exploring a return<\/a>, like Italy.<\/p>\nOf the 33 reactor units Germany is decommissioning, three were shut down just three years ago. If those sites alone \u2014 Emsland, Neckarwestheim 2 and Isar 2 \u2014 were still operating, they would generate around 32 terawatt-hours of electricity per year. That would be enough to cover the annual consumption of roughly 9 million households, a significant part of the German population.\u00a0<\/p>\n
So, it was worth asking: What would it take to get those plants back online?<\/p>\n
To the untrained eye, the decommissioned Emsland plant still looks largely intact, both the outside and within. At the center of the controlled area, the deep blue water of the spent-fuel pool still shimmers. At the bottom sit 718 fuel assemblies, which must continue cooling even after the end of power generation.<\/p>\n
\u201cEmsland was a state-of-the-art flagship plant, one of the best in the world,\u201d says Andreas Friehe. A tall engineer with gray stubble, Friehe knows the site\u2019s every detail. He started here as a student in 1996, wrote his thesis at the neighboring fuel-assembly factory, and now oversees the decommissioning. After talking in his office, we head together into the innermost part of the plant.<\/p>\n
One might expect a man like Friehe to be melancholy. He chose a profession in a sector he believed had a future. Some years later, he learned the end was coming. Now, in the final third of his career, he is in charge of laying this plant to rest.<\/p>\n
But the 56-year-old is either a pragmatist or an excellent actor. The decommissioning, he says, is an \u201cenormous challenge that I enjoy.\u201d As for reversing the phase-out, \u201cif you ask me, the point of no return was passed long ago,\u201d he says.<\/p>\n
To make his case, he leads me to a tarpaulin in the controlled area. Behind it lies a gigantic metal hemisphere: the lid of the reactor pressure vessel, the steel container that houses the reactor core.<\/p>\n
Emsland relied on a pressurized water reactor in which nuclear fission is used to heat water under high pressure. That water transfers its heat to a second circuit, which drives the turbine and generator. When I visited in early March, workers were in the process of sawing apart the lid. Deep cuts had already been sliced into the metal.<\/p>\n
The lid, weighing 109 tons, was custom built, made specifically for this plant. \u201cYou cannot just order something like that off the shelf,\u201d says Friehe. \u201cNobody in Germany today could build one for you.\u201d<\/p>\n
At this point, I might have been tempted to stop my reporting. If the manager in charge of dismantling one of Germany\u2019s most recently shuttered reactors says the process is irreversible, why should I doubt him? Anti-nuclear politicians often make exactly that argument: Look, they say, even experts from the industry consider a return impossible.<\/p>\n
But it is not that simple. Friehe\u2019s employer, the Germany-headquartered energy multinational RWE, is hardly a neutral observer in this matter. It once operated Emsland and is now managing its decommissioning. For a decade and a half, politics have forced the company to prepare economically, technically and organizationally for the dismantling of its nuclear plants.<\/p>\n
RWE CEO Markus Krebber has rejected a return to nuclear power in Germany; the era of the most recently shut-down plants, he has said, is \u201cover.\u201d One of his spokespersons put it this way: \u201cGerman politicians decided to phase out nuclear energy, and as a company we are implementing that decision. We are not participating in any debate about a return to nuclear power.\u201d<\/p>\n
My visit to Emsland showed just how sensitive the issue remains for RWE. The company dispatched two press officers to accompany me and the plant manager at every step. Friehe\u2019s line about the \u201cpoint of no return\u201d matches the company\u2019s official position.<\/p>\n
This wasn\u2019t always the company\u2019s view, of course. After German Chancellor Angela Merkel declared the risk of a Fukushima-style event \u201cunmanageable\u201d in 2011, RWE\u2019s then-CEO J\u00fcrgen Grossmann warned that a phase-out \u201ccould have massive consequences for Germany as a business location.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n
Indeed, many in the industry are still making a case for the restoration of plants like Emsland. \u201cIndividual existing German nuclear power plants that are in an early stage of decommissioning can be returned to operation,\u201d said KernD, an industry association that represents the interests of the sector.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Components that have already been dismantled could be reproduced and reinstalled. \u201cUp to a certain point in the decommissioning process, this is even economically advantageous compared with building new,\u201d said the association.<\/p>\n
KernD recommends a two-track approach: First, Germany should prepare for a future with new mini-reactors (small modular reactors, or SMRs), which manufacturers say could reach the market in the 2030s. Second, older nuclear plants should be refurbished where that remains feasible.<\/p>\n
Many supposed obstacles, the association said, are in fact surmountable. Fuel assemblies could be procured anew. Key positions, such as shift supervisors and reactor operators, could be refilled before operations resumed.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Tarik Choho, chief commercial officer of the American nuclear company Westinghouse, is optimistic that Germany\u2019s nuclear exit could be reversed. His firm is supplying the reactor technology for Poland\u2019s nuclear energy effort. In Germany, meanwhile, it is involved in decommissioning.\u00a0<\/p>\n
