[Moldoteck]

my OG comment clearly stated 'this year so far'. It's also obvious imports increased if you look per month net imports 2023 vs 2024. It doesn't matter the gateway, net imports do matter. Germany net imported 20TWh in 2024 so far and that's a fact. Germany net imported a lot more from neighbor states compared to last year and again, that's a fact.

[Krasnol]

The fact which is missing here is how much money Germany made with those trades.

As the other commenter wrote: trading, transfers, etc. is normal in the EU grid. You buy cheap, you sell expensive. Just because Germany imports electricity, doesn't mean it has to. The German grid, even in its unfinished state, allows turning off power generation where it doesn't make sense financially, and they can do that fast because they don't have those slow nuclear power generators clogging up the grid.

We'll see what comes of it when the year is finished and official sources release their information. Until then, you can translate this page here from the Federal Network Agency: https://www.smard.de/page/home/topic-article/444/213848

In the last paragraphs they write on in/exports and that they've bought cheap from France and Belgium in the last quarter. Why shouldn't they? France needs to have their reactors running. They are a constant deficit on the French taxpayer. Therefore, it is cheap on the EEX.

[Moldoteck]

nuclear can be turned modulated pretty fast too, look at France. We indeed should look at final year balance. Edf indeed needs to sell as much as they can, because of arenh. Afaik it'll end in the end of 2025. "In France, alternative retailers (i.e. those who aren’t EDF) can currently secure regulated access to energy produced by EDF’s existing nuclear fleet under the ARENH mechanism. It places an obligation on EDF to sell up to 100 TWh of nuclear power annually (about 25% of its production in France) at a regulated price of €42/MWh." It's interesting how the things will turn the next year indeed and how edf will handle it's new freedom

[natmaka]

> nuclear can be turned modulated pretty fast too, look at France

Nope. Albeit being shock-full of nuclear reactors... France always maintains fossil fuel active in order to load-follow. Add 'peakers' (needed during peak-demand) and here is the result: https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/energy?Metric=Share+of+...

Details: there are safety-related limits (power modulation proportion, duration of a pause needed after each modulation, modulations frequency...) to nuclear load-following capacity, and the very combustible status is a major parameter.

Pertinent document (French ahead!): https://www.sfen.org/rgn/expertise-nucleaire-francaise-suivi...

« un réacteur peut varier de 100 % à 20 % de puissance en une demi-heure, et remonter aussi vite après un palier d’au moins deux heures, et ce deux fois par jour »

Proposed translation: "a reactor power output can vary from 100% to 20% in 30 minutes, then after 2 hours can go back to 100% at the same speed, and can cycle this way 2 times per day".

This is quite a good performance when it comes to load-following (French engineers are very good at this), however it is insufficient in the real world (save any ridiculously expensive over-provision of nuclear reactor, most idling) and very weak compared to gas turbines performances.

> Edf indeed needs to sell as much as they can

No. EDF always needed to sell as much as they can, even before AREHN, because maintaining a high load factor for their nuclear reactors is financially key. An idle industrial reactor is a financial disaster.