Comments
work_work-work t1_j4xnyne wrote
Norway is quite happy too! :-)
Proud_Viking t1_j4zkdwt wrote
We're REALLY not. Norwegians are losing their shit because we have to export electricity to the EU which is driving up our bills. It's all we talk about
mrspidey80 t1_j4znl20 wrote
Everyone's electricity bills are up.
MrPapillon t1_j4zplmt wrote
Yes, but you really don't want the Norse people to start thinking about ways to upgrade their quality of life by "interacting" with their neighbors.
anchist t1_j4zted4 wrote
Try it, the last time the norse had to build a giant ditch to keep the Germans out.
MrPapillon t1_j4zyndk wrote
As a Frenchman, at least they managed to keep the Germans out.
TremendousCustard t1_j504ci6 wrote
English. Apparently ours are the highest in the world at the moment. Having to choose whether to be warm or eat is horrible and I don't recommend it.
akirodic t1_j4zqtu0 wrote
Just make more energy and make tons of money! Problem solved!
[deleted] t1_j51wmf2 wrote
[removed]
DoBetterGodDangIt t1_j529has wrote
We all have to chip in to get this done. We are all dealing with price hikes
Proud_Viking t1_j52b2ia wrote
I agree, but we're not "quite happy about it". The energy firms that sell our cheap electricity for a high price on the european market, while hiking up domestic prices are quite happy however.
milanistadoc t1_j4yu2da wrote
And Azerbaijan, Qatar and China,
valoon4 t1_j4xmf9g wrote
This will influence the Dutch-German Relationship for some decades
Joezev98 t1_j4xvhux wrote
We're shutting off our gas fields because houses are quaking apart and the government is handling it so badly that some people wish that their houses would collapse on top of them. That would finally send the government the signal that something really needs to be done.
It's an absolute clusterfuck. Oh, and did I mention we have a housing crisis, so when the gas-extraction induced earthquakes make a house unsafe to live in, there's nowhere else for them to go. And on top of that, we've just had a big inflow of refugees that also have to be housed somewhere.
I doubt it'll take decades to shutt off the gas.
arthoer t1_j4yw1vi wrote
Rustig
Timey16 t1_j4zrohp wrote
Yeah Germany too is now on the way to FINALLY adopt heat pumps... but it will take many years to transform basically every building in the country. Especially since heat pumps used to be so uncommon, only very few companies can actually install them.
While a surge in the industry will cause new companies to arise, it will take a while for them to establish themselves.
Janni0007 t1_j50ek1x wrote
Now lets not overreact even before the war there were 130000 new heatpumps installed in germany every year. It is not like this is entirely unknown territory. Seeing as we actually also produce heatpumps in large scale in germany ourselves, I do not see why we wouldnt be able to install a lot in a few years time. Current goal of the economy and climate minister is 500 000 new heatpumps each year.
kraenk12 t1_j51x2po wrote
Main reason is most houses aren’t fit enough to really make the trouble worth it.
VotingStar t1_j4zfdqk wrote
Most of the gas from the Netherlands to Germany is due to the lack of LNG terminals in Germany. It's LNG unloaded to Germany via Belgium and the Netherlands.
As for Norway, they were asked multiple times in 2022 to increase the deliveries but refused every time. There is just no capacity to deliver more to Germany.
While gas imports from Russia to Europe decreased in 2022, the imports from the USA doubled at the same time.
URITooLong t1_j4zkb0l wrote
Wasn't Germany already the biggest customer ?
mrgreyeyes t1_j509tmv wrote
Yes! But now we are even more dependent on them!
URITooLong t1_j50c85n wrote
Where are you from ? In your first comment you said "we are glad to have you as a customer" and now you say "we are even more dependent on them"
It can't be both.
Core2score t1_j4ydafx wrote
Man Putin nuked his country's economy big-time. Russia is toast.
People might not realize how dangerous this is for Russia in the long run, but it is catastrophic. Russia isn't really important for the global market outside their energy exports, and those exports were valuable mostly because they were in high demand by the European union, particularly Germany.
With EU no longer buying, supply now greatly exceeds demand for Russian energy, which is why China and India are able to buy at greatly reduced prices that barely leave any profit for Russia.. especially considering how pricier and more difficult delivering that energy to east Asia is compared to Western Europe.