A component like the freshly sawn-open reactor pressure vessel lid at Emsland, he says, could be replaced by Westinghouse \u201cwithout difficulty.\u201d<\/p>\n
So, if the problem isn\u2019t technical, what is it?<\/p>\n
I sent detailed questions to key players in Berlin: What legal steps would be required to halt the decommissioning of plants like Emsland? What timelines would be realistic? What safety and licensing requirements would operators have to meet? What would be the biggest hurdles \u2014 and the decisive stop signs?<\/p>\n
The federal government and the relevant regulatory authority both responded evasively. The Ministry for Economic Affairs, led by Katherina Reiche from the chancellor\u2019s conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), referred inquiries to the Ministry for the Environment, which is headed by Carsten Schneider of Merz\u2019s coalition partner, the Social Democratic Party (SPD).\u00a0<\/p>\n
BASE, the Federal Office for the Safety of Nuclear Waste Management, did the same. And a spokesperson for the environment ministry sent no real answers at all \u2014 only a description of the current status quo.<\/p>\n
All nuclear power plants in Germany, the ministry said, have decommissioning licenses, and dismantling is well advanced. The federal government is neither considering nor reviewing any option to restart decommissioned plants. Former operators, it added, have repeatedly publicly stated that they are not available for further operation. And finally: \u201cWe do not comment on hypothetical scenarios.\u201d<\/p>\n
The obstacle is clearly political.<\/p>\n
Ahead of the 2025 parliamentary election that made Merz chancellor, the CDU pledged to keep the \u201cnuclear option\u201d alive. \u201cWe will examine the resumption of operations at the most recently shut-down nuclear power plants,\u201d announced his party\u2019s platform.<\/p>\n
But after an unexpectedly disappointing result, Merz was forced to form a coalition with the SPD, which opposes the return of nuclear power.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Nina Scheer, the SPD parliamentary group\u2019s spokesperson on energy policy, told me a return is \u201cnot realistic.\u201d Restarting a decommissioned plant, she argued, is something entirely different than merely extending operations. Old licenses could not simply be prolonged. Instead, highly complex new procedures would be required, ones that could drag on for years.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Nuclear power, she added, is the most expensive form of electricity generation anyway. It is ill-suited to a system based on renewables, she continued. Waste disposal and safety issues remain unresolved. And Germany would not improve its resilience by creating new dependencies for fuel imports.<\/p>\n
These points are, at best, debatable. It\u2019s true that new builds are costly. That\u2019s less obvious for existing plants, where construction costs have already been paid off. And countries like Spain show that nuclear power can, in principle, coexist with wind and solar.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Germany would, indeed, depend on foreign uranium imports, but not in a way that\u2019s fundamentally different from other energy sources; uranium ore was even mined domestically until 1990. At the same time, the solar industry Scheer champions illustrates just how deep such dependencies can run: In 2024, 86 percent of the photovoltaic systems imported into Germany came from China.<\/p>\n
I asked Scheer whether there was any scenario that might prompt the SPD to reassess nuclear power. An extreme supply crisis, for example? She said no.<\/p>\n
In the face of this opposition, Merz\u2019s conservatives have declined to push.\u00a0<\/p>\n
A return to operating the most recently shut-down plants would be \u201cextremely difficult,\u201d Andreas Lenz, the CDU\/CSU parliamentary group\u2019s energy-policy spokesperson, wrote to me. Like Scheer, he pointed to the advanced state of decommissioning, the loss of personnel and the lack of licenses.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Above all, however, he pointed to the SPD.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt has to be said plainly \u2014 the coalition partner lacks the political will,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
Fatih Birol, head of the International Energy Agency in Paris, is among the sharpest critics of Germany\u2019s energy policy. Speaking on the sidelines<\/a> of a conference in Berlin, the 68-year-old also rejected the doctrine of finality. Restarting the most recently shut-down reactors would be \u201cvery challenging,\u201d he acknowledged. Still, he argues for \u201ca sober second look.\u201d If even a single nuclear plant could return to the grid, he says, that would be \u201can important gain for Germany.\u201d<\/p>\nOne country that has taken the right path, in Birol\u2019s view, is Poland. While Germany tears down its nuclear plants, Poland\u2019s state-owned company Polskie Elektrownie J\u0105drowe, or PEJ, is building its first one. For now, the site is little more than a cleared strip through a coastal forest, a few hundred meters from the Baltic Sea. The first concrete is to be poured at the end of 2028, and the first of three reactor units are scheduled to begin operating in 2036.<\/p>\n
In conversation, PEJ chief Marek Woszczyk explains Poland\u2019s turn to nuclear power with a single word: sovereignty. For decades, coal carried the country\u2019s power system, but Poland also learned how risky dependence on Russian gas could be. Therefore, as coal declines, nuclear energy has become the obvious answer. It offers electricity that is reliably available, affordable over the long term and largely emissions-free. Poland, he says, is betting on proven and modern Generation III+ reactors that can run for 60 to 80 years, perhaps longer, and that become highly competitive once the steep upfront investment has been made.<\/p>\n
