5 ms·

You mind sharing your data? AFAIK what proponents of the German „Energiewende“ are often referring to are sometimes just superficial headlines or positive data

You mind sharing your data? AFAIK what proponents of the German „Energiewende“ are often referring to are sometimes just superficial headlines or positive datapoints cherry picked out of a study that itself draws negative conclusions or fails to come to a postive result. The most prominent in the last years were those PR stunts, that claimed Germany is exporting more energy than it is consuming. Which frankly adds injury to insult. Because the only reason Germany is doing that is that otherwise its energy grid would collapse. Renewables (in Germany) produce energy in fluctuating rates and aren‘t suited to serve the base load. Excess energy can’t be saved so it has to be (by law) dumped somewhere, which usually means our neighbor countries. They in return, being annoyed by repeatedly having their grid brought on the brink of collapse by us started to install equipment on their borders to basically „emergency stop“ these shenanigans and cut-off our grid if they have to. Apart from the diplomatic „upside“ another side-effect said PR stunt is spin-doctoring is the fact that everytime we have to dump energy the prices go down. They even go negative. That sounds nice, but none of the German consumers will get these prices on their energy bill (if they did, they might increase consumption in those times, alleviating the grid’s pain...). It effectively means, that Germany pays other countries to take their (heavily tax-payer funded) excess energy. Which alas, gives us said PR stunt. Anyways, I honestly would be interested in your data that proves the „surpassing [of] any goals so far“.

