its demands earlier and more clearly?
A central point was the development of future job prospects for highly qualified people. Where jobs are lost in the power plants and in open cast lignite mining or in the dependent trades, new jobs have to be created to the same extent, and if possible covered by collective bargaining agreements. The final report therefore also provides for structural aid for the hard coal fired power plant sites.
In retrospect, there is an even stronger impression that there will be compensation arrangements for open cast mines and lignite-fired power plants, but that operators of hard coal fired power plants will be left to their own devices ...
That impression is deceptive. If the legislature wants to accelerate the reduction of coal-fired power generation – which is already taking place through emissions trading and the expansion of energy from renewables – compensation must be paid. This was the basis of my negotiations. At the insistence of the industry, the final report makes it clear that negotiations with power plant operators must include arrangements on compensation. The level is not set by the Commission, but the principle certainly is.
What could that compensation for the operators of hard coal fired power plants look like?
Decommissioning should only take place with the agreement of the power plant owners. There are several options in this regard. A decommissioning premium or a conversion bonus under the Combined Heat and Power Act would have to be attractive enough for a power plant owner to decide in favor of decommissioning. This will be a particular challenge if the amount of the decommissioning premium is determined by auction. Nevertheless, the Commission also considers it conceivable that compensation could be based on the standby mode formula.
In 2022, the last nuclear power plant is to be shut down, and at the same time lignite-fired and hard coal fired power plants with a capacity of more than twelve gigawatts (GW) are to be shut down. A maximum of nine gigawatts of lignite capacity and eight gigawatts of hard coal capacity are to be connected to the grid by 2030 – can security of supply really be guaranteed under these conditions?
Security of supply plays a central role for Germany as a business location: Electricity straight out of the socket around the clock and a secure heat supply, the core competences of municipal utilities, are services of general interest. The development of generation capacity will need to be assessed more precisely in future. The Commission has followed the VKU proposal and recommends the further development of security of supply monitoring in order to continuously analyze future security of energy supply in a risk and demand oriented manner.
In view of declining domestic generation capacities, will German industry have to prepare itself to become heavily dependent on electricity imports in the future?
This is after all about reducing guaranteed capacity. If we want to compensate for that, we will need new generation plants in Germany. The scenarios drawn up by the Federal Network Agency show that by 2030 we will need an increase of up to ten gigawatts in gas-fired power plants. Otherwise, there will be a risk of considerable bottlenecks. Only 2.2 GW is under construction or in planning. Gas-fired CHP plants are essential for security of supply, and it is therefore a fundamental recommendation of the Commission that government support for combined heat and power generation should be extended and made more attractive.
Is the inspection clause recommended by the WSB Commission sufficient to verify the effectiveness of the measures, or should there be further monitoring dates?
The section on monitoring was fiercely debated until the last night of negotiations. We now recommend that in the years 2023, 2026 and 2029 the implementation of the measures and their effects on climate protection, security of supply, electricity costs and regional development and employment be comprehensively assessed. There will be another hold point in 2032 to check whether the assumptions under which 2038 was set as the closing date are still valid. This is a sensible approach.
By 2022, the energy sector will have reduced its CO2 emissions by 45 percent compared with 1990 levels, while transport and the real estate industry are lagging far behind in their efforts – should corresponding benchmarks for those sectors be anchored in the planned climate protection law?
The energy sector has delivered, even beyond its commitment. Now the heating and transport sectors have to follow suit. Instead of setting rigid targets for individual sectors, threatening fines and getting bogged down in small print on climate policy, we need a regulatory framework that shows how climate protection can be achieved with a view to politically, economically and socially justifiable costs. Here I expect courage and creativity from politicians to promote innovative and climate-friendly technologies.