The only other export Russia had many buyers for, their weapons, is also seeing significantly reduced demand because of the war. A combination of the shitty performance against NATO weapons, sanctions making ordering parts much more difficult, and Russia using up their stockpiles in Ukraine have this part pretty much nuked as well.
Russia is done for. It might not show in the short run, but a few years from now the Russian economy could resemble Ukraine's in 2013 or 2014.
LordOfDorkness42 t1_j4yqh4y wrote
Yeah. Fucked pretty much sums it up.
Russia has had troubles for years, but one of the reasons so much of its shit got tolerated was how Putin was seen as this iron fisted genius. Somebody that slowly was stabilizing a country wrecked by the collapse of the old glory, when Soviet fell apart. Somebody that, while not nice, was simply needed in a place of great corruption and hopelessness.
Like, that 180 turn in global opinion is going to be written about for centuries. He went from untouchable genius badass, to Emperor Pantsless The Conman Fooled in freaking months.
Heck, at current rate, with how the war is tearing apart Russia's future one man at a time and undermining basically every bit of international trust it's built since the freaking 90s, I'm really wondering if Russia will even survive the current century.
Not many are still clamouring for a return & reunification of The Sick Man Of Europe, you know? That sort of history that's seldom talked about, because it's inglorious.
Core2score t1_j4ywsgv wrote
The current century? It wouldn't surprise me if the Russian federation collapses before 2030. I'm not saying it certainly will, but if that does happen it wouldn't surprise me.
Think about it, the Soviet Union was much more powerful than Russia, and they didn't fuck up nearly as much, and they still collapsed shortly after their occupation of Afghanistan failed miserably.
Russia doesn't even have the luxury of worrying about occupation, they couldn't even complete the invasion phase.
It's ironic.. Putin wanted to be remembered as a scary ironman and the glorious hero of Russia who restored it to a superpower.. instead he'll go down history as the dummass clown who took on a nation 10X smaller and miscalculated so bad he kickstarted the collapse of his own country.
ConohaConcordia t1_j5025m4 wrote
I think how the Cold War ended really made a lot of people forget how powerful the USSR once was. For a while, it was the world power with the most advanced technologies, with many renowned artists, and with an ideology that seemed to be the future for many people in the world. While the West ultimately emerged victorious in the Cold War, the USSR fought it at an equal footing — something the Russian Federation was never able to do.
Decuriarch t1_j504l4v wrote
Not really, it became very evident after the USSR fell that most of their "power" was just smoke and mirrors. We thought they were ahead of us in the space race, when they really weren't. They never had parity with the US, they just also had nukes and knew how to cast a large shadow. Putin was just emulating the past.
Downtown_Skill t1_j50qm2v wrote
Their technology was far behind and corruption was rampant domestically but there is no denying the influence they had in geopolitics. Shit many of Russia's current allies or sympathizers are left over from the cold war. I live in Vietnam which in general perceives the US as a partner and the US is very much liked here. You don't see any Russian flags anywhere but the hammer and sickle can be found everywhere. The Soviet union was a much more powerful ideological force than Russia if anything.
The Soviet union was a corrupt oppressive hell hole but the more I learn about the cold war the more it seems like the Soviet union at the very least supported a more humane foreign policy than the United States (a very low bar to clear in the cold war) which got them a lot of friends (that they're now losing at a staggering pace)
Edit: and just so no one thinks I'm a Soviet sympathizer because I'm very much not what I mean about the humane foreign policy is that while the USSR definitely had an unethical approach to foreign policy it's hard to beat the United States record of installing a corrupt dictator in the congo, illegally bombing Cambodia and Laos, installing violent dictators in Chile, Argentina, Brazil, and pretty much all of Latin America, militarily supporting Pakistan's genocide of Bangladesh, and various other less violent but equally shady things amongst their allies.
The USSR just wasn't quite as busy as the United States, they were more focused on oppressing people back in their Soviet bloc (which included most of eastern Europe at the time)
Core2score t1_j56dokd wrote
If you think the country that brought you the gulags knows anything about being humane you're prolly not right upstairs..
Downtown_Skill t1_j58satm wrote
Yeah that's not what I said at all but okay.
Core2score t1_j56ddod wrote
I mean the USSR was easily on par with the US early on in the space race, then a combination of a much inferior economy and corruption took its toll.
As for their military tech, it wasn't necessarily on par with the US all the time, but they had a very decent defense industry. Meanwhile all Russia can do is design super weapons like the T14 and then execution flops so bad im they become memes among military and defense bloggers.
To say nothing of the much much smaller sphere of influence Russia has today compared to peak Soviet Union.
KingPolle t1_j4yq28a wrote
Just a quick special operation. Three days in and out. 1 year later the prognosis for russias economic future looks really really really dark…
Core2score t1_j4ywz8b wrote
Thousands of years later and we can still see how right Sun Tzu was, know your enemy and know yourself.
It's almost like Putin decided to test that by doing the exact opposite, grossly underestimate your enemy and greatly overestimate yourself.
[deleted] t1_j4zdrvy wrote
[removed]
TurboSalsa t1_j4yyzwt wrote
Russia really doesn't have any options to sell gas at this point. Their ballyhooed Siberia-China pipeline was a dictators' vanity project and the route was designed according to which oligarch was owed favors at the time, and consequently won't make any money.
They can't build LNG terminals for lack of capital, technical workforce, and western equipment.
So while they're able to sell oil, a huge chunk of their gas is stranded at this point.
Hardly_lolling t1_j4z90c2 wrote
>So while they're able to sell oil, a huge chunk of their gas is stranded at this point.
*burned. You can see the flames all the way to Finland from them having to burn the gas because of lack of demand.
(environmentally burning it is bad but just releasing it is much much worse)
FistOfTheMagi t1_j4zjdfv wrote
Russian nuclear energy remains untouched, though.
Probably one of the reasons being the dependence of the ITER project. It's interesting that even if the political situation gets completely heated, that some projects remain unaffected.
Dustinthewindoftime t1_j502ocj wrote
And also crops are fertilizers. Can’t be replaced.
TrumpDesWillens t1_j4zm5ti wrote
Their weapons also aren't anything better than what smaller suppliers are making like the Czechs or the Italians.
PlaugeofRage t1_j4zn3zg wrote
They can't really operate their wells without western companies. They were always fucked long term.
plipyplop t1_j50c61r wrote
Also, there is no trust. The Ruble is rubble, propped up in the most blatantly manipulated and artificial way. The businesses that are there can be "nationalized" on a whim. The expectation of corruption is considered normal. The quality of workers and education is in crisis, if not permanently broken to the point of no return. This will be the beginning of new satellite-states as russia dissolves.
I expect them to soon start selling their own women into human trafficking, and going balls-deep into the drug trade (like Afghanistan). They will have to scrape along like North Korea does, at this rate.
[deleted] t1_j5074pt wrote
I heard Russia found more demand for their gas and oil from countries outside Europe who are in for a long term contract and already building infrastructure to allow mass importation of Russian energies, primarily for China and India. How much can the non-European buyers of Russian gas and oil be able to replace Russia's loss of revenue from Europe? Some experts say the demand from these countries cannot completely replace the demand from Europe, while other experts say it's more than enough to replace it. There's so much conflicting info on this issue I don't know which side is telling the truth.
Janni0007 t1_j50dysa wrote
Oil is easy enough to replace for russia, due to its liquid nature. Gas is another cattle of beast. Pipelines take time to build and those pipelines outside europe do not in fact in anyway replace the volume to europe. (doubly so because of the location of the gas fields in the west instead of siberia)
LNG is expensive to build and maintain. Mostly western expertise as well. So it is rather unlikely that russia is gonna enter that market full force anytime soon.
Core2score t1_j56f621 wrote
But you're missing the point.
Regardless of who they sell their energy to, and in what form they sell it, they have many less buyers now and delivery will be much more difficult and expensive leading to greatly reduced demand.. and this might prove too much for Russia to overcome.
Janni0007 t1_j56fxpg wrote
In parts sure. But there are a lot of things that could influence this either way. A global recession and the consequent slowdown of fossil fuel consumption would be a disaster for russia. If the economy booms and there is a ton of demand either way? Then the impact is far less pronounced.
Oil is to easy to trade and too important for the economy. Someone is always going to buy it. 30-40$ is the cut off for profitability for Russian oil. If it is above that then they will be mostly fine. Below that they are fucked.
AloneListless t1_j50gn02 wrote
!remindme in 2 years
qtx t1_j4zkzso wrote
Don't worry, India is buying up all the gas that used to go to Europe.
marvinhal21 t1_j4zm99h wrote
>Don't worry
Nobody is, except a few Reddit trolls like you lol. Also India buys oil, not gas. At least get your story straight!
lewger t1_j4ztld4 wrote
You know there is no infrastructure to move gas as a liquid or a gas to India. If you're going to lie at least make it plausible.
AkitaBijin t1_j4ynqi1 wrote
There are many things for which one may criticize the German government, but my goodness, this is an incredible achievement in one year. Overdue, yes, but nevertheless, incredible over a single year.
Fa1n t1_j4xb84g wrote
I just want more affordable clean energy.
PEVEI t1_j4xemt6 wrote
Saying “just” doesn’t make it easy.
Prinzmegaherz t1_j4ywoxd wrote
It seems that we can build lot‘s of LNG terminals in a short amount of times, but not renewables. They seem to take a looooong time here.
YeaISeddit t1_j4z59ge wrote
Each of these terminals can bring in between 50-100 TWh of energy while Germany is adding around 20-30 TWh of renewable energy per year. The obvious reason for the difference is upfront cost. The cost for each of these 50 TWh terminals is around 1 billion euro, while the cost to build 50 TWh of yearly solar capacity currently costs 150 billion euros. So the upfront costs are 150x higher for solar.
Obviously there are differences in costs of operation of the facilities since gas costs money and the sun is free. But upfront costs are the big hinderance for now.
To replace the 800 TWh of energy capacity from Russian gas, Germany would have to spend around 2.5 Trillion Euro, equivalent to 6 years of the German government's entire budget, whereas with LNG terminals it can be done for 16 billion or 4% of the government's yearly budget. Given the extremely tight time window to accomplish the transition, LNG is the obvious choice.
fredo3579 t1_j4zs4lz wrote
Excellent comment!
directstranger t1_j503nrg wrote
You also need gas to go hand in hand with renewables, each TW of renewables needs 1TW insalled in gas, for backup.
LefthandedCrusader t1_j4zqcos wrote
Last year Germany installed 9GW solar and more than 3GW wind capacity. Not bad.
kraenk12 t1_j51xf39 wrote
Renewable energy has been growing fast and is the highest among comparable Western European countries.
[deleted] t1_j4xerwo wrote
[removed]
EbonyOverIvory t1_j4y6jn4 wrote
Then advocate for nuclear power. The popular fear of nuclear energy is why we’re still so dependent on fossil fuels.
[deleted] t1_j4ymskf wrote
[removed]
Yarasin t1_j4zitvy wrote
No. Sourcing nuclear fuels isn't clean and building NPPs is a behemoth undertaking. By the time you've approved and built a single plant (10+ years) you could've covered half the country in wind-turbines and hydro-plants, all of which are built and operated independently.
EbonyOverIvory t1_j4zj8db wrote
Do. Fucking. Both.
Yarasin t1_j4zjazg wrote
Nuclear and renewables do not synergize. Wasting money on nuclear energy is a dead-end. The ship has sailed long ago.
EbonyOverIvory t1_j4zjni6 wrote
Wind and solar are not baseload. Unless we replace fossil fuels with hydro, geothermal, or biomass, we’ll still need to burn coal. Nuclear is the only viable large scale alternative to coal for baseload power. Wind and solar should absolutely be built, but they are not a total solution.
mrspidey80 t1_j4znsys wrote
That's bullshit. Renewables supported by Power-To-X
storage will work just fine.
EbonyOverIvory t1_j4zoyay wrote
Okay, so now you need to build not only vast quantities of wind and solar plants in your ten year plan, but also energy storage.
Bear in mind that in the past twenty years, in the US, renewables have gone from providing a negligible portion of the total grid power to providing 20%, and that includes hydro power, which provides about 8% of that total.
So you’re looking at building out 4 times (being generous) what was built in the last twenty years in the next ten, plus massive amounts of storage.
Now I don’t disagree with that as a goal, but it’s probably going to be quicker to divest coal power by building nuclear plants, which can actually be built in five years, not ten. Small modular reactors could potentially be built in an even shorter time frame.
