• 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!

Costs of Germany's Energy Revolution Explode

LowDown

LowDown

Curmudgeon
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2012
Messages
14,185
Reaction score
8,768
Location
Houston
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Irregular and unpredictable wind and solar power is increasingly becoming a problem for Germany’s power grid. Utility company Tennet TSO spent almost a billion euros last year on emergency interventions to stabilize the national grid.

That’s what the company announced earlier this week. The costs were thus about 50% higher than in 2016 (660 million euros) and around forty percent higher than in 2015 (710 million). Tennet is responsible for the electricity supply in an area that extends from Schleswig-Holstein in the north to Bavaria in the south of Germany and accounts for around forty percent of Germany’s total area. In particular, Tennet is responsible for important north-south transmission routes.

The reason for the increase in emergency interventions is the rising number of solar projects and wind turbines in Germany. The share of renewable energy increased from 29 to 33 percent of the electricity supply last year. Wind and solar power are irregular and often unpredictable. This makes the network increasingly unstable.
Click to expand...

And because "emergency interventions" involve burning a lot of coal, the energy program in Germany is not reducing carbon emissions as hoped:

Germany’s would-be coalition partners have agreed to drop an ambitious plan to lower carbon dioxide emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2020, two sources told Reuters on Monday — a potential embarrassment for Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Negotiators for her conservative bloc and the centre-left Social Democrats (SPD) told Reuters the parties had agreed in exploratory talks on forming a government that the targeted cut in emissions could no longer be achieved by 2020.
Click to expand...

German Energy Policy on the Rocks | Power Line

Using renewable energy sources to totally replace carbon fueled plants isn't feasible using currently available technology, and trying to force it despite all the difficulties will cost you a lot in terms of money and reliability.
 
LowDown said:
And because "emergency interventions" involve burning a lot of coal, the energy program in Germany is not reducing carbon emissions as hoped:



German Energy Policy on the Rocks | Power Line

Using renewable energy sources to totally replace carbon fueled plants isn't feasible using currently available technology, and trying to force it despite all the difficulties will cost you a lot in terms of money and reliability.
Click to expand...

It would be feasible if they included nuclear in the mix, it must have felt so good to take nuclear
power off the table, I guess that was more important than CO2 emissions.
 
bla bla bla.. from another alt-right neo con scam site. Bet it is also directly funded by big coal and oil to spread lies and falsehoods about countries who are moving forward in renewables.
 
PeteEU said:
bla bla bla.. from another alt-right neo con scam site. Bet it is also directly funded by big coal and oil to spread lies and falsehoods about countries who are moving forward in renewables.
Click to expand...

At what point does the magic happen, that point where low density, poor duty cycle sources,
fill the needs or our on demand society?
 
PeteEU said:
bla bla bla.. from another alt-right neo con scam site. Bet it is also directly funded by big coal and oil to spread lies and falsehoods about countries who are moving forward in renewables.
Click to expand...

[h=1]Germany to abandon climate target[/h]Posted on 08 Jan 18 by PAUL MATTHEWS • 14 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 … Cont
 
longview said:
At what point does the magic happen, that point where low density, poor duty cycle sources,
fill the needs or our on demand society?
Click to expand...

If we dont invest in renewable energy and the infrastructure now, then we will be stuck with more and more expensive coal and oil (not to mention dirty as hell).. so when it finally does run out, or the planet is dead due to pollution.. then it is too late. When I was a kid, oil was 10 bucks a barrel.. now it is 60 and has been over 140 bucks. Oil is running out and we should not be investing in getting to hard to reach oil or coal.. waste of energy and money. The future is in renewables and alternative energy.

Money should be pouring into renewable.. no tax breaks for the rich oil and coal industries. We have effectively reached peak efficiency with oil and coal, and it is not good enough. We have to change now, or it will be too late.
 