lispm 8y ago
> that claimed Germany is exporting more energy than it is consuming No one claims that. What is claimed and what is actually correct is that Germany exports more electricity than it imports. > They in return, being annoyed by repeatedly having their grid brought on the brink of collapse Contrary to popular myths the German electricity grid is one of the most stable in the world. https://energyathaas.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/gt.jpg https://energyathaas.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/gt.jpg > Excess energy can’t be saved There isn't much excess electricity from renewable energy. What we have are is a situation where coal / nuclear are exporting their electricity and are not willing or able to reduce their energy production enough. Note also exporting and importing electricity is nothing bad. We will see much more electricity exchange in the coming decades within the EU. The reason is that the EU is pushing an EU-wide electricity market with competition and wants to get rid of country-local closed energy markets with monopolies or oligopolies. Better adjust to that. > but none of the German consumers will get these prices on their energy bill Check out industry prices - they are consumers of electricity, too. > surpass any goalsso far Example, published in 2012: http://www.renewable-energy-concepts.com/fileadmin/user_upload/download-infos/broschuere_ee_zahlen_2011.pdf http://www.renewable-energy-concepts.com/fileadmin/user_uplo... It says: 'Bis spätestens zum Jahr 2020 soll der Anteil der erneuerbaren Energien an der Stromversorgung mindestens 35 Prozent betragen.' This has already happened in 2018.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- woodpanel 8y ago
  Sorry for getting the wrong impression of you, but why are you showcasing your answer as profound by dividing my post into separate quotes and sprinkling your answers with links that lead to anything but "data"? Your first link is just one jpg of a table on a blog of a progressive institute. The second one just a broad publication in German by the the German environmental ministry. Should I refer to its imprint as proof? Then you make un-based broad statements and label critics as adherents to mythical beliefs > Contrary to popular myths the German electricity grid is one of the most stable in the world. To which I'd say, look no further than 10 January 2019 when Germany's policy of legally enforcing right of way for renewable energies almost brought down the whole of Europe's electricity grid. [1] Furthermore the whole year of 2003 the German energy net authority had to perform 2 redispatches to avert a blackout. 2010 they had to perform 290, while in 2017 third quarter alone they had to perform 1.013 [2] No one claims [that Germany is exporting more energy than it is consuming]. What is claimed and what is actually correct is that Germany exports more electricity than it imports. Thats a non sequitur. > This has already happened in 2018. Clearly, your statement of the surpassing of "any goals so far" can't be based on that one data point out of a 140 page document? Or does this mean this was the only goal of the Energiewende? ? [1] https://derstandard.at/2000096185439/Europas-Stromnetz-stand-am-Rande-des-Totalausfalls https://derstandard.at/2000096185439/Europas-Stromnetz-stand... [2] https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Allgemeines/Bundesnetzagentur/Publikationen/Berichte/2017/Quartalsbericht_Q2_Q3_2017.pdf;jsessionid=F9FA1E72A7D8020CAB2E30F894F6EA97?__blob=publicationFile&v=3 https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/All... (page 32)
  - lispm 8y ago
    > Your first link is just one jpg of a table on a blog of a progressive institute. Is 'progressive' a problem for you? You can easily google for SAIDI and SAIFI numbers yourself. They will look the same. > The second one just a broad publication in German by the the German environmental ministry. Should I refer to its imprint as proof? A proof for what? I showed you a publication where the ministry communicated its goal for the share of renewable electricity in 2020. Higher up we already established that the number has been reached in 2018. > To which I'd say, look no further than 10 January 2019 when Germany's policy of legally enforcing right of way for renewable energies almost brought down the whole of Europe's electricity grid. [1] Which is factually wrong. Seems like you are not able to read the German text. It hasn't brought down the net at all, not in Germany and not in the rest of Europe and it wasn't even near that. The reason was a combination of data problem and a demand increase because of two power plants were going offline. Nothing to do with the 'Energiewende'. https://www.montelnews.com/de/story/datenfehler-bedarfsspitze-verursachen-netzvorfall--tennet/971069 https://www.montelnews.com/de/story/datenfehler-bedarfsspitz... If you read the above statements, it was far from bringing down the whole of Europe's grid - as you have claimed - even the French operator denies this. The whole of Europe is actually very large and includes countries like Ireland, Finland, Greece, ... none of which would have seen an effect. It's just a sensational headline. > Thats a non sequitur. What? > Clearly, your statement of the surpassing of "any goals so far" can't be based on that one data point out of a 140 page document? If you cite me, then cite me correctly. I said: 'The share of electricity from renewable energy has surpassed any goals so far.' I was explicitly talking about the goals for the share of electricity as an example and then gave you an example for that. Your statement was this: 'until now the government was great at missing even the most conservative goals on basically anything' I gave you an example where it wasn't missing its goals.
roenxi 8y ago
I find it unfortunate that I don't speak German, because the Energiewende is so interesting. The data that is clear is that carbon emissions have not dropped and energy prices have risen. Population is up a little (maybe ~2%). The steady emissions are a bit so-so, and aren't promising of an Energiewende success. What is missing for me is I can't source a current (~2017 or 2018) timeseries on German Energy/Capita use, which is a very important piece of the puzzle. Even if I could, I can't check sources because of the language barrier, so I wouldn't really be able to argue using it. If the per capita number has gone up then the Energiewende is very impressive. If it has gone down a lot, a failure. If it is middling, success is a political question. The data will get out eventually. A lot of the interim reporting seems to combine spin and evidence-that-isn't really-evidence like negative power prices (which don't really say if 'things are working or not').
- lispm 8y ago
  > If the per capita number has gone up then the Energiewende is very impressive. If it has gone down a lot, a failure. If it is middling, success is a political question. That makes little sense. A goal of German energy politics is to reduce energy per capita use.
  - roenxi 8y ago
    > A goal of German energy politics is to reduce energy per capita use. Really? That sounds remarkably foolish; I'm surprised there are riots in France but not Germany. Is there some sort of justification for such a damaging policy?
    - sveme 8y ago
      Why is that foolish? What‘s foolish about replacing light bulbs, reducing energy consumption of your appliances or reducing the energy consumption of your transport system?
      - roenxi 8y ago
        Those things probably wouldn't reduce per capita energy consumption. Energy is extremely fungible; it would likely trigger Jevon's paradox [0] and results in rising demand for energy. The only way to reduce per capita energy consumption is to ban people from doing things, or tax them until the poor can't afford it any more. An economy won't leave energy untapped because people are using it more efficiently. Energy is very valuable. Particularly in Germany's case, if per capita energy use is dropping, it is quite likely it is because people can't afford to buy some of Europe's most expensive power. That tends to upset. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox
chmod775 8y ago
> You mind sharing your data? He made two basic claims, but your post contains a plethora of critical responses to things he never said. I'm just gonna give you sources to support/correct his two original points and ignore your gibberish/rant. > The nuclear reactors were actually not 'perfectly modern'. Which they are not. The newest reactors in Germany began construction in 1982 [1], and most of the ones already shut down were old second generation nuclear technology [2][3] > The share of electricity from renewable energy has surpassed any goals so far. This is wrong afaik, since Germany isn't on track to meet it's own goals, but is just ahead of the EU's goals. [4] [1]: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Kernreaktoren_in_Deutschland https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Kernreaktoren_in_Deu... [2]: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Kernkraftwerke https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Kernkraftwerke [3]: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernkraftwerk#Generationen_von_Kernkraftwerken https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernkraftwerk#Generationen_von... [4]: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2015/11/germany-renewable-energy-revolution/ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2015/11/germany-...
Farradfahren 8y ago
We are paying renewables to shut down production, so the grid does not collapse. Actually seeing the green partys propaganda, and their ability to hold two opposing views at once, while still beeing voted for, has turned me partially away from democracy. A creature that decides upon its gut feelings like a animal and the power thirsty populists who use these feelings, with that you can not govern anything. The old greeks where right- the emotinal, the insane and the slaves should not be allowed to vote.

