A German-Norwegian comparative case study about
similari-ties, discrepancies and other attributes focusing on wind power
potentials and transnational electricity exchange
Bachelor Thesis
in
Environmental Engineering
by
Tim-Christoph Genge
1941413
Oslo, 20. February 2014
Examiner I: Prof. Dr. Heiner Kühle (HAW Hamburg)
Examiner II: Dr. Harald Throne-Holst (SIFO)
This thesis has been established in cooperation with the National Institute for Consumer Re-search (SIFO) in Oslo, Norway
Preface & Acknowledgment
A number of people have helped me in the process of writing this thesis and in guiding me to finish my studies. I would like to thank some of them here.
Many thanks to my beloved family, friends in Germany, Norway and abroad, and to everyone who have offered their support throughout the entire process.
Thanks to all my fellow students and friends from Hamburg for extensive discussions and comforting support since the start of my studies.
I would like to thank my faculty supervisor Prof. Dr. Kühle for guidance and useful input during my time at the HAW and abroad.
Special thanks to my supervisor Dr. Harald Throne-Holst for all the support and encourage-ment I have got over the last year at the institute. Thanks for the various tasks and inputs, from which I have learned so much.
At last I would like to thank all my colleagues at SIFO for the great time working together and for the strong support and help on the finishing straight.
Information about research activities and writing:
The following chapters contain information which relate to political decisions and their polit-ical positions. For the reader it is important to understand that the research activities for this thesis began at a time in which Norway as well as Germany faced government elections. While in Germany the election confirmed the re-election of Chancellor Angela Merkel (CDU) under a new coalition with the sister party the Christian Social Union (CSU) and the Labour Party (SPD), changes in Norway became more apparent. After an eight-year period of governance by a red–green coalition, led by Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg (Ap), Norwe-gian citizens elected a new government in September 2013. The new coalition consisting of a Conservative Party (Høyre), which is chaired by the new Prime Minister Erna Solberg, and a Progress Party (FrP), govern the Norwegian interests in cooperation with the support of a Liberal Party (Venstre) and Christian Democrats (KrF).
All data was collected by studying several scientific articles, project papers, and statements from institutes, associations and governments and by participating in a number of seminars and presentations regarding energy and sustainability subjects at universities as well as within committees, both in Norway and Germany.
Content
Preface & Acknowledgment ... 3
Content ... 5
Abstract ... 11
1 Introduction ... 13
2 Background information ... 16
2.1 Why Germany and Norway? ... 16
2.2 Norway: a brief summary ... 17
2.2.1 Norwegian energy regime; history and todays power portfolio ... 19
2.2.2 Sustainable hydropower: development, “Hjemfall” and market perspective ... 19
2.2.3 Offshore explorations of oil and natural gas ... 23
2.2.4 Nuclear fuels in Norway ... 26
2.2.5 Coal in Norway: resources and usage ... 26
2.2.6 Other renewables and heating technologies ... 27
2.3 Germany: a brief summary ... 28
2.3.1 Energy history and todays power portfolio ... 30
2.3.2 Black and Brown: Germany’s coal resources ... 30
2.3.3 Exploration of oil and natural gas ... 31
2.3.4 Nuclear Energy in Germany ... 32
2.3.5 Heating technologies and the way of renewable energy technologies ... 33
2.4 Norway: visions and future measures ... 35
2.4.1 Hydropower development in Norway ... 35
2.4.2 The limits of fossil fuels: An industry for the future? ... 36
2.4.3 Nuclear fuel and “Black” vs. “Green” ... 37
2.4.4 Reduction of CO2 with CCS and other policy instruments ... 38
2.4.5 Electrification II and other measures ... 39
2.5 Germany: visions and future measures ... 40
2.5.1 The future of coal ... 41
2.5.2 Nuclear phase-out within 2022 ... 41
2.5.3 “Energiewende”: Made in Germany or future utopia? ... 42
3 Wind Power and electricity exchange ... 46
3.1 Introduction in wind power: general information ... 47
3.2 Wind power potential in Norway ... 58
3.2.1 Introduction ... 58
3.2.2 Onshore potential ... 59
3.2.3 Offshore potential ... 60
3.2.4 Summary ... 63
3.3 Wind power potential in Germany ... 64
3.3.1 Introduction ... 64
3.3.2 Onshore potential ... 68
3.3.3 Offshore potential ... 70
3.3.4 Summary ... 73
4 Discussion ... 81
4.1 Wind power development: Yes or No? ... 81
4.2 Social Acceptance: resistance or positive attitudes? ... 84
4.3 Side effects ... 86
5 Conclusion ... 87
References & URL ... 89
Appendix ... 103
List of Figures
Fig.1 Map of Norway………...17Fig.2 Electricity production after type. 2011 TWh and percent………..22
Fig.3 Area status of the Norwegian continental shelf as at March 2012……….23
Fig.4 Thermal power production after type. 2011, GWh and per cent………....24
Fig.5 Export of natural gas in selected countries 2012…...25
Fig.6 Value creation in selected industries 2012 ………...25
Fig.7 German Primary Energy Consumption first half of 2013……...29
Fig.8 Electricity production sorted by technology in 2013………..29
Fig.9 Petroleum fields in Germany………..Appendix Fig.10 Nuclear Power plants in Germany...Appendix Fig.11 Development of renewable energy systems on the final energy supply………...34
Fig.12 Estimated development of petroleum resources in the NCS………...36
Fig.13 CO2 emissions selected in areas 2011………..38
Fig.14 EU Power Mix 2000………...46
Fig.15 EU Power Mix 2012………...46
Fig.16 Global mean wind speed at 80 m………...47
Fig.17 Unrestricted technical potential for onshore wind energy up to 2030………..49
Fig.18 Unrestricted technical potential for offshore wind energy in to 2030………..49
Fig.19 Share of the technical potential realized in different full load-hour classes………...51
Fig.20 Growth in size of commercial wind turbine designs………....51
Fig.21 Typical power curve……….52
Fig.22 Wind speed and efficiency for a Vestas V80 turbine………...52
Fig.23 European Wind Atlas, offshore………....53
Fig.24 European Wind Atlas, onshore………...54
Fig.25 Long term pattern of wind power variability in Germany 1990-2003……….56
Fig.26 The annual cycle of Norwegian hydropower………57
Fig.27 Wind map of Norway……….…..58
Fig.28 Average temperature in Norway (1961-1990)………..Appendix Fig.29 Potential for wind energy in mountainous areas in 2030 (TWh)………...60
Fig.30 Map of the ocean currents flowing into and out of the Norwegian Sea………...61
Fig.31 Bathymetry of North and Baltic Sea………...61
Fig.32 Available offshore area (km2) for wind energy farms within the EEZ………....62
Fig.33 Zones considered for offshore wind power in Norway………...Appendix Fig.34 Map of operative and license seeking wind farms, Q1 in 2011………....Appendix Fig.35 Development of on-&offshore wind power capacity in Germany………...65
Fig.36 EU member state marked shares for new capacity installed during 2012 in MW…....66
Fig.37 EU member state marked shares for total installed capacity………....66
Abbreviations
AAE - The Renewable Energy Agency
AC - Alternating Current
Ap - The Labour Party (Norway)
BDEW - German Association of Energy and Water Industries BfS - The German Federal Office for Radiation Protection BGR - The Federal Institute for Geoscience and Natural Resources BMBF - The Federal Ministry of Education and Research
BMUB - The Federal Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety
BMWi - The Federal Ministry of Economic Affairs and Energy Bpb - The Federal Agency for Civic Education
BSH - The Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency BWE - The German Wind Energy Association
BWP - The German Heat Pump Association CCGT - Combined Cycle Gas Turbine CCS - Carbone Capture and Storage
CDU - The Christian Democratic Union (Germany)
CEDREN - Centre for Environmental Design of Renewable Energy
List of Tables
Tab.1 The 10 largest power producers in Norway (1 January 2012)………..…Appendix Tab.2 The 10 largest hydro power plants in Norway (1 January 2012)…...………...Appendix
Tab.3 Reduction targets for greenhouse gas emissions in Germany………..40
Tab.4 Germany’s main targets of the Energiewende……….………...43
Tab.5 Examples for full load hours 2011………...50
Tab.6 Ratio of temperature and density of air………...55
Tab.7 Wind-and production index for 2012………...59
Fig.39 Distribution of wind power plants in Germany (2011)………...……….Appendix Fig.40 Average wind speeds in German in 10 m height………...68
Fig.41 Unrestricted technical potential for onshore wind energy up to 2030………...69
Fig.42 Installed offshore capacity by region 2000-2012………....70
Fig.43 On-&offshore wind power generation in Germany 2000-2012………..70
Fig.44 Bathymetry of North and Baltic Sea………71
Fig.45 Available offshore area (km2) for wind energy farms within the EEZ………....72
Fig.46 Offshore wind parks in the North Sea (2011)……….……….Appendix Fig.47 Offshore wind parks in the Baltic Sea (2011)……….……….Appendix Fig.48 Offshore wind speeds in Germany and Denmark ………...72
Fig.49 Screenshot from NordPool electricity exchange on the 19.08.2013………...76
Fig.50 Hybrid wind-hydro power plant………...77
Fig.51 Subsea cable projects-NORD.LINK and NorGer………78
CHP - Combined Heat and Power
CICEP - Strategic Challenges in International Climate and Energy Policy CSU - Christian Social Union (Germany)
DC - Direct Current
Dena - The German Energy Agency
DERA - The German Mineral Resources Agency DEWI - Deutsche Windguard
EC - European Commission
EEA - European Environment Agency
EEA - European Economic Area
EEG - The German Renewable Energy Sources Act
EEZ Economic Exclusive Zones
EFTA - The European Free Trade Association Eia - U.S. Energy Information Administration
EPBD - Directive on the energy performance of buildings EPR - pressurized-water reactor
EU - European Union
EV - Electric Vehicle
EWEA - The European Wind Energy Association
Ewi - Institute of Energy economics at the University Cologne FNR - The Specialist Agency for Renewable Resources e.V Frp - The Progress Party (Norway)
GDP - Gross domestic product
GHG - Greenhouse Gases
HVAC - High Voltage Alternating Current HVDC - High Voltage Direct Current Høyre - Conservative Party (Norway) IEA - International Energy Agency
IPCC - The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Klif - The Norwegian Climate and Pollution Agency KrF - Christian Democrats (Norway)
LCA - Life-Cycle-Assessment
LBEG - The State Authority for Mining, Energy and Geology NATO - The North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NCS - Norwegian Continental Shelf
NINA - Norwegian Institute for Nature Research NREAP - National renewable Energy Action Plans NPD - Norwegian Petroleum Department
NVE - The Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate OECD - The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OED - The Royal Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy
PV - Photovoltaic
RCN - The Research Council of Norway
UN - United Nations
UNIS - The University Centre in Svalbard UMB - Norwegian University of Life Sciences SEA - Strategic Environment Assessment
SPD - Labour Party (Germany)
SRU - The German Advisory Council on the Environment SSB - Statistics Norway
SSD - Svalbard Samfunnsdrift WEC - Wind Energy Converter
Abstract
Rapid climate change due to greenhouse gas emissions, high consumption of water, food and energy, uncertainties in energy security and sustainability concerns are only a few topics the world is facing today and in the future. Taking responsibility, Europe is about to change and to push towards a new industrial revolution. The European Union set up several measures and frameworks, which commit all member states to a low-carbon economy and to promote “green” growth. Mandatory targets for 2020, 2030 and 2050 have been set by Brussels, to tackle climate change and the related impacts on us and the ecosystems. Decreasing green-house gas emissions and decreasing fossil fuel consumption, however, can only be achieved by energy efficiency measures, a decrease in general consumption and by an enormous in-creasing of renewable energy technologies, both for electricity generation and heating. Today, the limits and the dependency on fossil fuels seem to be more obvious than they were decades ago. This and the fact that the European Union is counted as the world’s third largest CO2 emitter boosted the development of renewable energy technologies since the turn of the
millennium. Facing this change and conquering barriers, both Germany and Norway show high ambitions in reducing fossil fuel consumption, increasing the share of renewables in all sectors and in securing the energy supply for a sustainable future.
Developing different renewable energy systems, wind energy clearly plays an important part in achieving the European energy and climate targets. Wind as a source of “clean”, affordable energy, is worldwide available. Wind energy does not emit any greenhouse gases and shows low environmental impact in general. Nevertheless, the biggest problem is the dependency on wind. This becomes crucial when relying on wind power as a main pillar in the national ener-gy supply. Whether wind is blowing or not, the demand has to be met. Germany has high hopes in wind energy, and projects to become nearly 100 % renewable within 2050. This, however, can only be achieved in using Norway’s potential to store energy in reservoir hydro power plants.
This bachelor thesis will give an overview about Germany’s and Norway’s power portfolio, present similarities as well as discrepancies, point towards measures taken for the future and explain how both nations can benefit from renewable energy development as well as from transnational electricity exchange. Focusing on wind power, this thesis will demonstrate that there is plenty of room to use wind power potentials, both in Germany and Norway.
1
Introduction
Europe and the world is changing and facing many problems in the foreseeable future. Popu-lation growth linked to a higher life expectancy all over the world will cause serious prob-lems on a planet, which has limited space and limited resources. Facing demographic change, the European Commission predicts several effects on energy supply and consumption in Eu-rope (EuEu-ropean Parliament, 2009). Today, fossil fuels like oil, natural gas, uranium and coal are the most important energy resources of our time. Over the last hundreds of years, man-kind used exactly those fossil fuels to satisfy our energy demand and support our develop-ment in sectors such as industry, housing transportation and agriculture.
Despite uranium, fossil fuels mainly contain carbon (C) and hydrogen (H). The combustion process realises chemical energy in the form of heat, which later on can be converted into electricity. However, the by-product, called carbon dioxide (CO2), is less desirable. Today we
know that carbon dioxide is the major climate gas in the greenhouse emission inventories (IPCC's Task Force on National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, 2013). Human activities in the industrial era increased the ratios of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. According to infor-mation by the Norwegian Climate and Pollution Agency (Klif), the ratio of CO2 has increased
by around 39 %, whereas methane has increased by as much as 158 % (Klif, 2012). The In-tergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates an increase of the average tem-perature between 1.1 and 6.4 degree Celsius in the next hundred years, if we continue using fossil fuels. Today, the European Union is counted as the world’s third largest CO2 emitter
(CICEP, 2013).Though fossil fuels are limited, energy consumption is about to grow. Gov-ernments, scientists, engineers, non-governmental organization work feverishly on solutions, to overcome the time without fossil energy fuels.