Jack Hays said:
[h=1]Germany to abandon climate target[/h]Posted on 08 Jan 18 by PAUL MATTHEWS • 14 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 … Cont
Click to expand...

And so what? Does not mean renewables or alternative energy is wrong or failing. In fact Germany and other countries who have invested in such tech are at a massive advantage in the future. All this means, is that Merkel is a pragmatist, and does not want the AfD to have any influence, so she has make deals. This is a compromise.. sure they wont reach their goal, but they will get a large way there I bet.
 
PeteEU said:
And so what? Does not mean renewables or alternative energy is wrong or failing. In fact Germany and other countries who have invested in such tech are at a massive advantage in the future. All this means, is that Merkel is a pragmatist, and does not want the AfD to have any influence, so she has make deals. This is a compromise.. sure they wont reach their goal, but they will get a large way there I bet.
Click to expand...

They are moving backwards. Emissions were higher in 2016 than in 2015, and will be higher still for 2017. The abandonment of nuclear power was a colossal mistake, and now new coal mines are being dug in Germany.
 
PeteEU said:
If we dont invest in renewable energy and the infrastructure now, then we will be stuck with more and more expensive coal and oil (not to mention dirty as hell).. so when it finally does run out, or the planet is dead due to pollution.. then it is too late. When I was a kid, oil was 10 bucks a barrel.. now it is 60 and has been over 140 bucks. Oil is running out and we should not be investing in getting to hard to reach oil or coal.. waste of energy and money. The future is in renewables and alternative energy.

Money should be pouring into renewable.. no tax breaks for the rich oil and coal industries. We have effectively reached peak efficiency with oil and coal, and it is not good enough. We have to change now, or it will be too late.
Click to expand...

I think you misunderstand what I am saying, we need the renewable s, but we also need to
go in with our eyes open as to their limitations.
When Germany decided to not do nuclear, they limited their options.
I think the first viable market for renewable energy is in transport fuels,
which is something Germany has been working on, but to attempt to replace base load power with
renewable sources is doomed to failure without some long term type of energy storage.
 
longview said:
I think you misunderstand what I am saying, we need the renewable s, but we also need to
go in with our eyes open as to their limitations.
When Germany decided to not do nuclear, they limited their options.
I think the first viable market for renewable energy is in transport fuels,
which is something Germany has been working on, but to attempt to replace base load power with
renewable sources is doomed to failure without some long term type of energy storage.
Click to expand...

Germany had nuclear... but then Fukushima happened. It was politically impossible to continue with nuclear. Had that not happened then they could have met their target easily.
 
Jack Hays said:
They are moving backwards. Emissions were higher in 2016 than in 2015, and will be higher still for 2017. The abandonment of nuclear power was a colossal mistake, and now new coal mines are being dug in Germany.
Click to expand...

Nuclear power has its risks.. ask the Japanese. The Germans decided that those risks were too high, and have to rethink their plans.
 
PeteEU said:
Nuclear power has its risks.. ask the Japanese. The Germans decided that those risks were too high, and have to rethink their plans.
Click to expand...

They have earthquakes and tsunamis in Germany much? Otherwise, their danger was limited.
 
LowDown said:
And because "emergency interventions" involve burning a lot of coal, the energy program in Germany is not reducing carbon emissions as hoped:



German Energy Policy on the Rocks | Power Line

Using renewable energy sources to totally replace carbon fueled plants isn't feasible using currently available technology, and trying to force it despite all the difficulties will cost you a lot in terms of money and reliability.
Click to expand...
I don't have a problem with what Germany did in spirit. They failed really hard in execution. The US could take the exact same program and it would be far more successful because we have huge swaths of open sunny land that also gets pounded by strong winds.
 