The main barrier to building them is backlash from the public due to misinformation about risks and pollution. So like I said at the start of this, advocate for nuclear power. It needs people championing it if we’re going to get off coal before we all burn.
But by all means, advocate for renewables also.
mrspidey80 t1_j4zz1ko wrote
You're forgetting that this kind of storage is basically gas tanks and pipes. We already have plenty of those. They just need to be repurposed and extended.
Also, we would not get a single new NPP up an running in 20 years, even if we tried.
SaltyMudpuppy t1_j51v7sl wrote
Yea, this is nonsensical. The type of storage needed would be batteries, or something like molten salt. You can't store electricity in a fucking tank.
mrspidey80 t1_j51x921 wrote
Lol, sure you can. Google "Power To Gas".
Hexokinope t1_j4zomeb wrote
Excellent points. Germany (and Japan) are different though because they're sitting on many perfectly functional nuclear plants that used to supply much of their electricity until people freaked out about Fukushima and governments replaced it cheap coal and a mix of other fossil fuels which is obviously awful across the board for everything but cost. Germany and Japan could easily slash their emissions and gain more energy independence just by turning them back on. It hasn't been that long either, so they still have much of the needed expertise.
Yarasin t1_j4zq8mm wrote
The anti-nuclear sentiment is much older than Fukushima, going back to the 80s and earlier. An official exit was already ratified in the late 90s/early 00s, but then Merkel and the CDU unilaterally decided to stop it due to lobbying from energy producers. It was only picked up again when Fukushima lit a fire under her ass and she caved to public pressure.
Hexokinope t1_j4zr2wr wrote
I'm not sure what point you're trying to make? Obviously there's a longer history behind the nuclear power opposition (the bit on the Sierra Club in Freakonomics ep 516 is quite interesting), but Fukushima was the trigger that caused the CDU to cave (and Japan's LDP to reverse course). More to the point, they can restart their reactors to both dramatically cut CO2 emissions and to reduce reliance on foreign fossil fuels with minimal lead time.
Tiny_Ad_638 t1_j4xfeye wrote
According to my electricity supplier, all my electricity comes from renewable clean sources, but I still pay the same as everyone else using non-renewable sources. So don't hold your breath on cheaper bills .
fabscav t1_j4xkkyb wrote
That's because your energy actually comes from unclean sources such as coal, but your supplier gets to sell it as clean energy to you, as long as they buy enough clean energy credits from other countries.
indica_please t1_j4y2kfj wrote
Even if their energy was 100% clean and renewable, that doesn't mean it's free.
Xaeryne t1_j4xs1x2 wrote
And of course the generating country still gets to claim that green energy source for themselves too, because they are the ones actually using it.
Tiny_Ad_638 t1_j4zf7sr wrote
They say they only purchase clean energy, but the way they worded it it was so ambiguous. I know they are not 100% truthful. Imagine that a big company not being entirely honest.
RedMoustache t1_j4ytvgc wrote
Energy companies are shady. My energy company tried to sell me on a "green energy" charge. They charge you an extra fee to "support green energy." Sounds nice until you ask a couple questions.
The extra money isn't being used to build or support green energy. It's just for me to show I support green energy their profits.
TaXxER t1_j4z942p wrote
That’s exactly where it’s trending towards:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-electricity-renewables?tab=chart&country=~DEU
[deleted] t1_j4xqiio wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j4yp6gr wrote
[removed]
treadmarks t1_j4xmxxd wrote
> However, potential for a damaging trade row between the EU and the US over green subsidies remains.
> The US last year approved a massive $370bn (£299bn) in investments for climate-friendly technologies, including tax credits for electric cars that are made in America.
Oh heavens no, not subsidies for green energy. The world is in a climate emergency but GDP competition is clearly still the top issue for the elite.
u_tamtam t1_j4xrk5p wrote
It's more nuanced than that. For instance, Chinese dumping caused many renewable companies in Europe to go bankrupt, which possibly slowed down innovation. I won't pretend to know the details of either, but often it happens that consolidation yields undesired consequences.
qingqunta t1_j4yfiqg wrote
The issue is the made in America part, which is anticompetitive.
NoStressAccount t1_j4y7v6r wrote
(Flashback to the 1940s and the failed attempts to take the oilfields)
Germany: "You have no idea how long we've been waiting to say that."
MSadlaV t1_j4xhcjl wrote
Rushia:: but we have gas please take it we have so much gas
TokyoTurtle t1_j4y0fxp wrote
Russia's next move might be: "buy our gas, or else we'll vent it and make climate change worse!"
KingPolle t1_j4yqhy3 wrote
I think this would count as an attack on every single country in the world and im pretty sure most countries even china and india would strongly oppose this and take it as a direct threat. Honestly its stupid enough that russia might actually try it.
YourStepDad97 t1_j4yif2r wrote
Please don’t scare me
TurboSalsa t1_j4yz4t6 wrote
Not venting, but flaring and they're already doing that.
SaltyMudpuppy t1_j51w771 wrote
Venting is waaaay worse than flaring.
MKCAMK t1_j4yy8iw wrote
Great! See? It was not the end of the world. Go Germany!
IngloriousMustards t1_j4zi3nn wrote
Damn, that was fast. Germany was ruZZias whipping boy, and now they’re free. Congratulations!
That brown coal is still a bummer, but ruZZian cockroaches are so much worse, and brown coal is easier to deal with.
[deleted] t1_j51yaug wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j4xeprp wrote
[removed]
Finarous t1_j4yvofg wrote
Now hopefully Germany can try and get off of its coal habit. Hopefully adopt more things along the lines of nuclear, wind, or solar if they can manage to make the latter work with how cloudy the place is.
Fellow-Child-of-Atom t1_j4zzh8a wrote
Photovoltaic works absolutely fine in germany. Pretty much every new building has it. The only reason we are behind our plan for renewables is because people were dumb enough to vote conservatives into government for 16 years until last year.
Finarous t1_j504mkt wrote
Out of curiosity, how does that work when Germany has a much lower number of sunny days on average?
Fellow-Child-of-Atom t1_j50a7lb wrote
I don't have numbers unfortunately. All I can say is that photovoltaic is the default rather than the exception for new buildings and that all people I know with photovoltaic talk very highly about the returns.
Obviously in more southern countries it works even better and countries in scandinavia will have less returns. I think photovoltaic is pretty much nonexistent in Norway or Sweden for example. But from what I know, photovoltaic is a riskfree, profitable investment here.
I'm not sure how widely it is known, but Germany has been the worldleading producer for photovoltaic around ~2010 thanks to the subsidies by the past progressive government until - as always - Merkel and other corrupt conservatives destroyed the industry with over 100.000 workers shortly before it became profitable by itself by cutting all of the funding.
If people had been smarter in the past elections, this whole current mess would have been very different and maybe Putin wouldn't even have dared to wage war because Germany would have been way more independant of their energy supplies.
Finarous t1_j50cbfr wrote
In fairness, adding PV to buildings seems sensible even if it weren't terribly efficient because to not do it simply seems to be wasting energy that is literally falling from the sky for free. And I would agree that a major country such as Germany being dependent on other countries for something as significant energy is rather poor as a policy decision, given how it allows other countries to use that as leverage. Always good to have leverage over others, not so good for them to have it over you.
TaXxER t1_j51ll88 wrote
The definition of “sunny days” are simply not so relevant, since the output of solar panels on sunny and on cloudy days differ by a margin that is much smaller than most people think.
kraenk12 t1_j51y4av wrote
Honestly the last summers were so sunny and dry as if it was Italy.
Janni0007 t1_j50fa9w wrote
We are not in the 90s anymore. PV does not need direct sunshine only at this point diffuse light suffices. If you want to look at interesting data look at the fraunhofer institute ISE (it is also available in english)
Finarous t1_j50s2mn wrote
Thank you very much good redditor! Always a pleasure to learn new things.
TaXxER t1_j51le26 wrote
> solar if they can manage to make the latter work with how cloudy the place is.
You do know that clouds have only a limited effect on the output of a solar panel, right?
kraenk12 t1_j51xz7r wrote
Lol Germany has one of the highest amounts of renewable energy among all countries on this planet!
[deleted] t1_j4zmele wrote
[removed]
tamaytotomahto t1_j505vz7 wrote
Just now relies on Middle Eastern energy instead…
[deleted] t1_j50l5qn wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j511rdb wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j51b90u wrote
[removed]
Icollectpropertytax t1_j51xfh7 wrote
Good i dont care if that Greta gets angry keep using that coal insted of relying on russia
MolestedByFicus t1_j4xv967 wrote
And how much coal are they burning now?
URITooLong t1_j4zkgvz wrote
Not more than before really.
There is a small increase in 2022 which will go down now again.
The incrase in 2022 was to compensate for the lack of nuclear based exports from France.
Akiasakias t1_j4y1qz8 wrote
So much. Lignite too, the dirtiest kind. It was way up even before the Russian mess.
The German energy policy has been divorced from reality for a while now.
TaXxER t1_j4z9jbz wrote
This trend is pretty rooted in reality honestly:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-electricity-renewables?tab=chart&country=~DEU
2022 data is not yet in that graph, but we find here an estimate of 49.6%. Continuing the upward trend.
https://renewablesnow.com/news/renewables-account-for-496-of-germanys-power-mix-in-2022-810330/
Janni0007 t1_j50fxz4 wrote
"Do not bother me with facts, I already made up my mind!" That is your problem though. You are arguing against people with an agenda with facts. They do not conceive of such things only the latest news cycle...
Akiasakias t1_j51ciib wrote
Carbon emissions are way up overall, and were even before the war. Yes they are using more renewables in the mix, but overall the environmental impact of German energy policy has been getting worse.
Peak demand is winter and during the night. Solar is unable to meet those needs so in moving away from oil they have been burning coal instead.
I agree with you that agenda over facts is a problem. I just caution you to re-examine which is which. Here is an expert on the subject explaining the issue of why solar in Germany has not gone well.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LV-D9mKoig
We all want to see the energy grid to go green, but there are right and wrong ways to get it done.
Janni0007 t1_j51hvua wrote
>Carbon emissions are way up overall, and were even before the war. Yes they are using more renewables in the mix, but overall the environmental impact of German energy policy has been getting worse.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-emissions-per-country?country=~DEU
this is just demonstrably untrue. 2020 is simply not representative due to industry shutting down and 2021 is still only slightly above 2020. Germanys Electricity mix is getting greener every year.
>Peak demand is winter and during the night. Solar is unable to meet those needs so in moving away from oil they have been burning coal instead.
Winter is also peak production time for wind. Which is why it is always the time we export most of our electricity.
>I agree with you that agenda over facts is a problem. I just caution you to re-examine which is which. Here is an expert on the subject explaining the issue of why solar in Germany has not gone well.
My dude your source is a dude on youtube. Mine is the Fraunhofer Institute ISE. Who made for example this study
https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/en/publications/studies/paths-to-a-climate-neutral-energy-system.html
Those are actual scientist working in the field showing exactly the pathway to 0 emmissions
Akiasakias t1_j51qn7v wrote
The source is a best selling author and THE dude the industry pays to consult for them and give talks at all the big conferences. I picked a short video just for ease of linking right to it, but his infographics are used the world over.
Also, if you looked at the video, you would see it also praised wind as the solution, although Germany doesn't have the best profile there it is much better than solar. Germany has paid more for solar than California where it makes sense, for way way way less output.
SaltyMudpuppy t1_j51wu0g wrote
I guess you just decided to ignore Janni's links.
TaXxER t1_j51g62g wrote
That’s simply false. Germany’s emissions have been on a steel downward trend year after year since the start of the energy transition.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-emissions-per-country?country=~DEU
The temporary switch to coal has only temporarily slowed down the pace of this decrease.
> Peak demand is winter and during the night. Solar is unable to meet those needs so in moving away from oil they have been burning coal instead.
The two months where renewable electricity generation peaks are January and February, exactly in the winter when most necessary.
It is true that solar output is lower in winter. But at the same time, wind output is highest in winter, and that has a stronger effect on the cumulative renewable output.
Finarous t1_j50sd28 wrote
Still more progress to be made, but things are certainly moving in a good direction! Always encouraging to see such news in the papers.
[deleted] t1_j4zryhv wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j4xnlgy wrote
[removed]
tomoko2015 t1_j4xtqkc wrote
We first need to find a few which work.
