4 ms·

You're importing coal-based power from your neighbors. That's what you did to replace your nuclear energy generation. Let me ask you this, if solar is capable

You're importing coal-based power from your neighbors. That's what you did to replace your nuclear energy generation. Let me ask you this, if solar is capable of replacing fossil fuels, why did Germany sign a multi-decade/mult-billion-euro deal to buy Russian gas?

adrianN 7y ago
Because our politicians are corrupt? Former chancellor Schröder now has a cushy post in the Russian gas industry. Besides, gas is a cheap, fast way to replace coal with drastically reduced carbon emissions.
- v_lisivka 7y ago
  BTW: Where are shares of North Stream 2? Nobody can found them. They are even better than cash or cushy post when goal is to corrupt officials.
_ph_ 7y ago
No, Germany is not importing coal-based power from our neighbours, nor are we doing so with nuclear power. Germany is a net exporter of electricity. Unfortunately too much of that being coal power produced in Germany. Germany is part of the European power grid, so there are times, when power is imported to compensate for local over- and underproduction. As Germany is in the middle of Europe, far more power is conducted across of Germany. You cannot count French nuclear power as in import, if the same amount of power is exported to Austria at the same time (a very common situation). Germany is a net power exporter. Gas is important in two way: first of all, it is way cleaner than coal, so it is the best short term replacement for coal. Germany almost has enough (currently mostly idle) gas power plants to completely replace coal short term. As long as there are no mass storage facilities, gas is needed as the gap filler for the times when neither wind and solar can power the grid. As the production capacity grows, these gaps are going to get increasingly smaller. It remains to be seen what is the best long-term solution, either to grow large storage facilities to get to 100% reneweables or allow like 10% gas in the mix.
- macspoofing 7y ago
  >As long as there are no mass storage facilities, And there aren't. >gas is needed as the gap filler for the times when neither wind and solar can power the grid. This is the entire point!! Wind and solar can't replace fossil fuels. So what Germany did was replace non-CO2 emitting nuclear power with CO2 emitting power generation (natural gas and coal). I guess fighting global warning is less important than satisfying irrational German paranoia against nuclear. >As the production capacity grows, these gaps are going to get increasingly smaller. The sun will start shining at night?
  - _ph_ 7y ago
    Your argumentation is full of fallacies. First of all, we didn't "replace" nuclear with coal - as I wrote before, we didn't build new coal power plants. Most of all, the renweables are replacing nuclear. And they are replacing coal. If we get rid of 90% of fossil fuels in electricty production, how are we not replacing fossil fuels with reneweables? The sun will start shining at night? That sentence did a huge disservice to your post. Of course the sun doesn't shine at night. But no one wants to replace all energy production by solar alone. Wind is the companion of solar, both are roughly the same size in Germany. Wind is what delivers the power at night (where electricity consumption is lowest) and solar adds the power for the additional requirements during daytime.
    - MagnumOpus 7y ago
      You are ignoring both heating and transportation, each of which creates as much of Germany's CO2 emissions as electricity generation. Replacing both with domestic non-fossil solutions is near-impossible in the medium term unless nuclear forms a big part of the baseload - heating on those winter nights where the sun doesn't shine but electric heat exchangers work full tilt, and generation for those electric cars charging throughout the winter night.
      - _ph_ 7y ago
        We were talking specifically about the electricity production, not the total energy production. So you are changing the topic. But they are related topics. First of all, you must not make the mistake to compare the termal energy used in transportation and (to a lesser part) for heating with the electrical energy produced. An electric car uses less than a third of thermal energy consumed by a combustion engined car. Heat pumps are way more efficient than any thermal heaters. To convert all cars to electric in Germany, the electricity production would have to be increased by a mere 15%. To get rid of all fossile energy is of course a larger step, something we have to work at.

adrianN 7y ago

Because our politicians are corrupt? Former chancellor Schröder now has a cushy post in the Russian gas industry. Besides, gas is a cheap, fast way to replace coal with drastically reduced carbon emissions.

v_lisivka 7y ago
BTW: Where are shares of North Stream 2? Nobody can found them. They are even better than cash or cushy post when goal is to corrupt officials.

_ph_ 7y ago

No, Germany is not importing coal-based power from our neighbours, nor are we doing so with nuclear power. Germany is a net exporter of electricity. Unfortunately too much of that being coal power produced in Germany. Germany is part of the European power grid, so there are times, when power is imported to compensate for local over- and underproduction. As Germany is in the middle of Europe, far more power is conducted across of Germany. You cannot count French nuclear power as in import, if the same amount of power is exported to Austria at the same time (a very common situation). Germany is a net power exporter. Gas is important in two way: first of all, it is way cleaner than coal, so it is the best short term replacement for coal. Germany almost has enough (currently mostly idle) gas power plants to completely replace coal short term. As long as there are no mass storage facilities, gas is needed as the gap filler for the times when neither wind and solar can power the grid. As the production capacity grows, these gaps are going to get increasingly smaller. It remains to be seen what is the best long-term solution, either to grow large storage facilities to get to 100% reneweables or allow like 10% gas in the mix.

macspoofing 7y ago
>As long as there are no mass storage facilities, And there aren't. >gas is needed as the gap filler for the times when neither wind and solar can power the grid. This is the entire point!! Wind and solar can't replace fossil fuels. So what Germany did was replace non-CO2 emitting nuclear power with CO2 emitting power generation (natural gas and coal). I guess fighting global warning is less important than satisfying irrational German paranoia against nuclear. >As the production capacity grows, these gaps are going to get increasingly smaller. The sun will start shining at night?
- _ph_ 7y ago
  Your argumentation is full of fallacies. First of all, we didn't "replace" nuclear with coal - as I wrote before, we didn't build new coal power plants. Most of all, the renweables are replacing nuclear. And they are replacing coal. If we get rid of 90% of fossil fuels in electricty production, how are we not replacing fossil fuels with reneweables? The sun will start shining at night? That sentence did a huge disservice to your post. Of course the sun doesn't shine at night. But no one wants to replace all energy production by solar alone. Wind is the companion of solar, both are roughly the same size in Germany. Wind is what delivers the power at night (where electricity consumption is lowest) and solar adds the power for the additional requirements during daytime.
  - MagnumOpus 7y ago
    You are ignoring both heating and transportation, each of which creates as much of Germany's CO2 emissions as electricity generation. Replacing both with domestic non-fossil solutions is near-impossible in the medium term unless nuclear forms a big part of the baseload - heating on those winter nights where the sun doesn't shine but electric heat exchangers work full tilt, and generation for those electric cars charging throughout the winter night.
    - _ph_ 7y ago
      We were talking specifically about the electricity production, not the total energy production. So you are changing the topic. But they are related topics. First of all, you must not make the mistake to compare the termal energy used in transportation and (to a lesser part) for heating with the electrical energy produced. An electric car uses less than a third of thermal energy consumed by a combustion engined car. Heat pumps are way more efficient than any thermal heaters. To convert all cars to electric in Germany, the electricity production would have to be increased by a mere 15%. To get rid of all fossile energy is of course a larger step, something we have to work at.