PeteEU said:
Germany had nuclear... but then Fukushima happened. It was politically impossible to continue with nuclear. Had that not happened then they could have met their target easily.
Click to expand...
So which of German's reactors are in danger from a tsunami?
The political decision is what endangered the target, but it was a political decision.
A choice was made, and they chose the discontinuation of nuclear over the CO2 targets.
Since the renewable s are incapable of meeting many seasonal demands,
killing Nuclear almost guaranteed that the coal and natural gas plants would be required.
 
WCH said:
They have earthquakes and tsunamis in Germany much? Otherwise, their danger was limited.
Click to expand...

You forget the waste.... that was already a problem.
 
longview said:
So which of German's reactors are in danger from a tsunami?
The political decision is what endangered the target, but it was a political decision.
A choice was made, and they chose the discontinuation of nuclear over the CO2 targets.
Since the renewable s are incapable of meeting many seasonal demands,
killing Nuclear almost guaranteed that the coal and natural gas plants would be required.
Click to expand...

God you people... the tsunami was not the freaking point. Nuclear power was already unpopular due to Chernobyl and 3 Mile Island (yea Americans forget about that one). Then came this massive meltdown. On top of that, the disposal of nuclear waste was always an issue with the German population... so politically, the politicians had no choice but to do what they did.

As for "seasonal demands".. horse**** on so many levels.
 
Jack Hays said:
They are moving backwards. Emissions were higher in 2016 than in 2015, and will be higher still for 2017. The abandonment of nuclear power was a colossal mistake, and now new coal mines are being dug in Germany.
Click to expand...

They have more energy from solar and wind than they know what to do with. Some months, if it's sunny AND windy, they generate so much energy that they can't store it all with current battery technology. So the price of electricity becomes NEGATIVE: meaning they actually pay people to use electricity to take all that extra energy off their hands.

Germany paid people to use electricity over the holidays because its grid is so clean | The Independent
 
ataraxia said:
They have more energy from solar and wind than they know what to do with. Some months, if it's sunny AND windy, they generate so much energy that they can't store it all with current battery technology. So the price of electricity becomes NEGATIVE: meaning they actually pay people to use electricity to take all that extra energy off their hands.

Germany paid people to use electricity over the holidays because its grid is so clean | The Independent
Click to expand...

Too bad these people had to lose their village.

[h=3]In shadow of Germany's climate conference, a village disappears to ...[/h]https://www.washingtonpost.com/...germanys...coal/.../82deb030-c18b-11e7-9294-705f...
Nov 11, 2017 - The Post's Griff Witte and Luisa Beck traveled to western Germany where, despite the country's green rhetoric, coal mines are rapidly expanding. (Griff Witte .... The owner of the area's mines, an energy colossus known as RWE, is constructing a new version of the village seven miles up the road. But the two ...
 
These two graphs tell the story in Germany:

20170320_uba_greenhousegasemissions1990_2016_first_estimate.png


fig2-gross-power-production-germany-1990-2017-1.png


As you can see, the reduction in CO2 emissions has flattened off in Germany, thus making it all but impossible to achieve their ambitious climate targets now. Although renewable generation has expanded to constitute some 33% of German electricity production and generation from coal continues to fall, the resulting drop in CO2 emissions has been cancelled out by the phasing out of nuclear generation and a booming economy that requires more power.
 
PeteEU said:
God you people... the tsunami was not the freaking point. Nuclear power was already unpopular due to Chernobyl and 3 Mile Island (yea Americans forget about that one). Then came this massive meltdown. On top of that, the disposal of nuclear waste was always an issue with the German population... so politically, the politicians had no choice but to do what they did.

