The political decision has been made: Germany will no longer produce nuclear power since the last three nuclear power plants, Emsland, Isar-2 and Neckarwestheim-2, were shut down two years ago. Nuclear power was once again a topic in the federal election campaign at the beginning of the year, with calls for a return to nuclear power, for a review of such a move, or for a clear rejection.
Nuclear power also colours hydrogen, in a figurative sense. This is because hydrogen produced by electrolysis using electricity from nuclear power is called pink hydrogen. The advantage is that it produces fewer climate-impacting emissions compared to electrolysis using electricity from fossil fuels, which produces grey, brown or black hydrogen.
Nevertheless, pink hydrogen produced in Germany is currently not a factor.
This is because, like the advantages, the disadvantages lie in the power source itself: ‘This is irrelevant for us because Germany has decided to phase out nuclear energy,’ says Prof. Andreas Peschel, Director at the Institute for Sustainable Hydrogen Economy (INW) at the Jülich Research Centre. Even a U-turn would be difficult: reconnecting the three most recently shut-down reactors to the grid is technically almost impossible. If the decision were made now, it would probably take several years before at least Emsland, Isar-2 and Neckarwestheim-2 were supplying electricity again.
In terms of energy demand, that would not be much. According to the Federal Statistical Office, they accounted for six percent of gross electricity generation in 2022, the last full year of operation. At its peak in the late 1990s, 30 percent of Germany’s electricity came from nuclear energy. Measured against the share of electricity in total energy consumption at that time (17 percent), the share of nuclear energy was around five percent in 2000 and only 1.14 percent in 2022. Extensive new construction of nuclear power plants would be necessary to reach at least the five percent of that time.
Electricity costs dominate the price of hydrogen
“Where should the new nuclear power plants go? There are discussions about so-called small modular reactors (SMRs), which are particularly small plants. These would also have to be heavily secured. That means they would probably be built where they would disturb as few people as possible. However, these locations probably do not have any significant electricity and hydrogen requirements. So the hydrogen produced here would have to be transported, which would increase costs. This means that hydrogen produced with nuclear energy will be very expensive,‘ explains Andreas Peschel.
Not only because the cost of hydrogen is higher, but above all because of the higher price of nuclear power. ’This is very relevant because the price of hydrogen obtained from electrolysis is dominated by electricity costs. Even if we increase efficiency there by incorporating heat into the process, we do not see hydrogen production using nuclear power as a source that will bring about any positive change,” explains the Jülich hydrogen scientist. This is because nuclear power is significantly more expensive than electricity from renewable sources, especially when it comes to new construction.
For the energy transition, we now need solutions with a good environmental balance and good technical feasibility – and that is green electricity.“
Prof. Andreas Peschel
Prof. Andreas Peschel Foto: Forschungszentrum Jülich/Limbach
That is why the expansion of renewables is necessary, such as offshore wind farms with constant wind availability. Hydrogen could then be transported from there via undersea pipelines. ‘This is cheaper and more sustainable – without the problem of final storage and safety risks.’
The topic of nuclear energy is not off the table once and for all. This is demonstrated not only by the election campaign, but also by the many reports of planned SMR plants. ‘Perhaps they will become cheaper at some point if they are built in large numbers. But that is a long way off. For the energy transition, we now need solutions with a good environmental balance and good technical feasibility – and that is green electricity,’ says Andreas Peschel. And it automatically follows that, given the timescale for implementation, green is the best colour for hydrogen.
Nuclear power plants must run as continuously as possible
There is another reason for this. Nuclear power does not fit in with the logic of renewables. “We need technologies for times when there is little wind and sun. Nuclear power plants are not well suited for this either. They have to run as continuously as possible to amortise the high investment costs. They are far too expensive to only be used when there is not enough wind or sunshine,” explains Andreas Peschel. Looking at the solution, the circle is complete: batteries will carry a lot of the load in the future, and for particularly large amounts of energy that need to be stored, hydrogen will be used, which cannot be expensive and pink, but as cheap and green as possible.
