Skip to content

Germany has Europe's most Dirty Power Plants

"A new study revealed that six of the 10 dirtiest power plants are located in Germany, a country that claims it is at the forefront of the battle against climate change." writes United Press International (via Observing Hermann):
According to a survey called the "Dirty Thirty" by the World Wildlife Fund, Greece's Agios Dimitrios and Kardia plants (owned by DEH) are the continent's dirtiest power stations, followed by Niederaussem in Germany, which is owned by RWE. In 2006 the Dirty Thirty were responsible for 393 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions, or roughly 10 percent of all EU CO2 emissions. "The facts are clear: The power sector needs to phase out dirty coal as soon as possible," Stephan Singer, head of WWF's climate program, said in a statement. More than half of the Dirty Thirty are run by just four power-generation companies: Germany's RWE, Swedish firm Vattenfall, French group EDF and Germany's EON.

Trackbacks

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as Linear | Threaded

Zyme on :

And the next round of Germany-bashing-season is opened :D

JW-Atlantic Review on :

:-) I criticize both sides: The US and Germany. I am an equal opportunities critic. Therefore some commentators have started to call me "Anti-American" while others talk about a "Germany-bashing session" I know you used a big smiley. And I don't take your comment as criticism. I just wanted to point out that the Atlantic Review is critical of everybody. Well, that should be obvious. No, I don't claim to be neutral and balanced. I just think that I make an effort to be fair.

Zyme on :

Yeah I didn´t want to critisize the post - I rather wanted to ridicule those who start a comment with something like "See! [...] That´s the typical german hypocrisy at it´s best! [...] !!! " :)

Fuchur on :

I think Chancellor Merkel's calm response was spot on. If you look a little closer, you realize that this study is just a big yawn. "OMG!! Germany has power plants fuelled by coal!!!" really shouldn't come as a big surprise to anybody who has at least basic knowledge in the field. There's nothing "embarrassing" or "revealing" about this. They just cherry-picked one statistic that makes Germany look bad. Fact is that Germany overall has cut carbon dioxide emissions over the last few years - and that's what really counts. Another thing one should add is that the German power plants are of course very "clean" in the traditional sense. I am also rather curious to hear the WWF's suggestions to deal with this problem: Should we build more nuclear plants? (NO! Nuclear energy is from hell!!!) Should we rely more on hydroelectric power? (NO! Think of the environment!) How about wind engery? (NO! Wind parks are a danger to birds! And they look bad.) I guess it's the Peter Pan solution: Just believe very firmly that there is clean energy...

JW-Atlantic Review on :

I think we should be able to increase our energy efficiency much more. There is so much waste. Unncessary driving, fuel inefficent cars, leaving the lights on, having TVs, HiFis, computers on standby. I am sure our industries do not use energy efficiently, since they still don't pay that much for it. Though, I do not know any numbers. Wasn't their some EU decision to outlaw the ordinary lightbulb in ten years? Like the Australians have done recently. Why have not we done so ages ago? Besides there is: [url]http://atlanticreview.org/p/co2online.html[/url] Yes, I admit that I don't know how much energy we could save with all that. It is just my guess that we could increase energy efficiency a lot with many small measures and some big ones. "Fact is that Germany overall has cut carbon dioxide emissions over the last few years - and that's what really counts." True. Kurt Volker, the State Department's Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for European and Eurasian Affairs, mentioned some interesting statistics at a speech at the German Marshall Fun in Berlin on February 12, 2007, for example the [b]change in greenhouse gas emissions between 2000-2004[/b] according to data from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change: [b]United States: +1.3% Germany: -0.7% EU-15: +2.4% EU-25: +2.1%[/b] US population and economy was growing in that time period. Not the case in Germany and much of the EU. New post about this in the next few weeks. Still, Germany and everybody else should work harder on the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. And those power plants are a disgrace.

Zyme on :

"There is so much waste. Unncessary driving, fuel inefficent cars, leaving the lights on, having TVs, HiFis, computers on standby." I am guilty in every point. And you know what - I do it on purpose :D That´s part of what I understand by the term "Lebensqualität" - the quality of life. Does that qualify me as an american? ;)

Fuchur on :

"those power plants are a disgrace" At least that's what this WWF report wants to make you believe. I want to make it clear again: FAIK, these power plants are very "clean" (in the sense we have used this word for the past 50 years), and very energy efficient. But the WWF report simply brushes these things aside and merely looks at the relative carbon dioxide emissions. Now, this raises several questions for me: 1. Is there a correlation between carbon dioxide emissions and energy efficiency / pollution in the classical sense? (my guess: no) 2. What's the reason for this relatively high carbon dioxide emissions? (my guess: maybe the German plants use lesser quality coal/lignite(Koks)?) 3. Are there known and tested techniques to reduce the carbon dioxide emissions from coal fuelled plants? I read that Vattenfall(?) experiments with some technology that tries to bury the carbon dioxide in the ground instead of blowin it in the air. But FAIK that's a totally new approach that's never been employed before. I've tried a few minutes with Google, but didn't find any answers. And that's why I call this WWF report manipulative: It simply uses the old loaded word "dirty", suggesting that the plants use bad, outdated technology. And then they say that this "can not be" and that something must be done about it. But I suspect that, in reality, the plants use up-to-date technology, and that the carbon dioxide emissions right now are simply a fact that we can't do much about. The big question is: Is there really something that can be done (or could have been done) about these carbon dioxide emissions? And I mean: in reality ("Just don't burn any coal!" is just wishful thinking). Then it would indeed be "disgraceful". But if not - then this is just meaningless hot air.

Axel on :

"I criticize both sides: The US and Germany. I am an equal opportunities critic." I hope so. And blogs that degenerate to echo chambers are really boring. "And that's why I call this WWF report manipulative: It simply uses the old loaded word "dirty", suggesting that the plants use bad, outdated technology. And then they say that this "can not be" and that something must be done about it." IMHO, the WWF report ([url=http://assets.panda.org/downloads/european_dirty_thirty_may_2007.pdf]PDF[/url]) is much better than the press release suggests, but "Dirty Thirty" really sounds catchy. The authors ranked European power plants according to the absolute and relative CO2 emissions and also calculated three replacement scenarios (Replacing power plants "coal with modern coal", "coal with gas", "coal with renewable energies" after its technical lifetime). Not very surprising, the dirtiest power stations are all coal-fired, with the worst ten running on particularly CO2-intense lignite. So I see the intention of the report mainly as a demonstration how effective modern present-day technologies already are, combined with the demand for more and faster investments in more efficient power plants.

Add Comment

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

Form options