As for "seasonal demands".. horse**** on so many levels.
Click to expand...
They still had a choice and they made it, it just so happens that that choice is also driving them
to use Coal and Natural gas to fill in for the known poor duty cycle of the alternate energy sources.
The seasonal demand is very much a reality, and that you do not admit it is part of the problem.
Germany get very long summer days, but the weather is cool enough to not require much air conditioning,
this causes a power surplus. The winter is the opposite, short cold days, requiring heat.
Germany has a very asymmetrical seasonal energy demand.
But do not believe me, this has been an ongoing topic in German Universities for several years.
https://www.fraunhofer.de/en/press/research-news/2010/04/green-electricity-storage-gas.html
Solar has real benefits, but it also has real limitations that need to be addressed.
 
ataraxia said:
They have more energy from solar and wind than they know what to do with. Some months, if it's sunny AND windy, they generate so much energy that they can't store it all with current battery technology. So the price of electricity becomes NEGATIVE: meaning they actually pay people to use electricity to take all that extra energy off their hands.

Germany paid people to use electricity over the holidays because its grid is so clean | The Independent
Click to expand...

Except when they don't have enough, because they can't store it efficiently. They are seeing wildly variable supply and until batteries improve, they can't provide stable service.

There are safe designs for nuclear reactors that aren't being built because of irrational fear.

The first nation to jump on board with thorium reactors will have a serious advantage until the rest catch up.

If we'd been doling these out to the 3rd world since the 60's (when they were first designed and test reactors built) instead of weaponry, the world would be a very different place today.
 
Surface Detail said:
These two graphs tell the story in Germany:

As you can see, the reduction in CO2 emissions has flattened off in Germany, thus making it all but impossible to achieve their ambitious climate targets now. Although renewable generation has expanded to constitute some 33% of German electricity production and generation from coal continues to fall, the resulting drop in CO2 emissions has been cancelled out by the phasing out of nuclear generation and a booming economy that requires more power.
Click to expand...

Germany's CO2 emissions are rising, not flattening.

[h=3]Germany's dirty coalmines become the focus for a new wave of direct ...[/h]https://www.theguardian.com/.../germanys-dirty-coalmines-become-the-focus-for-a-new...
Nov 8, 2017 - Not far from the UN climate talks taking place in Bonn, activists frustrated with slow progress by governments are turning up the heat at the Hambach opencast mine, highlightingGermany's failure to live up to its green pledges.
 
longview said:
They still had a choice and they made it, it just so happens that that choice is also driving them
to use Coal and Natural gas to fill in for the known poor duty cycle of the alternate energy sources.
The seasonal demand is very much a reality, and that you do not admit it is part of the problem.
Germany get very long summer days, but the weather is cool enough to not require much air conditioning,
this causes a power surplus. The winter is the opposite, short cold days, requiring heat.
Germany has a very asymmetrical seasonal energy demand.
But do not believe me, this has been an ongoing topic in German Universities for several years.
https://www.fraunhofer.de/en/press/research-news/2010/04/green-electricity-storage-gas.html
Solar has real benefits, but it also has real limitations that need to be addressed.
Click to expand...

LOL aircondition in Germany? HAHAHAHA..
 
PeteEU said:
LOL aircondition in Germany? HAHAHAHA..
Click to expand...

I lived in Berlin for three years. Many older buildings did not have air conditioning. In the summer it can get quite hot, and when that happened there were heat-related deaths in Berlin.
 
longview said:
They still had a choice and they made it, it just so happens that that choice is also driving them
to use Coal and Natural gas to fill in for the known poor duty cycle of the alternate energy sources.
The seasonal demand is very much a reality, and that you do not admit it is part of the problem.
Germany get very long summer days, but the weather is cool enough to not require much air conditioning,
this causes a power surplus. The winter is the opposite, short cold days, requiring heat.
Germany has a very asymmetrical seasonal energy demand.
But do not believe me, this has been an ongoing topic in German Universities for several years.
https://www.fraunhofer.de/en/press/research-news/2010/04/green-electricity-storage-gas.html
Solar has real benefits, but it also has real limitations that need to be addressed.
Click to expand...

Of course, wind is the main source of renewable power in Germany, and the wind tends to be stronger in the winter. Solar power nicely lops off peak demand in the daytime in summer, thus allowing conventional power plants to run at a more constant rate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom