The energy transition was badly overslept, but everyone is now shouting that prices are now shooting through the roof because of the energy transition? Even today, when every blind person recognizes that energy dependency on gas and oil is simply not sustainable, everyone continues to applaud the incredibly incompetent Minister for Economic Affairs. Why isn't she simply thrown out?
And the energy transition is not the only thing that has been and continues to be deliberately overslept.
What this country actually needs is more progressive economic policy. You don't have to like Habeck as a person, he certainly wasn't flawless, but at least he always had an explanation for his actions.
We need to finally get away from the fact that the combustion, gas and oil lobbies determine the everyday lives of average citizens.
And the energy transition is not the only thing that has been and continues to be deliberately overslept.
What this country actually needs is more progressive economic policy. You don't have to like Habeck as a person, he certainly wasn't flawless, but at least he always had an explanation for his actions.
We need to finally get away from the fact that the combustion, gas and oil lobbies determine the everyday lives of average citizens.
•
3434
•
@Keineui The fairy tale of the energy turnaround will not come true if it is told a thousand times and ridiculously claimed that we need to go in the wrong direction even more.
There will be no independence from fossil fuels for industrialized nations in the foreseeable future.
There will be no independence from fossil fuels for industrialized nations in the foreseeable future.
•
1212
•
@Keineui Independence from oil and gas is something I'm actually in favor of. But you can't achieve that by simply turning off the gas tap and blowing up nuclear power plants at the same time ...
Expanding renewable energies and using existing infrastructure for as long as necessary - you have to do that in parallel. With a plan over many years, possibly decades.
Expanding renewable energies and using existing infrastructure for as long as necessary - you have to do that in parallel. With a plan over many years, possibly decades.
•
1313
•@FairValue There is simply no alternative. We can discuss whether nuclear power is too fast and too early. But the fact is that going back in is unaffordable today. What happens when you are dependent on authoritarian governments for oil and gas supplies should be well known (and yes, let's include the USA for the sake of simplicity). So what to do, burn coal? Please, that makes me laugh.
So put solar on the fields and roofs, wind turbines wherever possible and then use BESS to support the grid and control it intelligently. The solutions are all there and what's more, it would be much quicker and cheaper than reopening the nuclear power debate.
We would also like to see local energy generation, be it biogas-powered fuel cells or whatever. But we'd rather throw a spanner in the works of companies like VoltStorage GmbH (and no, I'm not affiliated with them in any way), choke off the solar and PV market and give this lead away to China (Solarworld/QCells, you name it)...
Shall I start with the wind industry? Would you prefer that the manufacturers also have to emigrate or that the mountain of paperwork for the construction of a wind turbine is now miles long and it takes 5+ years to get approval?
We would rather bury our tax money in nonsensical and climate-damaging subsidies instead of taking even one step in the right direction. I have to stop, I'm talking myself into a rage here...
But when I hear/read fairy tales about the energy transition, I have to get it out.
So put solar on the fields and roofs, wind turbines wherever possible and then use BESS to support the grid and control it intelligently. The solutions are all there and what's more, it would be much quicker and cheaper than reopening the nuclear power debate.
We would also like to see local energy generation, be it biogas-powered fuel cells or whatever. But we'd rather throw a spanner in the works of companies like VoltStorage GmbH (and no, I'm not affiliated with them in any way), choke off the solar and PV market and give this lead away to China (Solarworld/QCells, you name it)...
Shall I start with the wind industry? Would you prefer that the manufacturers also have to emigrate or that the mountain of paperwork for the construction of a wind turbine is now miles long and it takes 5+ years to get approval?
We would rather bury our tax money in nonsensical and climate-damaging subsidies instead of taking even one step in the right direction. I have to stop, I'm talking myself into a rage here...
But when I hear/read fairy tales about the energy transition, I have to get it out.
•
1212
•@Keineui We have over 170 GW of installed solar and wind capacity and although this is a massive overcapacity, we can't even reliably produce our electricity with it and have to keep massive backups ready and use them regularly. The reasons are well known and the storage capacities are simply not there. When that happens, I'll be right behind it, but we're still miles away from it.
And don't even get me started on the fact that only 20% of primary energy in Germany can currently be supplied by renewables. You can't seriously claim that you only have to do more, here and there and a little biogas, and then it would be possible to replace 8k petajoules from fossil fuels in no time at all. That's crazy.