lispm 8y ago

> that claimed Germany is exporting more energy than it is consuming No one claims that. What is claimed and what is actually correct is that Germany exports more electricity than it imports. > They in return, being annoyed by repeatedly having their grid brought on the brink of collapse Contrary to popular myths the German electricity grid is one of the most stable in the world. https://energyathaas.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/gt.jpg https://energyathaas.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/gt.jpg > Excess energy can’t be saved There isn't much excess electricity from renewable energy. What we have are is a situation where coal / nuclear are exporting their electricity and are not willing or able to reduce their energy production enough. Note also exporting and importing electricity is nothing bad. We will see much more electricity exchange in the coming decades within the EU. The reason is that the EU is pushing an EU-wide electricity market with competition and wants to get rid of country-local closed energy markets with monopolies or oligopolies. Better adjust to that. > but none of the German consumers will get these prices on their energy bill Check out industry prices - they are consumers of electricity, too. > surpass any goalsso far Example, published in 2012: http://www.renewable-energy-concepts.com/fileadmin/user_upload/download-infos/broschuere_ee_zahlen_2011.pdf http://www.renewable-energy-concepts.com/fileadmin/user_uplo... It says: 'Bis spätestens zum Jahr 2020 soll der Anteil der erneuerbaren Energien an der Stromversorgung mindestens 35 Prozent betragen.' This has already happened in 2018.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
woodpanel 8y ago
Sorry for getting the wrong impression of you, but why are you showcasing your answer as profound by dividing my post into separate quotes and sprinkling your answers with links that lead to anything but "data"? Your first link is just one jpg of a table on a blog of a progressive institute. The second one just a broad publication in German by the the German environmental ministry. Should I refer to its imprint as proof? Then you make un-based broad statements and label critics as adherents to mythical beliefs > Contrary to popular myths the German electricity grid is one of the most stable in the world. To which I'd say, look no further than 10 January 2019 when Germany's policy of legally enforcing right of way for renewable energies almost brought down the whole of Europe's electricity grid. [1] Furthermore the whole year of 2003 the German energy net authority had to perform 2 redispatches to avert a blackout. 2010 they had to perform 290, while in 2017 third quarter alone they had to perform 1.013 [2] No one claims [that Germany is exporting more energy than it is consuming]. What is claimed and what is actually correct is that Germany exports more electricity than it imports. Thats a non sequitur. > This has already happened in 2018. Clearly, your statement of the surpassing of "any goals so far" can't be based on that one data point out of a 140 page document? Or does this mean this was the only goal of the Energiewende? ? [1] https://derstandard.at/2000096185439/Europas-Stromnetz-stand-am-Rande-des-Totalausfalls https://derstandard.at/2000096185439/Europas-Stromnetz-stand... [2] https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Allgemeines/Bundesnetzagentur/Publikationen/Berichte/2017/Quartalsbericht_Q2_Q3_2017.pdf;jsessionid=F9FA1E72A7D8020CAB2E30F894F6EA97?__blob=publicationFile&v=3 https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/All... (page 32)
- lispm 8y ago
  > Your first link is just one jpg of a table on a blog of a progressive institute. Is 'progressive' a problem for you? You can easily google for SAIDI and SAIFI numbers yourself. They will look the same. > The second one just a broad publication in German by the the German environmental ministry. Should I refer to its imprint as proof? A proof for what? I showed you a publication where the ministry communicated its goal for the share of renewable electricity in 2020. Higher up we already established that the number has been reached in 2018. > To which I'd say, look no further than 10 January 2019 when Germany's policy of legally enforcing right of way for renewable energies almost brought down the whole of Europe's electricity grid. [1] Which is factually wrong. Seems like you are not able to read the German text. It hasn't brought down the net at all, not in Germany and not in the rest of Europe and it wasn't even near that. The reason was a combination of data problem and a demand increase because of two power plants were going offline. Nothing to do with the 'Energiewende'. https://www.montelnews.com/de/story/datenfehler-bedarfsspitze-verursachen-netzvorfall--tennet/971069 https://www.montelnews.com/de/story/datenfehler-bedarfsspitz... If you read the above statements, it was far from bringing down the whole of Europe's grid - as you have claimed - even the French operator denies this. The whole of Europe is actually very large and includes countries like Ireland, Finland, Greece, ... none of which would have seen an effect. It's just a sensational headline. > Thats a non sequitur. What? > Clearly, your statement of the surpassing of "any goals so far" can't be based on that one data point out of a 140 page document? If you cite me, then cite me correctly. I said: 'The share of electricity from renewable energy has surpassed any goals so far.' I was explicitly talking about the goals for the share of electricity as an example and then gave you an example for that. Your statement was this: 'until now the government was great at missing even the most conservative goals on basically anything' I gave you an example where it wasn't missing its goals.