A reliable economic development, climate change and the shift from fossil fuels to a “clean” alternative are, however, global problems with a grand complexity and urgency. After the youngest oil crisis in 1973-1974, studies were presented which indicated that, there is a limit of growth and that our resources are not limitless. Due to the fact that electricity is by far the most important energy product in consumption, it is central that nations, governments and stakeholders have to work close together to ensure a reliable and affordable electricity supply. Two European countries, facing the profound challenges and intend to work together, are Germany and Norway.
Both show high ambitions in reducing fossil fuel consumption, increasing the share of renew-ables in all sectors and in securing the energy supply for a sustainable future. Germany, at-tempts to shift from fossil fuel consumption to 100 % renewable energy consumption, is these days characterized with the term “Energiewende”. Germany can again become a pio-neer. However, it is extremely unlikely without collaboration. Norway and its hydro power potentials can support Germany in achieving this transition. Norway shows a unique energy portfolio regarding national electricity production. In 2011, 95 % was covered by hydro pow-er plants across the country. Nevpow-ertheless, fossil enpow-ergy consumption, especially in the transport sector is dominating.
The next chapters will therefore compare energy related topics and set the scene for future development and collaborations. Pointing out that both countries focus on wind power devel-opment, intentions of exchanging electricity in times of off-peak hours and peak demand will ensure a sustainable future.
2
Background information
2.1
Why Germany and Norway?
Energy security is linked to the ability to use non-fossil energy resources and a strict climate policy. This and a strong economic bond are key elements to combat future problems. Both countries share a common history and have been bonded for hundreds of years. This chapter will give an overview over of the two Northern European countries and provide background information of their shared similarities and discrepancies.
Germany has grown from a divided nation, two world wars and several crises to one entity. Today it demonstrates a strong position in the European Union and in a global context. Nor-wegian territorial power peaked in 1265, but competition from the Hanseatic League and the spread of the Black Death weakened the country. Norway, occupied by several countries in the past, was in 1905 able to declare its independency and to initiate a great development process. New diplomatic relations between Germany and Norway have been established, which formed a functional and profitable trading bond. Germany is a full member of the Eu-ropean is supporting Norwegian interests in a wide range. At a global level, Germany and Norway cooperate for freedom in the Middle East and Africa as well as binational and more regional businesses in politics, economics and in several cultural areas.
Today, Germany counts as Norway’s most important economic partner in Europe. About 10% of the Norwegian exports are going to Germany. 80 % of Norwegian goods and services is exported to the European Union. In reverse, Norway is the 5th biggest import partner for the EU (European Commission: DG Trade, 2013 & Eurostat, 2013).
Rising interests in Norwegian natural gas and the long term perspective in connecting the German electricity grid with the Norwegian power market, to support Germany’s energy transition are significant and will become more central in near future (Agora, 06/2013). Though Norway could theoretically isolate itself and not contribute to European policies at all, Norway will need reliable partners and is today responding and contributing to policies formed in Brussels. In response to the crises and the needs Europe is facing today, it is likely that Germany and Norway are going to strengthen their relations as well as to develop new cooperation’s.
Fig. 1 Map of Norway, Source: Google Images
2.2
Norway: a brief summary
Norway, one of the three Scandinavian countries is perhaps commonly known for its famous ancestors who ruled for century’s great parts of Europe, Asia, and the North Atlantic islands. By the time the Viking era ended, Norway was absorbed into several unions. After more than four centuries of occupation by Denmark and nearly one hundred years in union with Sweden, Norway gained its long awaited independency in 1905. After policies of neutrality in World War I, the occupation by German forces in World War II, inflation in 1949 and implementing the Marshall plan, a great indus-trialization process was initiated. The unitary par-liamentary constitutional monarchy showed a great growth in all areas in the society, and became after the oil discoveries in the 60th one of the richest countries in the world, which today maintains an effective model of welfare. Though Norway did not join the European Union, it is member of the OECD, joined the EFTA and is a member in the NATO.
Norway is the most northern nation in the world. Nearly half of the country is located north of the
Arctic Circle and with land area of 385 186 km2 1) it is even bigger than Germany. Compared to other countries, Norway is a rather small with 5 063 709 2) citizens. Since Norway has a lot of natural resources like petroleum, natural gas, wood, fish and water it shows low unem-ployment rates, high educational standard and a strong economy. Large latitudinal range of the country, the variety in topography, and cold climate pose challenges to agriculture, infra-structure and energy related issues.
Setting the scene for energy and climate related topics it is to mention that Norway has rati-fied the Kyoto-protocol and adopted the European Energy package regarding the 20-20-20 targets to combat climate change and to secure a sustainable future. In January 2008, the Norwegian Parliament (Stortinget) agreed that Norway should become carbon neutral by latest in 2050, however new ambitious among the politicians moved the deadline for this commitment to the year 2030 (Stortinget, 2012).
The International Energy Agency (IEA) counts Norway as the sixths largest hydro power producing country and further as the third-largest exporter of energy in the world, due to Norway’s unique energy portfolio and the access to great energy resources (IEA- Norway).
1) Factsabout Norway 2013 Source: Statistics Norway 2) Norway’s population 1st April 2013 Source: Statistics Norway
The Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE) states in a report about Norway’s energy balance for 2011, that the primary energy production through crude oil, several petroleum products, natural gas, coal, hydro power and other technologies reached a number of 8 337 PJ. 7 230 PJ were exported and only 285 PJ were imported (Energy in Nor-way 2011). NorNor-way is today counted as Europe's largest oil producer and as the world's sec-ond largest natural gas exporter. Norway is therefore an important partner for other countries who rely on natural gas and petroleum.
The access to great hydro power volumes linked to relatively cheap electricity prices led in the 20th century to establishments of power intensive industries to produce artificial fertilizer, aluminum and other power intensive products. Though Norway is trying to locate all energy intense industries close to hydro power station, there are compared to a country like Germa-ny, limited industry areas linked to urban areas (e.g. overcrowded areas such as the Ruhr District in Germany). To reduce transfer costs and electricity losses, power stations have, if possible, been established close to local industries or vice versa.
Though Norway is a great exporter of energy, the total energy consumption of 278 GJ per capita is above average consumption in the OECD countries (Energy in Norway 2011). In 2011 the final energy consumption was calculated at 213 TWh, whereas stationary energy consumption counted for around 150 TWh 3) (Bøeng, 2013). While in the transport sector petroleum is still counted as the main energy source, electricity is the most important station-ary energy product. Lightning, heating purposes as well as the usage of technical devices count for more than half of the consumption in total.
SSB calculates, that the transport sector holds one fourth of the final energy consumption, while 32 % is covered by the industry. Households and other services cover 21%. Despite a slight growth in population, the energy consumption in Norwegian households has been sta-ble since the mid-1990s at 45 TWh. However, Norway is, besides Iceland, the country in the world with the highest consumption of electricity for domestic purposes. Around 77 % of the energy used in households and services is provided by electricity (Bøeng, 2013). This fact is supported by numbers of the IEA which calculate a total domestic consumption, exclusive losses in the distribution system, with around 25 177 kWh per capita (IEA-Norway, 2010). It is observed, that in the 1970s high prices for oil and paraffin increased the consumption of electricity and consumption peaked in the turn of the millennium.
Though the electricity consumption has intensely increased since the 1960s and studies about demographic change show that the energy demand might increase in the future, the last dec-ades illustrate a surprisingly reduction in the Norwegian domestic electricity consumption (Heidenstrøm, 2012).
In 1991 a liberalization process of the Norwegian electricity market was initiated. At that time Finland and Sweden joined the Norwegian Pool system, which later on became the world’s first transnational open competitive market for electricity exchange. This has influ-enced several other countries like Denmark, the Netherlands, Estonia, Lithuania, the United Kingdom and Germany about the opportunity to exchange electricity, which has resulted in a great development for the North European electricity marked and opened the way for future concepts relating energy supply and security.
3)
Norway, known for its oil and natural gas resources and as a nation which has a nearly 100 % electricity production from renewables, mainly from enormous hydro power potentials, opens up new opportunities for other countries. Discussions about a sustainable energy future linked to a greater national development of renewables, sustainable explorations of fossil fuels and about a more intensive transnational electricity exchange have already emerged and pose new questions and difficulties for industries, politics and the society.
2.2.1 Norwegian energy regime; history and todays power portfolio
Talking about the Norwegian energy regime it is important to distinguish between two central parts. The first is related to the development of the national hydro power potential and the second is associated to the exploration of oil and gas resources which paved the way for a rapid growing economy. The following chapters will provide more information about Nor-way’s energy sector in detail. Explaining natural resources, their current usage and energy related topics, this chapter will further show that an estimated global increase in the electrici-ty consumption for households and industries create a number of opportunities for sustainable solutions: Made in Norway.
2.2.2 Sustainable hydropower: development, “Hjemfall” and market perspective
The development of hydro power, its opportunities and its usage date far back in Norway’s energy history. In many countries around the middle age it was common to use the power of water through turning millwheels. It was a widespread practice to grind corn, draw water or to create other mechanical forces for other purposes, processes of industrialization and elec-trification. At the end of the 19th century, waterwheels gained further importance for power- intensive industries. Steam engines were replaced by electric motors and electrically powered lighting at home was getting more widespread. Norway’s first hydro power station on Sjena an island in the Norwegian Sea, was established in 1882 but its capacity of 6,5 kW, only lighted itself. Nevertheless it was the first operative hydro power station in Europe (Bøeng, 2013).In 1895 the state used its first waterfall to operate the railway in Southern Norway. Later on, in 1899, Christianias 4) power station operated with its first hydro power plant and produced electricity for a number of citizens and factories. A penstock of 98 m and a water flow of 2,47 m3 produced electricity of 15 000 kW. This production was doubled the year after, and from 1900 until 1911 even ten folded (Søbye, 2010). Soon industries began to search for opportu-nities to produce as much goods as possible with as little input of energy as possible. This interest was not only represented by national companies. Foreign interests in the cheap elec-tricity production led to political struggle in Norway.
At that time rivers, waterfalls and lakes were often privately owned. Foreign investors could thus easily gain control over the national resource; water. After the long-awaited independen-cy from Sweden in 1905, giving away control of something valuable was not desired but less prohibited by the government. To protect the national resources in 1905 the Norwegian Gov-ernment adopted a special concession, from time to time called “the Panic Act” 5)
. This act defined that everyone, both foreigners and Norwegians, who want to acquire a waterfall, had to obtain permission from the public authorities. To prevent a majority of foreign capital on the market and to regulate a sustainable development of hydropower, the Norwegian Gov-ernment adopted further in 1917 a Concession Act 6). This Concession is part of the Norwe-gian Water Regulation Act and states that no one, except the NorweNorwe-gian state, may acquire waterfalls of capacities exceeding 4 000 natural horse-powers (approx. 2, 94 MW 7)) without the king’s permission and approval by the parliament.
Concession could not be granted only for longer than sixty years. However, plants which were constructed during the concession period were able to gain long-term leasing contracts with the state, which ensured that the companies could continue its operations after the expi-ration of the concession (Tonne, 1983). Smaller hydro power station on rivers, fjords or wa-terfalls could, on the other hand, be owned by private cooperation’s. At that time a great number of farmers had access to various places where hydro power stations were developed. Agricultural associations were organized to administrate these places and to be an advisory for the state. In 1921 the Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate (NVE) was established, to manage all state-concerning energy resources and projects related to the power sector (NVE about concessions).
Both the desire to increased industrialization and the interest in developing water resources gained more and more support in the society. Nevertheless, the state did not have the capital, which was needed to develop hydro power at a large scale. Consequently, it was necessary to involve foreign capital and technologies. That’s why the “Hjemfall” rule was established (Tonne, 1983). This rule confirms that the state has full control of Norway’s water resource development. That means that properties like waterfalls, rivers and dams which are in private hands will automatically be owned by the state after the concession period is expired.
In 1920, Norway’s hydro power production was estimated at only 1.2 TWh. While the global demand on power-intensive products such as artificial fertilizer, aluminum, magnesium, iron and steel, ferro-alloys and chemicals increased rapidly, Norway’s electricity grew to 10.9 TWh by the time of the Second World War. During and after WW II further industrial expan-sion and development of hydroelectric stations took place, and as part of the European recon-struction plan the Norwegian state promoted its national opportunities to produce cheap elec-tricity. As a consequence the electricity consumption within the power intensive industries increased between 1948 and 1974 from 4 338 GWh to 27 439 GWh. It is important to note, that the inexpensive power production not only resulted from capital and technology.
5) Act of June 12, 1906 No 12, Source: Norwegian Government 6) Act of Dec. 14, 1917, No 16, Source: Norwegian Government 7) 1 hp = 0.735499 W
The main reason can be found in a third factor; the market. In 1945 Norway’s population was close to 3.1 million 8). Due to this rather small number of consumers the domestic market was insignificant for big industries. This circumstance led to the fact that industries had to enter export markets (Tonne, 1983).
The Norwegian power market can today be divided into three main groups; generation, trans-formation and trading activities. According to the Royal Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy (OED), 183 companies produce power while further 408 companies carry out transmission and trading activities. The 10 largest power producers in Norway hold almost 75 per cent of production capacity in total (Table 1, Appendix).
Today more regulation tools are established to strengthen public ownership of water re-sources. However, private stakeholders have the opportunity to hold 1/3 of the capital and rights in these public companies. Though public control has been central to Norway's man-agement of hydropower resources since 1909, criticism from the European Free Trade Asso-ciation Court (EFTA Court) in Luxemburg and by state secretaries of the Royal Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy (OED) increased at that period. The “Hjemfall” rule may discriminate private owners and potential foreign investors. Although the rule seems to be against the principals of the European Economic Area (EEA), the Norwegian state does not attempt to alter this regulation (HydroWorld, 2007; Pollestad, 2008).
