• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Coal Burning Gas Guzzling Germany

It wouldn't matter if they did. There will be significant stretches of days where the sun won't shine and the wind won't blow anywhere in Germany, and that will lead to blackouts if there are no coal plants to back the renewables up. In fact, for every kW produced by renewables a kW of coal capacity has to be available to back it up. And in order to be available at a moment's notice the coal plants have to remain fired up all the time. That means there is very little in the way of actual reduction of emissions.

It could make up for coal in Germany though.
 
And in order to be available at a moment's notice the coal plants have to remain fired up all the time. That means there is very little in the way of actual reduction of emissions.

Sorry, but this is utter bollocks.

The existence of weather forecasting means that renewable output is relatively predictable and coal plants do not have to be available at a moment's notice. They can be (and are) quite easily ramped up and down to provide energy as required by fluctuations in either supply or demand of energy.

Electricity Data Summary

Look at the "Generation by Fuel Type" graph of power generation over the last 24 hours in the UK. You can see how coal generation is ramped up and down over the course of a day, mostly due to changes in electricity demand. Changes in wind generation have a much smaller effect and are quite predictable.
 
Sorry, but this is utter bollocks.

The existence of weather forecasting means that renewable output is relatively predictable and coal plants do not have to be available at a moment's notice. They can be (and are) quite easily ramped up and down to provide energy as required by fluctuations in either supply or demand of energy.

Electricity Data Summary

Look at the "Generation by Fuel Type" graph of power generation over the last 24 hours in the UK. You can see how coal generation is ramped up and down over the course of a day, mostly due to changes in electricity demand. Changes in wind generation have a much smaller effect and are quite predictable.

If I may, the fact that power generation moves up and down does not mean that the generation source does not have to remain fired up 100% of the time.
 
Sorry, but this is utter bollocks.

The existence of weather forecasting means that renewable output is relatively predictable and coal plants do not have to be available at a moment's notice. They can be (and are) quite easily ramped up and down to provide energy as required by fluctuations in either supply or demand of energy.

Electricity Data Summary

Look at the "Generation by Fuel Type" graph of power generation over the last 24 hours in the UK. You can see how coal generation is ramped up and down over the course of a day, mostly due to changes in electricity demand. Changes in wind generation have a much smaller effect and are quite predictable.

Uh Huh.

MIT Technology Review

Germany Runs Up Against the Limits of Renewables

Even as Germany adds lots of wind and solar power to the electric grid, the country’s carbon emissions are rising. Will the rest of the world learn from its lesson?

It's difficult to shut down plants when there's plenty of renewable energy, and the coal plants have to remain and new coal plants have to be built in order to back renewables up when the sun and wind are dormant.

Ergo, the CO2 savings simply can't be as large as one would assume from the fact that the country is getting 30% of it's power from renewables.

They might have dedicated some effort to improving the safety of nuclear plants, but somehow they go wobbly when that gets brought up. Yes, they claim to be able to solve unsolvable problems of renewable energy, problems for which the basic physics hasn't been figured out yet (if ever), but they can't solve elementary problems when it comes to nuclear power.

Germany could become a sh**-bag 3rd world nation without reliable levels of dependable electrical power, not fit for any advanced industry much less a reasonable lifestyle for its citizens, to save the environment, but somehow I don't think that's an option.
 
Uh Huh.



It's difficult to shut down plants when there's plenty of renewable energy, and the coal plants have to remain and new coal plants have to be built in order to back renewables up when the sun and wind are dormant.

Ergo, the CO2 savings simply can't be as large as one would assume from the fact that the country is getting 30% of it's power from renewables.

They might have dedicated some effort to improving the safety of nuclear plants, but somehow they go wobbly when that gets brought up. Yes, they claim to be able to solve unsolvable problems of renewable energy, problems for which the basic physics hasn't been figured out yet (if ever), but they can't solve elementary problems when it comes to nuclear power.

Germany could become a sh**-bag 3rd world nation without reliable levels of dependable electrical power, not fit for any advanced industry much less a reasonable lifestyle for its citizens, to save the environment, but somehow I don't think that's an option.

You're hardly in a position to advise the Germans on their power generation infrastructure, given your apparent inability to comprehend the simple fact that coal plants emit a negligible amount of CO2 when they aren't generating power.
 
You're hardly in a position to advise the Germans on their power generation infrastructure, given your apparent inability to comprehend the simple fact that coal plants emit a negligible amount of CO2 when they aren't generating power.

Enough coal is still burned to keep the boilers hot and ready.
 
You're hardly in a position to advise the Germans on their power generation infrastructure, given your apparent inability to comprehend the simple fact that coal plants emit a negligible amount of CO2 when they aren't generating power.

And you seem to be unable to comprehend that coal plants have to be kept hot if they are expected to back up renewables (it takes them hours to come up from a cold start), and if they are hot they are indeed emitting a significant amount of CO2 without generating electricity. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601514/germany-runs-up-against-the-limits-of-renewables/

Natural gas plants, which can be brought up to speed faster, are increasingly used when renewables backup is required. But natural gas isn't as reliable as coal, and the price of natural gas will likely rise. Natural gas plants depend on a continuous fuel supply through pipelines, and that's not as dependable as having 3 months worth of coal piled up at the plant.