What does Woszczyk make of Germany\u2019s course? \u201cI do not want to lecture Germany,\u201d he says. \u201cBut I can explain Poland\u2019s momentum.\u201d In his country, he explains, the debate is not driven by ideology but by a simple question: \u201cWhat else can guarantee clean, safe and predictable electricity on a large scale for decades?\u201d Most Poles share his optimism. In surveys, support for nuclear energy has remained exceptionally high for years.<\/p>\n
Back in Lingen, however, the decommissioning continues. Every dismantled component and every screw from the former power plant is logged and packed into compact metal containers. A red lid means the contents still need to be cleaned in the site\u2019s own decommissioning facility. A green lid means clean and decontaminated \u2014 that is, cleared of any potentially radioactive particles on the surface.<\/p>\n
Once officially cleared for release, most of these materials enter the normal recycling stream. A small portion is burned or melted down. That leaves the radioactive waste. According to RWE, it accounts for only about 1 percent of the total material from a nuclear plant.<\/p>\n
Since decommissioning began in 2024, Friehe says, his team has removed nearly 1,000 tons of material. In the end, the total will come to around 800,000 tons, not including the cooling tower. The job is supposed to be finished by the mid-2030s. Once the facility then \u201cfalls out of the Atomic Energy Act,\u201d as Friehe puts it, conventional demolition will follow.<\/p>\n
But if I\u2019ve learned anything from researching this article, it\u2019s that it\u2019s worth contemplating the alternative.<\/p>\n
If Germany wanted to produce nuclear electricity again, the Bundestag would first have to amend the Atomic Energy Act. As things stand, the law effectively says that the license for commercial operation has expired. That sentence would have to be deleted or changed. A simple parliamentary majority would suffice.<\/p>\n
If the law were amended this year, KernD estimates that a rough timeline might look like this: In 2027 and 2028, a political decision would need to be taken on which sites should be brought back online. In parallel, the relevant authorities would adapt their regulatory frameworks. A new operating organization could begin work \u2014 hiring and training staff, for example.<\/p>\n
By the end of 2029, operators would then have time to recruit private investors and industrial offtakers. And if the final licenses were granted, the first reactors could be back online between 2031 and 2033, before the Emsland plant would even be fully decommissioned.<\/p>\n
But to get there, German politicians would have to move now \u2014 and it\u2019s not looking likely. As the CDU\u2019s Lenz put it: \u201cEvery additional day of dismantling makes it harder and more expensive.\u201d<\/p>\n
The phase-out of nuclear power in Germany might, indeed, turn out to be \u201cirreversible,\u201d as Merz said. That, however, is not a hard reality but a political choice.\u00a0<\/p>\n
In the meantime, a nuclear power plant in decommissioning is a strange in-between thing. No longer a source of energy but not yet a pile of scrap \u2014\u00a0 like Schr\u00f6dinger\u2019s cat, it still contains the possibility of both.<\/p>\n
The Axel Springer Global Reporters Network is a multi-publication initiative publishing scoops, investigations, interviews, op-eds and analysis that reverberate across the world. It connects journalists from Axel Springer brands \u2014 including POLITICO, Business Insider, WELT, BILD, and Onet \u2014 on major stories for an international audience. Its ambitious reporting stretches across Axel Springer platforms: online, print, TV, and audio. Together, these outlets reach hundreds of millions of people worldwide.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Germany\u2019s leaders insist the atomic exit is final. Inside a dismantled reactor, that certainty looks less than convincing. By MARC FELIX SERRAOin Lingen, Germany Illustration by Nat\u00e1lia Delgado\/ POLITICO AI generated Text-to-speech Marc Felix Serrao is a Global Reporter with The Axel Springer Global Reporters Network. The entrance to Germany\u2019s former Emsland nuclear power plant […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":5450,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"miestas":[],"class_list":["post-5449","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-pasaulis"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/cp.snarskis.lt\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5449","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/cp.snarskis.lt\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/cp.snarskis.lt\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cp.snarskis.lt\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5449"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/cp.snarskis.lt\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5449\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cp.snarskis.lt\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5450"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/cp.snarskis.lt\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5449"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cp.snarskis.lt\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5449"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cp.snarskis.lt\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5449"},{"taxonomy":"miestas","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/cp.snarskis.lt\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/miestas?post=5449"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}