When talking about Norwegian hydro power in general it is important to differ between two types of plants; reservoir power plants and river power plants including waterfalls. River power plants can be further divided in sub- categories regarding scale and production capaci-ty. While the energy production via reservoir power plants is adjustable and mostly used as energy storage for times of high electricity demand, river power plants are difficult to regu-late. That simply means that river power plants produce energy constantly for the Norwegian grid. Norway’s hydro power generation is varying from one year to another. Precipitation and inflow are significant factors for a reliable energy supply. Each region is affected by seasonal variations. By today, around 1393 hydro power plants with a capacity of 30 142 MW are installed, whereas the ten biggest power plants cover already ¼ of the production capacity (Table 2, Appendix).
Regarding the electricity production from renewable energy systems, Norway has become a role model in the world. According to the Royal Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Ener-gy (OED) the average power production in Norway for the last 10 years is 127 TWh/a. The production is based on wind power, hydro power and heat power, whereas the biggest amount is provided by reservoir hydro power plants. In 2011, 128 TWh of electricity were produced in total and can be divided into 122.1 TWh by hydro power, 1.3 TWh by wind power and 4.8 TWh by gas power and other power-heat coupling plants (OED, 2013). This shows that Nor-way produces almost 100% of electricity for domestic use from renewable energy.
Hydro power 112 TWh (95%) Thermal power 4,8 TWh (4 %) Wind power 1,3 TWh (1 %)
Fig. 2 Electricity production after type. 2011 TWh and percent
Source: OED-Fakta 2013
Another striking example about how significant hydro power is for the national energy sup-ply is given by numbers of the installed electricity production capacity. According to the OED, the installed production capacity in 2012 was 31 814 MW in total, whereas 30 142 MW was covered by hydro power installations. Over a long and stable development in the hydroelectric industry, Norway has gained competence and capacity. Its competiveness with-in a cost-effective electricity generation as well as with-in technology competences, such as con-struction and maintenance of hydro power stations and transmission systems, makes Norway a strong player within the global power industry and may contribute in securing Europe’s energy supply.
2.2.3 Offshore explorations of oil and natural gas
The discovery of oil and natural gas isan important event in the Norwegian energy history. Until 1959 Norwegian oil and gas production had hardly be considered, however, after the discovery of a giant gas field in Groningen Hol-land, interest in the North Sea sedimen-tary basin increased dramatically and Norway restarted their offshore research activities (NPD, 2013). Despite the fact that Norway had no onshore resources, most of Norway’s petroleum and gas resources are trapped in reservoir rocks deep in the Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS). Due to the Geneva Convention of 1958, which gives coastal states the right to extend their jurisdiction to the continental shelf for the purpose of ex-ploring and exploiting its natural re-sources, the Norwegian state pro-claimed sovereignty over a seabed out-side at the NCS in 1963. The so-called Norwegian legislation passed a
subma-rine resources act concerning submasubma-rine natural resources and offshore activities. This legal framework called the Royal Decree is similar to the concession for the hydro power devel-opment and grants that the state has complete control over resources which later on paved a way for an enormous growth in national prosperity. However, until 1965 there were no active Norwegian oil companies, so foreign companies had to carry out all offshore activities (Tonne, 1983). This problem led to reforms of the concession principle which after all al-lowed private companies to operate in all areas relating the petroleum business. After estab-lishing national oil companies, such as Statoil, and after the first drilling in 1966 turned out to be dry, the first production on the NCS was recorded in 1971. Rapidly further fields were explored and after Norway exceeded domestic consumption, it became a great net exporter of oil and gas. In 1996 a final act called Petroleum Act was established to confirm, that the property right to the petroleum fields on the NCS is vested in the Norwegian state 9).
Today’s exploration activities are mainly concentrated in three areas; the North Sea, the Norwegian Sea and the Barents Sea South. According to the NPD some of the petroleum resources are time-critical. To secure an efficient and sustainable exploration, the state intro-duced so called Pre-defined Areas (APA/ Fig. 3).
9) Act of 29 November 1996 No. 72, Source: Norwegian Petroleum Directorate
Fig. 3 Area status of the Norwegian continental shelf as at
Oil discoveries are mostly linked to the appearances of natural gas. While in old days natural gas was mainly used to light dwellings and streets or to improve living standards e.g. such as heating water, today gas-fired plants are used to generate electricity and heat. Technologies like combined cycle gas turbines stations (CCGT) and cogeneration plant (Combined Heat and Power (CHP)), are suitable to provide peak-load power, even in the Norwegian electrici-ty market. While it is observed that Norwegian petroleum is used as an energy carrier in na-tional transport and otherwise is mainly exported, Figure 2 illustrated that in 2011 a gas share of 4.8 % contributed to the domestic electricity production.
Among the fossil fuel family natural gas has the lowest CO2 figures. Figure 4 shows that 90
% of the thermal power production in 2011 was based on non-renewable resources. Renewa-bles like biomass such as trees and grass, municipal waste and coal contributed to rather small amounts. Whereas the thermal power production around 1 TWh was stable between 2003 and 2008, the following years showed and strong increase which peaked with 5 TWh. This growth can be explained through the maintenance of gas-fired power plants in Kårstø and in other places. However, only Kårstø is estimated to have an annual electricity produc-tion of 3.5 TWh (Bøeng, 2013).
Due to large petroleum deposits in the NCS and the great exploration frequency Norway was in 2011 counted as the seventh largest oil exporter in the world. Even for 2012 was the export ratio calculated with more than 600 billion NOK. Petroleum which has been sold and deliv-ered since the production started in 1971 is estimated with 6 billion Sm3 (37.74 billion barrels of oil equally 6 000 billion liters). Moreover, Norwegian gas exports cover close to 20 % of European gas consumption, whereas countries like Germany, the UK, Belgium and France are counted as the major buyers (Fig. 5). Oil and natural gas are Norway's biggest export articles with a 47 % share of the total Norwegian export market (NPD, 2013).
Natural gas 4 059 GWh
(85 %)
Others (e.g. coal and landfill gas)
251 GWh (5 %) Biomass 256 GWh (6 %) Municipal waste 206 GWh (4 %)
Fig. 4 Thermal power production after type. 2011, GWh and per cent, Source: Statistics Norway
There is no doubt that petroleum activities have contributed significantly to a great economic growth in Norway. According to the NPD, Norwegian petroleum production added more than 9 000 billion NOK to the country’s GDP over the last 40 years and in 2012 the exploration represented more than 23 % of the national value creation (Fig. 6). To support long-term fi-nancial management, even at the time petroleum resources are empty, Norway’s Parliament established in the 1990s the Government Petroleum Fund. Today called Government Pension Fund is stated as the biggest state fond in the world and at the end of 2012 valued at 3 816 billion NOK (approx.: 517 Million € 10)
). However, the Norwegian state relies on long-term gains and is therefore investing in several sectors like in the development for renewable ener-gy technologies, stocks, research projects or real estates.
Currently there are 76 active oil and gas fields on the Norwegian continental shelf, and even though the Norwegian Parliament (Stortinget) has opened most of the North Sea, the Norwe-gian Sea and the Southern Barents Sea for exploration activities, it is likely that more discov-eries will be made. Chapter 2.4 “Norway: visions and future measures” will provide brief information about Norway’s future in the petroleum sector and how the incumbent govern-ment will face the limits of fossil fuels.