roenxi 8y ago

I find it unfortunate that I don't speak German, because the Energiewende is so interesting. The data that is clear is that carbon emissions have not dropped and energy prices have risen. Population is up a little (maybe ~2%). The steady emissions are a bit so-so, and aren't promising of an Energiewende success. What is missing for me is I can't source a current (~2017 or 2018) timeseries on German Energy/Capita use, which is a very important piece of the puzzle. Even if I could, I can't check sources because of the language barrier, so I wouldn't really be able to argue using it. If the per capita number has gone up then the Energiewende is very impressive. If it has gone down a lot, a failure. If it is middling, success is a political question. The data will get out eventually. A lot of the interim reporting seems to combine spin and evidence-that-isn't really-evidence like negative power prices (which don't really say if 'things are working or not').

lispm 8y ago
> If the per capita number has gone up then the Energiewende is very impressive. If it has gone down a lot, a failure. If it is middling, success is a political question. That makes little sense. A goal of German energy politics is to reduce energy per capita use.
- roenxi 8y ago
  > A goal of German energy politics is to reduce energy per capita use. Really? That sounds remarkably foolish; I'm surprised there are riots in France but not Germany. Is there some sort of justification for such a damaging policy?
  - sveme 8y ago
    Why is that foolish? What‘s foolish about replacing light bulbs, reducing energy consumption of your appliances or reducing the energy consumption of your transport system?
    - roenxi 8y ago
      Those things probably wouldn't reduce per capita energy consumption. Energy is extremely fungible; it would likely trigger Jevon's paradox [0] and results in rising demand for energy. The only way to reduce per capita energy consumption is to ban people from doing things, or tax them until the poor can't afford it any more. An economy won't leave energy untapped because people are using it more efficiently. Energy is very valuable. Particularly in Germany's case, if per capita energy use is dropping, it is quite likely it is because people can't afford to buy some of Europe's most expensive power. That tends to upset. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

chmod775 8y ago

> You mind sharing your data? He made two basic claims, but your post contains a plethora of critical responses to things he never said. I'm just gonna give you sources to support/correct his two original points and ignore your gibberish/rant. > The nuclear reactors were actually not 'perfectly modern'. Which they are not. The newest reactors in Germany began construction in 1982 [1], and most of the ones already shut down were old second generation nuclear technology [2][3] > The share of electricity from renewable energy has surpassed any goals so far. This is wrong afaik, since Germany isn't on track to meet it's own goals, but is just ahead of the EU's goals. [4] [1]: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Kernreaktoren_in_Deutschland https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Kernreaktoren_in_Deu... [2]: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Kernkraftwerke https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Kernkraftwerke [3]: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernkraftwerk#Generationen_von_Kernkraftwerken https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernkraftwerk#Generationen_von... [4]: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2015/11/germany-renewable-energy-revolution/ https://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2015/11/germany-...

Farradfahren 8y ago

We are paying renewables to shut down production, so the grid does not collapse. Actually seeing the green partys propaganda, and their ability to hold two opposing views at once, while still beeing voted for, has turned me partially away from democracy. A creature that decides upon its gut feelings like a animal and the power thirsty populists who use these feelings, with that you can not govern anything. The old greeks where right- the emotinal, the insane and the slaves should not be allowed to vote.