And beyond that, the economy doesn't seem to believe these promises about the energy transition for a second. Otherwise, investment in Germany would have to skyrocket as a result. The opposite is the case.
And don't even get me started on the fact that only 20% of primary energy in Germany can currently be supplied by renewables. You can't seriously claim that you only have to do more, here and there and a little biogas, and then it would be possible to replace 8k petajoules from fossil fuels in no time at all. That's crazy.
And beyond that, the economy doesn't seem to believe these promises about the energy transition for a second. Otherwise, investment in Germany would have to skyrocket as a result. The opposite is the case.
•
77
•
@FairValue I'm not that deep into the subject, but the storage problem should be solved in the long term by using the excess capacity to produce hydrogen with electrolysis and store it.
The existing and new gas infrastructure should then be used for this.
Of course, this will result in massive costs in the medium term, but once this is in place, we will be completely energy-independent and the costs per kWh should also be lower.
However, you also have to electrify transportation and heating. And, of course, expand the grid.
But I don't think that's impossible, we're not the only ones doing it.
China is also massively expanding its renewables, and not because they're left-wing greens.
I think we want to make progress?
However, continuing to burn fossil fuels is exactly the kind of standstill that is always denounced.
The existing and new gas infrastructure should then be used for this.
Of course, this will result in massive costs in the medium term, but once this is in place, we will be completely energy-independent and the costs per kWh should also be lower.
However, you also have to electrify transportation and heating. And, of course, expand the grid.
But I don't think that's impossible, we're not the only ones doing it.
China is also massively expanding its renewables, and not because they're left-wing greens.
I think we want to make progress?
However, continuing to burn fossil fuels is exactly the kind of standstill that is always denounced.
•
66
•
@Keineui I see it similarly. Many mistakes were certainly made at the traffic lights, especially the public image was catastrophic and the tabloid media exploited it skillfully. Which probably made some things seem worse than they were. However, what some people feared before the last election is currently becoming apparent: unfortunately, voters often confuse economic proximity with economic competence when it comes to the CDU/CSU.
•
66
•
@Keineui the Russians would still be supplying cheaply if Ukraine had not blown up the pipeline
•
11
•@TotallyLost Storage problem should(!) be solved. Okay, let's talk when it's solved. It won't do us any good in the next 5 years.
China is massively expanding in all areas, including nuclear power and coal, because they want to become the world's number one power and have understood that they need astronomical amounts of energy, preferably diversified and cheaply converted.
We want to make progress? Yes. Thanks to the green transformation, Germany is hurtling full steam ahead into the abyss. Once again. Reality shows: we cannot do without massive use of fossil fuels in the foreseeable future. Maybe in 20-30 years, but not in the foreseeable future.
And many risk assessments at large corporations, but also in medium-sized companies, come to precisely this conclusion, which is why they are increasingly relocating their sites abroad and are only consuming assets at their local sites.
China is massively expanding in all areas, including nuclear power and coal, because they want to become the world's number one power and have understood that they need astronomical amounts of energy, preferably diversified and cheaply converted.
We want to make progress? Yes. Thanks to the green transformation, Germany is hurtling full steam ahead into the abyss. Once again. Reality shows: we cannot do without massive use of fossil fuels in the foreseeable future. Maybe in 20-30 years, but not in the foreseeable future.
And many risk assessments at large corporations, but also in medium-sized companies, come to precisely this conclusion, which is why they are increasingly relocating their sites abroad and are only consuming assets at their local sites.
•
22
•@FairValue... "Okay, let's talk when it's solved. It won't do us any good for the next five years."
And should we therefore stop expanding it?
According to this logic, we can stop all projects that are not completed after 5 years.
Incidentally, it doesn't send out a good signal when a country changes its strategy every fart.
Neither to the economy nor to partners.
And should we therefore stop expanding it?
According to this logic, we can stop all projects that are not completed after 5 years.
Incidentally, it doesn't send out a good signal when a country changes its strategy every fart.
Neither to the economy nor to partners.
•
11
•@TotallyLost We should not stop working on storage technology. I didn't say that either. It's just that without it, an increase in wind and solar power won't bring us anything worth mentioning, neither in terms of electricity nor primary energy.
A strategy should definitely be changed if it was doomed to fail from the outset or turns out to be obviously wrong. How much further downhill does it have to go before this realization sets in?
A strategy should definitely be changed if it was doomed to fail from the outset or turns out to be obviously wrong. How much further downhill does it have to go before this realization sets in?
••