10) Currency exchange (31st December 2012); Source: http://finance.yahoo.com/
Fig. 6 Value creation in selected industries 2012, Source: Statistics Norway Fig. 5 Export of natural gas in selected countries 2012, Source: Statistics Norway
2.2.4 Nuclear fuels in Norway
While in other countries around the 1950s and 1960s, the idea of producing electricity through nuclear fuels became mature and in the end nuclear power plants contributed to their energy production, no nuclear power plant has ever been established in Norway. This deci-sion is deep-rooted in the Norwegian society. In 1969 the government paved the way for a nuclear power plant project in the Oslofjord area. Due to security concerns and an intense counter movement among the citizens, the general usage of nuclear power in Norway was questioned. The project paused from 1976 and in 1979 the government finally concluded, that the national power production should rather rely on hydro power than on nuclear power (Governmental message nr.22 (1998-99)). Besides the fact that Norway has a legal frame-work for licensing the construction and operation of nuclear installations, only research reac-tors have been constructed (oecd-nea-Norway). Of four reacreac-tors in total two, the Halden Re-actor and JEEP II at Kjeller north from Oslo are currently operative. Especially the Halden reactor is used for research activities and contract research e.g. with regard to improving nu-clear fuels or assisting countries like Brazil with submarine development (Bøhmer, 2013a). Since 1948 the Norwegian nuclear research program is managed by the international research foundation for energy and nuclear technology (IFE).
2.2.5 Coal in Norway: resources and usage
Today around 4 % of electricity is produced through fossil fuels. This number includes fossil fuel based electricity imports from other countries, national thermal power production and one specific reason which can be found far north in the Arctic Ocean; Svalbard. The Norwe-gian archipelago and is located north of the Arctic Circle. Sixty per cent of the archipelago is glacier with a water front of 200 kilometres in total. The island is covered by a great number of mountains and fjords. Today the number of citizens is 2 158 Norwegians and 471 Rus-sians. Of these, around 2 040 11) live in the capital Longyearbyen. Historically Svalbard has been a base for whaling and fishing. Today, besides tourism and research programs e.g. in climate or space activities, coal mining is one of the three main industries on the island. Sval-bard has the only workable coal deposits in Norway. The Norwegian company “Store Norske” and the Russian state-owned company “Arktikugol” remain the only mining compa-nies on the island (Facts about Svalbard).
Store Norske is known to supply coal for a variety of purposes, like to the cement and steel-making industry. However about 85 % of the coal resources are used for energy production (Store Norske about coal). According to Store Norske, half the coal is sold to coal-fired pow-er plants on the European continent whpow-ere Gpow-ermany is the main purchaspow-er.
Due to Svalbard’s localization and the fact that coal is the main resource on the island, Long-yearbyen powered by a local coal power plant. This is the only coal-fired power plant on Norwegian soil. Its power generation capacity of 28 MW is divided in 12 MW of electricity capacity and 16 MW of heat capacity (Facts about Svalbard).
2.2.6 Other renewables and heating technologies
Other renewable energy technologies contribute very little to the national power production. The usage of solar thermal or photo voltaic systems is quite popular at summer cottages. Yet, producing “homemade” electricity or additional heat in domestic homes is not as popular as it is for example in German households. Renewable products and usage for and from biomass, reaching from heating purposes via firewood, pellets, or heat recovery from waste water treatment plants and landfills to produce power via combined power and heat plants (CPH) or in form of biofuels are important factors too. Systems in which electricity is produced through tidal power, waves and water currents as well as by using the principal of osmosis are technologies which count as small scale- and research technologies. Especially the osmot-ic power plant gained some attention during the last years. Since 2009 the world's first proto-type osmotic power plant operates at Tofte, outside Oslo’s. It is projected that 10 liters of fresh water and 20 liters of salt water per second will produce between 2-4 kW of electricity (Statkraft about Osmosis).
In Norway the access to district heating is not as developed as it is in Germany. The produc-tion of heat by industrial processes, waste combusproduc-tion or using large scale heat pumps, is only for those available where the required infrastructure is build. According to the Norwe-gian district heating association district heat contributed with only 5 TWh to the national heat production in 2011. The average energy costs of 68.2 øre/kWh for district heat in 2011 was not able to compete with the average electricity price of 44.1 øre/kWh (Norsk Fjernvarme, 2013). High costs, previously warmer winters and “limited” access to say sources are reasons why district heating has by today not a major position on the Norwegian heat market. Yet heating is a central topic in Norway. Long and usually cold winters imply a special need con-cerning heating technologies in homes, offices and public buildings. Bioenergy is the oldest energy source in Norway. Besides heating with oil and gas, firewood is still a major heating resource in Norway. However, according to the Royal Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy the use of oil products like paraffin, light oil and heavy oil has decreased in the pri-vate sector (OED, 2013). Already during the oil crisis of 1973 Norwegian interests in renew-able heating technologies were discussed. Motivated to become independent from limited fossil fuels, to have stable and affordable energy costs and by rising environmental concerns, heating with electricity became more popular. Due to the fact that every Norwegian house-hold, in urban areas as well as in rural areas, is provided with cheap electricity produced through hydro power, electric radiators are often the main heating technology in domestic households. Research studies by the National Institute for Consumer Research reveal that questioned households, in Oslo and Trondheim, heat mainly with electricity. These findings, the fact that Norwegians are concerned about rising electricity prices and the desire for new affordable heating technologies such as heat pumps or pellet heating, will be further dis-cussed in chapter “2.4.5 Electrification II and other measures”.
2.3
Germany: a brief summary
There are many events in history that played an vital part informing the Germany we know today. The earlier events show that Germany has been a democratic parliamentary federal republic since 1949 and that after the reunification in 1990 it became one of the most power-ful nations in the world. Being a founding member of the European Commission, Germany is at present a leader in several fields. Having major economic and political power, Germany is counted as the biggest economy in the European Union and a key player in global policies regarding the United Nations, OECD and the Council of Europe (eia, 2013).
The population of 81.2 million12) , spread over 16 different federal states, shows high stand-ards of living, low employment rates and a strong economy. Today, Germany is considered as one of the biggest export and import nations worldwide. Being a driver and innovator in many areas, especially engineering, exports account for more than one-third of national in-come (Library of Congress, 2008)
Though Germany is a strong country concerning economy and politics, it is heavily depend-ing on energy imports to meet the demand. Nevertheless, Germany was one of the first coun-tries who ratified climate- protocols and determining the European Energy package and in securing the climate targets. Showing high ambitions, Germany may become an exceptional nation. In 2011, Germany announced the shutdown of all nuclear power plant within 2022. Ambitions by German policy makers show that Germany wants to shift from fossil fuel con-sumption towards a more sustainable and environmental friendly concon-sumption. Scenarios assume that Germany can become nearly 100 % renewable by the end of the 21th century (Agora, 06/2013). Increasing the share of renewable energy systems as well as supporting energy efficiency measures, Germany desires to reduce its fossil fuel consumption and has formed the term “Energiewende”.