One thing that is common to all nations that have gone the renewables route is that everywhere it is tried it causes energy prices for the consumer to skyrocket (and puts a drain on government treasury besides). This has a profound effect on the economic competitiveness of a nation.

And for what? For some speculation, most likely incorrect, about the future climate.
 
And France . . .


[h=1]Climate Hypocrite President Macron Sucking Coal Power from Britain[/h]Guest essay by Eric Worrall According to The Guardian, a temporary shortage of nuclear power in France forced France to buy substantial amounts of “dirty” coal power from Britain – right at the time French President Macron was taunting President Trump, and pushing for climate trade tariffs against countries which do not share the EU’s…
Continue reading →
 
And you seem to be unable to comprehend that coal plants have to be kept hot if they are expected to back up renewables (it takes them hours to come up from a cold start), and if they are hot they are indeed emitting a significant amount of CO2 without generating electricity. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601514/germany-runs-up-against-the-limits-of-renewables/

Natural gas plants, which can be brought up to speed faster, are increasingly used when renewables backup is required. But natural gas isn't as reliable as coal, and the price of natural gas will likely rise. Natural gas plants depend on a continuous fuel supply through pipelines, and that's not as dependable as having 3 months worth of coal piled up at the plant.

One thing that is common to all nations that have gone the renewables route is that everywhere it is tried it causes energy prices for the consumer to skyrocket (and puts a drain on government treasury besides). This has a profound effect on the economic competitiveness of a nation.

And for what? For some speculation, most likely incorrect, about the future climate.

Didn't you even look at the graph of electricity generation that I linked to? Let me enumerate the points where you are wrong:

1) Coal plants do not keep emitting large amounts of CO2 when they are not generating electricity. Your link doesn't support your claim that they do. You are simply wrong about this.

2) Nobody even tries to use coal plants to compensate for short-term variations in demand - they typically provide base load. Natural gas generation generally provides most of the load-following capacity.

3) Both coal and gas plants are subject to disruptions in supply. See, for example, the 1970s UK miners' strike and associated power supply disruptions which led directly to Margaret Thatcher's "dash for gas".

4) Most of the variation in demand for fossil fuel generation comes from variations in consumer demand, not the supply of renewable energy. The energy companies are well used to compensating for such fluctuations in demand. It is simply not a major problem for them. Also, variations in renewable generation are quite predictable on the basis of weather forecasting. The energy companies can and do easily plan ahead for this.

5) Germany is one of the most competitive nations on Earth and is currently undergoing an economic boom. The country has not been economically crippled in any way by its use of renewables. Indeed, it's this economic boom and associated need for more energy that is partly responsible for the recent pause in their emissions reduction.

6) Predictions about future climate change are based on science, not speculation.
 
[h=2]Save the world with internal combustion engines[/h]
[h=3]Who cares about 50% more emissions?[/h]
China is powered by 65% coal.
A new study in China compares cars with internal combustion engines to electric cars. Qiao et al estimate that from cradle-to-gate electric cars use about 50% more energy and produce around 50% more emissions. (Thanks to Kenneth Richards at NoTricksZone.)
All Greens should hereby recycle their EV and buy a gas guzzler.
This is not even “lifetime costs” which include disposal.
These results will come as no surprise to people who remember the detailed study in Norway of 2012 which found that “…in regions where fossil fuels are the main sources of power, electric cars offer no benefits and may even cause more harm, the report said.”
In China, these electric cars are powered by 65% coal. Call them “coal-fired-cars”.
The largest single difference was with the battery.
Below, marvel at the results of the Chinese study. (ICE means Internal Combustion Engine. BEV means Battery Electric Vehicle.)
Not. Even. Close.
If you think CO2 matters, oil powered cars beat coal powered ones.
ICE = Internal Combustion Engine: BEV = Battery Electric Vehicle. By every measure Electric cars use more energy and emit more CO2.
Even if electric vehicles are powered by the wind, there are other costs. For the UK to power a national electric fleet they’d have to turn Scotland into a wind farm. (We need stationary batteries to supply the mobile batteries. Add up the losses.) In Australia there are estimates that each extra electric car could cost another $2000 per year in network and generation costs. (Let’s add that to the registration cost for an EV shall we?)
Keep reading →
 
[h=1]Germany to abandon climate target[/h]Posted on 08 Jan 18 by PAUL MATTHEWS 4 Comments
According to Reuters and Spiegel, the Grand Coalition of the CDU and SPD currently being formed in Germany is abandoning the emissions target of a reduction of 40% below 1990 levels by 2020. It had been obvious for some time that the target was not going to be met. This is a big humiliation for …
 
[h=1]Germany to abandon climate target[/h]Posted on 08 Jan 18 by PAUL MATTHEWS 4 Comments
According to Reuters and Spiegel, the Grand Coalition of the CDU and SPD currently being formed in Germany is abandoning the emissions target of a reduction of 40% below 1990 levels by 2020. It had been obvious for some time that the target was not going to be met. This is a big humiliation for …

I think that die was cast when they decided to cut back on nuclear power.
 
I think that die was cast when they decided to cut back on nuclear power.

Yes, meeting their ambitious emission targets while phasing out nuclear power was always going to be a struggle for Germany. Nevertheless, it is still a remarkable achievement that Germany has still managed to keep its CO2 emissions flat while doing so, as well as experiencing an economic boom.
 
Yes, meeting their ambitious emission targets while phasing out nuclear power was always going to be a struggle for Germany. Nevertheless, it is still a remarkable achievement that Germany has still managed to keep its CO2 emissions flat while doing so, as well as experiencing an economic boom.

What is not remarkable is the hardships they place on their people.
 
Yes, meeting their ambitious emission targets while phasing out nuclear power was always going to be a struggle for Germany. Nevertheless, it is still a remarkable achievement that Germany has still managed to keep its CO2 emissions flat while doing so, as well as experiencing an economic boom.

Not flat.

[h=3]German carbon emissions rise in 2016 despite coal use drop | Clean ...[/h]https://www.cleanenergywire.org/.../german-carbon-emissions-rise-2016-despite-coal-...



Dec 20, 2016 - German energy-related CO₂ emissions rose almost 1 percent in 2016, despite a fall in coal use and the ongoing expansion of renewable energy sources, according to first estimates by energy market research group AG Energiebilanzen. A rise in overall energy consumption covered in parts by an ...




[h=3]Germany's energy use and emissions likely to rise yet again in 2017 ...[/h]https://www.cleanenergywire.org/.../germanys-energy-use-and-emissions-likely-rise-y...



Nov 13, 2017 - Climate & CO2. Higher energy demand triggered by economic growth and colder weather is likely to push up Germany's greenhouse gas emissions again this year, energy market group AG Energiebilanzen forecast on Friday. A new rise would put Germany's 2020 climate targets even further out of reach.



 
What is not remarkable is the hardships they place on their people.
Even assuming there is this massive hardship....yeah, sometimes countries and people have to take responsibility for things and that requires a hardship. Not everything is like US wars where a small % of the population fights the war and the cost is put on the credit card. It wasn't too long ago that rightwingers were on her during the recession saying we should be cutting funding for social programs in the middle of a recessions because reducing deficits was worth the hardship and I promise you, many more people would of faced a greater hardship chasing lower deficits than people in Germany faced by reducing emissions.
 
Not flat.

[h=3]German carbon emissions rise in 2016 despite coal use drop | Clean ...[/h]https://www.cleanenergywire.org/.../german-carbon-emissions-rise-2016-despite-coal-...



Dec 20, 2016 - German energy-related CO₂ emissions rose almost 1 percent in 2016, despite a fall in coal use and the ongoing expansion of renewable energy sources, according to first estimates by energy market research group AG Energiebilanzen. A rise in overall energy consumption covered in parts by an ...




[h=3]Germany's energy use and emissions likely to rise yet again in 2017 ...[/h]https://www.cleanenergywire.org/.../germanys-energy-use-and-emissions-likely-rise-y...



Nov 13, 2017 - Climate & CO2. Higher energy demand triggered by economic growth and colder weather is likely to push up Germany's greenhouse gas emissions again this year, energy market group AG Energiebilanzen forecast on Friday. A new rise would put Germany's 2020 climate targets even further out of reach.




Yes, flat:

20170320_uba_greenhousegasemissions1990_2016_first_estimate.png
 
Your own graph contradicts you. (2016) 906 > (2015) 902

And 2017 will be higher still.

No, it doesn't. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that a trend line drawn through that graph would be flat at the end. Your misplaced reliance on year-to-year fluctuations invalidates your claim.
 
No, it doesn't. Anyone with an ounce of common sense can see that a trend line drawn through that graph would be flat at the end. Your misplaced reliance on year-to-year fluctuations invalidates your claim.

I hope you are just playing this for laughs :lamo because that's all you're going to get. Please note that both links in #67 use your same graph to illustrate rising German emissions. They were higher in 2016 than in 2015, and in 2017 will be higher still.:mrgreen:
 
I hope you are just playing this for laughs :lamo because that's all you're going to get. Please note that both links in #67 use your same graph to illustrate rising German emissions. They were higher in 2016 than in 2015, and in 2017 will be higher still.:mrgreen:

:roll: Jack, only you can see an upward trend in this graph:

20170320_uba_greenhousegasemissions1990_2016_first_estimate.png
 
There's no need to feel too sorry for the Germans. They have a longer life expectancy than US Americans.

Because they have a better social structure. They aren't killing themselves with obesity, drugs, auto accidents, etc. at the same rate we do.

By social structure, I mean the habits of the people. Not socialism.
 
Back
Top Bottom