FreedomIsFried t1_j4xtrti wrote
StationOost t1_j4z7h6v wrote
Dependency on gas is not related to sending Leopard tanks.
wave-garden t1_j505hak wrote
And all they had to do was brutalize working class people and tear up farmland to mine coal.
kraenk12 t1_j51yfl6 wrote
What does any of that news have to do with mining lignite/coal?
wave-garden t1_j5243l0 wrote
Just a frustrated nuclear engineer venting. Germany invented some of the best nuclear fuel in the 1970s. Had they not been steered away from that solution, they’d be in a very good place right now. Most likely a shining example for the rest of us with a resilient combination of renewables and nuclear.
kraenk12 t1_j52fv50 wrote
We were talking about natural gas here though which isn’t even 10% of the German electric energy production.
wave-garden t1_j52irau wrote
The issue is that Germany is restarting existing coal plants to move from Russian gas.
Discussion from NPR (I’m American, surely there are better sources in German media).
The plan is that they will operate through the winter and profits will be used to build more renewable generation. As an energy person, I am HIGHLY skeptical. Even with more renewables, the situation will likely be similar next winter and thereafter. They’re doing the best they can in a situation that was totally avoidable. I would say the same about my country, though the circumstances are different.
kraenk12 t1_j52ja4y wrote
“The issue is that Germany is restarting existing coal plants to move from Russian gas.“
I can only imagine that as a bridge situation and as I said, gas is only a very small fraction of Germany’s power production anyway.
Teamnoq t1_j4xxalv wrote
Until it is, in the future, just not now.
DangerPoopaloops t1_j51vbuf wrote
Cool, now thank dead Ukrainians and give the living one tanks.
[deleted] t1_j4ygpcp wrote
[deleted]
Web_Automatic t1_j4x62a0 wrote
Reliant on coal then?
Quezni t1_j4xtngu wrote
Better that than Russian gas.
Web_Automatic t1_j4xu2gp wrote
What happen to those nuclear power plants? Oh wait
kraenk12 t1_j51ykuw wrote
Coal? You mean what we use for electricity plants? What does that have to do with Russian gas that we basically only use for heating and the industry?
Delicious-Ask-463 t1_j4x47jl wrote
Just coal.
kraenk12 t1_j51yx98 wrote
What does coal for electric power have to do with (Russian) gas for heating?
Slayers_Picks t1_j4xyvhb wrote
Which is a fairly bad thing because now Germany is mining coal like crazy, becoming one of the biggest coal countries in europe.
Germany, get your shit together bro.
Emile-Yaeger t1_j4y1mgq wrote
It’s either that or the German industry shuts down. I’m more then fine with germany using coal and nuclear power until they figure out what to do.
At the end of the day though, not much will change. Germany will have to find another country to depend on. Germany lives and dies on foreign energy
kraenk12 t1_j51z8vf wrote
That’s not even true…Gas is used for the industry and mainly private heating. Coal is mainly used to produce power not heating in Germany.
URITooLong t1_j4zkk0l wrote
>Which is a fairly bad thing because now Germany is mining coal like crazy, becoming one of the biggest coal countries in europe.
Germany is not mining more coal than before.
[deleted] t1_j51z28r wrote
[removed]
JamonDeJabugo t1_j4y7oju wrote
Germany is a little larger than New Mexico...yeah.
djolepop t1_j4ykxh1 wrote
/r/shitAmericansSay
It also has more than a quarter of US' entire population
Web_Automatic t1_j4zeog5 wrote
And still is on coal 💀
URITooLong t1_j4zkll5 wrote
The US has dirtier energy grid than Germany. But please go on.
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3
https://www.energy-charts.info/charts/energy_pie/chart.htm?l=en&c=DE&interval=year&year=2021
​
| Gas | Coal | Fossil fuels total | Renewables total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| USA | 38.4% | 21.9% | 61% | 19.8% |
| Germany | 10.5% | 29.5% | 41.2% | 45.6% |
kraenk12 t1_j51zt29 wrote
And has almost 50 times the GDP of New Mexico. Lmao
gabigtr123 t1_j4x8np3 wrote
But those money man,we take those Russian money
mrgreyeyes t1_j4x709x wrote
We are glad to have you as our new biggest customer.
Kind regards the Dutch.