Different than Norway, Germany’s primary energy consumption is mainly based on fossil fuels such as mineral oil, coal, and natural gas. Not including Russia, Germany is counted as the largest energy consumer in Europe where industry, households, and transport share the majority (eia, 2013). Figure 7 illustrates the primary energy consumption in Germany for the first half of the year 2013. Though it is estimated that fuel consumption in total will declined, mineral oil holds with 31.8 % still the biggest share. Due to cold temperatures and an in-creased usage of heat power generation, the consumption of natural gas (24.8 %) and hard coal (12.3 %) is even greater than in 2012. Yet, lignite is slightly declining, due to efficiency measures in consisting power plants and shutdowns of old power plants, the consumption of coal in total is significant high. Nuclear power generation is decreasing, while the share of renewable energy generation grew by nearly 4 % and count for around 11.7 % in the primary energy consumption (AGEB, 2013).
Until today, Germany is the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases in the European Union. In 2010 alone, 24 % were emitted on German soil. Nearly 85 % of Germany’s greenhouse gas emissions is caused by energy production and the transport sector (BMWi, 2013). Compared to Norway, Germany’s electricity production is more complex and several technologies are involved. In 2013, the gross inland consumption was about 596 TWh from which 560 TWh were counted as the net electricity consumption. Divided into groups of consumption, the industry, followed by households and commerce and trade are counted as the major consum-ers of electricity (AGEB, 2013).
Primary Energy Consumption 2013
Mineral Oil 31,8 % Natural Gas 24,8 % Hard Coal 12,3 % Lignite 11,2 % Nuclear 7,3 % Renewables 11,7 % Other 1,7 %Figure 8 illustrates the share of electricity generation sorted by technology for the year 2013. We can see that, coal power plants share the majority with 255.4 TWh in total. This is an increase of 7.7 TWh compared to 2012. Nuclear power production showed a decrease of 1.9 TWh to 92.3 TWh in total. Among the renewable energy technologies, wind generated 47.2 TWh and is therefore bigger than solar power or other technologies (Fraunhofer ISE, 2014).
In general, Germany reached a new record in export surplus of 31.4 TWh. This is 36 % more than in 2012 (23.1 TWh) (Fraunhofer ISE, 2014). These numbers are likely to increase. Ac-cording to numbers by the World Bank, Germany shows a total electricity consumption of 7 081 kWh per capita (The World Bank, 2014). Due to several measures taken by the Federal Government, there is no tendency of an enormous growth in electricity consumption. This simply means, that changing from fossil to renewable energy generation and after meeting the demand, Germany might be able to continue exporting surplus electricity to neighboring countries. However, the ‘Energiewende’ is challenging and will, in some way or another, affect a lot of actors in Europe.
Fig. 7 German Primary Energy Consumption first half of 2013, Source: AGEB, 2013
2.3.1 Energy history and todays power portfolio
Germany has a different energy regime than Norway. Besides, oil, natural gas and uranium, many other natural resources have to be imported and used to meet the countries energy de-mand. The share of renewables in electricity generation was counted with around 25 % in 2012. About 142.4 TWh were generated by renewables like wind, solar, biomass and others (BMUB, 2013). Though Germany is expanding renewable energies, it will have to rely on current technology too. Giving an overview about current energy technologies and giving information about further measures, which will be taken in the foreseeable future, this chapter will show that Germany is about to become a key figure in the futures energy and climate policies. Watched by several countries, Germany can show that a revolution within an envi-ronmental friendly climate and energy policy is certainly possible.
2.3.2 Black and Brown: Germany’s coal resources
As stereotypical hydro power is for the Norwegian energy production, production in Germa-ny mainly is linked to the black and brown mineral of fossil carbon, called coal. No one ex-actly knows, at what time and where the large amounts of coal deposits were discovered. It is assumed, that due to a lack of wood around 1370, coal first was discovered in areas around the city Aachen (Kracht, 2012). Records from the middle age show that at that time coal min-ing began to be more important than before. The growth of Germany as a nation contributed to a strong development within the coal industry. Due to the enormous value, people at that time started to exploit the resource not only at the earth surface. After a strong development within economics and trade all over Europe, the industry began to construct deep pits, to sat-isfy the increased demand.
In Germany the improvement of technologies, expansion of the infrastructure and frame-works for employers and organizations, made the area around the Ruhr to one of the most important coal regions in Germany. Led by the industrialization and the need to expand mili-tary forces, coal resources unleashed an even stronger exploration. However, since the end of the German economic miracle in the mid-20th century, the coal industry in Germany faces difficulties. Even though Germany still disposes many resources, other countries exploit coal much cheaper and therefore are more competitive in the current market. This and imports of around 44.2 alone in 2011 lead to the fact that the German government subsidizes coal min-ing (DERA, 2012).
However, coal is still of great importance for several purposes. The major role is related to energy generation and process industry e.g. iron and steel manufacturing. Like the global electricity generation heavily is based on coal (about 40 %13), German coal- fired power plants contribute with a high share in national electricity generation too. The electricity and thermal output of German coal- fired power plants vary in a wide range. One of the biggest power stations for producing electricity is the Niederaussem Power Station in the Rhein area. Using lignite, its nine units have a total capacity of around 3 900 MW (RWE, 2013). Cover-ing base load power, German power plants generated about 255.4 TWh of electricity in 2013 (Fraunhofer ISE, 2014).
Numbers about the consumption of lignite and hard coal by the Federal Institute for Geosci-ences and Natural Resources (BGR) reveal a strong consumption of coal in 2012. Whereas, hard coal consumption was counted about 56.9 Mt, a lignite consumption of about 175.2 Mt made Germany to the biggest consumer in the world (DERA, 2012).
However, the plans by the Germany government to change from fossil to a renewable energy generation, does in one way or another effect the coal consumption too. Though, Germany has enormous hard coal and lignite deposits and is still heavily depending on this energy re-source, it will be interesting to see, what part coal will take in Germany’s future energy port-folio.
2.3.3 Exploration of oil and natural gas
Different than Norway, petroleum resources are marginally small and contribute little to val-ue creation, energy production or to significant incomes through export activities. Neverthe-less, in Germany several sedimentary basins exist. The most important basin and main cen-ters of petroleum explorations are located in North Germany (Figure 9, Appendix). Here, the federal states Schleswig-Holstein, Niedersachsen and the North Sea are about to have the biggest reserves. Nevertheless, compared to Norwegian petroleum industry, the German is trivial. Whereas oil mainly is used as a fuel in transport, gas is used for heating purposes in residential dwellings or other real estates and for electricity generation via cogeneration or combined heat and power plants (CHP).
In 2012, the national crude oil exploration was counted with about 2.6 million tonnes. Com-pared to the previous year this is a decrease of 2.1 %. However, according to the Working Group on Energy Balances (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Energiebilanzen), crude oil consumption in Germany reached 105.9 million tonnes in 2012 (LBEG, 2012). National natural gas produc-tion, divided nearly equally in crude and clean gas, was counted with 22.4 billion m3 in total. Though warmer temperatures in winter season had a positive effect on natural gas consump-tion for heating purposes, the overall picture is different. In 2012, natural gas consumpconsump-tion of 93 billion m3 in total revealed an increase in consumption (LBEG, 2012). The difference in exploration and consumption of petroleum (∆ oil = 103.3 million tonnes, ∆ gas = 70.6 billion m3), leads to the fact that Germany depends on fossil fuel imports. After electronic devices, fuel is the second biggest import product (Trading Economics, 2014). As mentioned in the previous chapter, most of the natural imports are covered by Norwegian natural gas deliver-ies. In 2011, for example, these imports generated about 342 TWh of electricity (BMWi, 2013).
Though consumption is high, Germany does try to sustain natural energy resources and not control the exhaustion. As well as other countries, Germany counts once a year the reserves. Natural gas reserve vary between 700 and 2 300 billion m3 and studies reveal that crude oil reserves were counted to be around 32.5 million tonnes (LBEG, 2012).
Due to the fact that national resources are limited and the fact that Germanys demand will in one way or another continue to grow Germany, fuel imports from elsewhere are going deter-mine the trends of the next years. Remembering that in 2011, deter-mineral oil contributed with nearly 32 % in Germany’s total primary energy consumption, it is estimated that it will re-main as a primary source, especially in transport (eia, 2013). There is a slight tendency of natural consumption to increase. However, while offshore petroleum exploration may conflict
with offshore wind power activities, exploiting gas from rock layers on the mainland, recent-ly poses problems and resistance in the public. A new method called fracking is today a re-current topic in the petroleum industry and poses problems and resistance in the public. It is estimated that fracking contributed major parts to natural gas exploration. For more infor-mation about petroleum activities and future forecasts in Germany, please read LBEG, 2012 or BMWi, 2013.
2.3.4 Nuclear Energy in Germany
After the German physicist Otto Hahn succeeded the nuclear fission of uranium atoms in 1939, nuclear power seemed no longer utopian. During WWII and the post-war period, the field of nuclear energy research raised high hopes. The first policies for a peaceful nuclear power generation date back to the 1950s. Development and improvement was pushed for-ward and led to the operation of the research reactor at the Technical University of Munich in 1957 (DAtF about nuclear power development). For years, power plants contributed with a high share to Germany’s energy production. Growth of power capacities characterized the period around the 1980s. More nuclear power plants were constructed and the share of elec-tricity generated through nuclear power plants increased constantly. In 2013, Nuclear power production counted 92.3 TWh in total to the gross electricity production (Fraunhofer ISE, 2014). Germany, therefore, is amongst the top ten of the world’s largest nuclear power pro-ducers (eia, 2013). Whereas countries like the United States of America consume around 18 kt uranium each year, Germany consumed in 2011 roughly 1.93 kt uranium (DERA, 2012). Nevertheless, since the early beginnings nuclear energy was quite controversial in German society. Electricity provided by nuclear power plants was often prophesied to solve problems related to dependency on energy deliveries from other countries or on predicted limits on fossil fuels (Münzinger, 1957). In the beginning of the 1980s social resistance against all forms of nuclear energy usage among the public grew. Due to increased mistrust and en-larged environmental concerns, the political party Alliance '90/The Greens was established. Assumptions that all sections within the nuclear power generation, from mining and enrich-ment of uranium, over nuclear fission to the question of final disposal or reuse, has dangerous effects on ecosystems were driving arguments for the resistance front (bpb, 2010). For more information about the technology of nuclear fission and fusion, risks and future development in general, read BfS, 2013; Visschers, 2013 or Bodansky, 2007
In Germany it is to distinguish between three application types of nuclear plants. Not talking about technical details e.g. pressurized- water reactor (EPR) or boiling water reactor, are ac-cording to information by the Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS), besides research reactors (10 operative) and treatment and disposal reactors (21 operative), nuclear power plants the most important ones. Out of 29 power plants in total, currently nine are used for electricity generation. The capacity of these power plants are around 1 400 MW each (BfS, 2014). Figure 10 (Appendix) illustrates a map of German nuclear power plants which are used for electricity generation. Describing the map legend, it is to note that dark marked nu-clear reactors are currently operative. While the light brown colored reactors describe plants which are under decommissioning, the yellow colored reactors are permanently shut down. Already in 2000, the Federal Government agreed on nuclear safety requirements. In 2010, policy makers in Berlin decided to extend the life-time of technical faultless reactors. This was justified by a controlled and flexible management of all nuclear power plants. However, the nuclear disaster at the nuclear power plant in Fukushima in Japan in the first quarter of
2011 reformulated Germany’s targets. The German Parliament nearly unanimously agreed on a nuclear power phase out within 2022. This resulted in an immediate shut down of the eight oldest nuclear power plants. Though the shutdown of all power plants does mean a loss of based load power capacity, no nuclear power plant is supposed to operate as backup capacity (BfS, 2013). That simply means that alternative energy technologies such as the renewables will most likely face a stronger development than the years before.
2.3.5 Heating technologies and the way of renewable energy technologies
In comparison to Norway, Germany shows entirely different methods concerning heating technologies in homes, offices and public buildings. While in Norway electricity is the main source to provide heat, electric heating in Germany would be categorized as excessive or foolish. This is crucial, because energy consumption for heating in German households is around twice as large as electricity consumption (Agora, 06/2013).
Similar to Norway, the period from October until April is the main period for heating in Germany. Though Germany faces milder temperatures, there is great heat consumption in private households. In Germany heat is mainly provided via energy sources like natural gas, oil and district heat from power plants and other thermal processes (BDEW, 2012). Neverthe-less, this picture is changing. While the heat generation through oil was decreased over the last years, other methods for heating were established and gained popularity among the pub-lic. After the shift from oil towards natural gas, attention was drawn to pellets and heat pumps. While in 2011, nearly 50 % new constructions in Germany were connected to natural gas grid, heat pumps shared 22.6 %, followed by district heating with 16.4 % (BDEW, 2012). Yet heating technologies have been improved, the last years showed a trend towards energy- efficient modernization and remodeling of private households, in addition. Adapting the Di-rective on the energy performance of buildings (EPBD) of the European Parliament and Council on energy efficiency of buildings, Germany places high demand on the building sec-tor, both for new buildings and for the existing ones. Being one of the first countries, the German Energy Agency (DENA) introduced energy certificates on buildings. This certificate simply shows the energy-efficiency of a building. It is measured in kWh/m2 * a, and selects buildings into different energy categories, starting with A++ (top mark) until the G (lowest mark) (BMWi, 2013). Costs for electricity and heat currently differ. Depending on the tech-nology, electricity is produced, e.g. only with renewables or a mix of several resources, tricity costs for private house owners amount between 25-30 Euro-cent/kWh (Vattenfall elec-tricity prices 2014). The costs for natural gas, for example, remained quite stable over the last years of around 6.5 Euro-cent/kWh (BMWi, 2013).
Due to the fact that electricity prices are currently more expensive than the costs for heat, electricity will continue to be more valuable. Supporting district heating and technologies such as heat pumps, new methods might replace oil and gas heating. Based on a high heat consumption in German households, the building sector will most likely face a growth for constructing low energy houses, such as passive houses, zero emission houses and plus ener-gy houses.
When setting the scene for renewable energy technologies, it is important to note that though renewables have been used for a while, the 1990 were the new beginning of renewable ener-gy technologies in Germany. Nevertheless, before that The Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) promoted research activities for non-fossil fuel energy systems.
