4 ms·

The graph shows 36% coal and 13% natural gas for 2016, meaning coal and gas for 2016 is 49%. There is the question of what this would look like if they didn't

by fiter 7y ago

The graph shows 36% coal and 13% natural gas for 2016, meaning coal and gas for 2016 is 49%. There is the question of what this would look like if they didn't shut off their nuclear plants. It's my expectation that the nuclear would have replaced coal and natural gas. EDIT: Changed incorrect 2019 reference to 2016.

lispm 7y ago
https://strom-report.de/strom/ https://strom-report.de/strom/ Share of electricity production in Germany in 2019: Coal 19.5% + 9.5% Gas 10.5% 19.8 + 9.5 + 10.5 = 39.8%
- fiter 7y ago
  Interesting. The graphs on that website do not agree with the ones on Wikipedia. For example, for coal in 2016 Wikipedia says ~220 TWh but Strom says ~135 TWh. EDIT: I see my mistake. I did not add both brown (~135 TWh) and black coal (~100 TWh) together (surprised to see those broken out, but it's a valid difference). In that case, the numbers still do not agree, but at least they are comparable. [0] https://strom-report.de/strom/#stromerzeugung-deutschland-2017-detail https://strom-report.de/strom/#stromerzeugung-deutschland-20...
  - lispm 7y ago
    I don't see it. Strom-report says for 2016: 150 TWh Braunkohle + 110 TWh Steinkohle. For electricity production. > surprised to see those broken out Braunkohle has domestic production, Steinkohle no longer.
  - xxgreg 7y ago
    Another chart... Note some stats are percentage of consumption, others are percentage of generation. These differ due to imports and exports. https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/gallery_image/public/paragraphs/images/fig2a-gross-power-production-germany-1990-2019-source.png?itok=gfWUQdcp https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/g...
  - imtringued 7y ago
    Black coal is basically dead while brown coal might survive economically without carbon pricing.
xxgreg 7y ago
This assumes that the nuclear reactors could ramp up and down on a daily basis. Germany's reactors weren't capable of load following to the extent required. In fact brokdorf was taken offline early due to a failure during a load following experiment. It was only ramping by a small percentage of load. It's more likely that keeping the reactors online would have made the coal phaseout negotiations harder, and made it easier for the big four power companies to prevent renewables from being deployed. In my view it's more important to build up industry capable of constantly deploying new zero carbon generation, and exporting this technology, than to keep the reactors running for more than 35 years (the phase out agreement).

by fiter 7y ago

lispm 7y ago

https://strom-report.de/strom/ https://strom-report.de/strom/ Share of electricity production in Germany in 2019: Coal 19.5% + 9.5% Gas 10.5% 19.8 + 9.5 + 10.5 = 39.8%

fiter 7y ago
Interesting. The graphs on that website do not agree with the ones on Wikipedia. For example, for coal in 2016 Wikipedia says ~220 TWh but Strom says ~135 TWh. EDIT: I see my mistake. I did not add both brown (~135 TWh) and black coal (~100 TWh) together (surprised to see those broken out, but it's a valid difference). In that case, the numbers still do not agree, but at least they are comparable. [0] https://strom-report.de/strom/#stromerzeugung-deutschland-2017-detail https://strom-report.de/strom/#stromerzeugung-deutschland-20...
- lispm 7y ago
  I don't see it. Strom-report says for 2016: 150 TWh Braunkohle + 110 TWh Steinkohle. For electricity production. > surprised to see those broken out Braunkohle has domestic production, Steinkohle no longer.
- xxgreg 7y ago
  Another chart... Note some stats are percentage of consumption, others are percentage of generation. These differ due to imports and exports. https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/gallery_image/public/paragraphs/images/fig2a-gross-power-production-germany-1990-2019-source.png?itok=gfWUQdcp https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/g...
- imtringued 7y ago
  Black coal is basically dead while brown coal might survive economically without carbon pricing.

xxgreg 7y ago

This assumes that the nuclear reactors could ramp up and down on a daily basis. Germany's reactors weren't capable of load following to the extent required. In fact brokdorf was taken offline early due to a failure during a load following experiment. It was only ramping by a small percentage of load. It's more likely that keeping the reactors online would have made the coal phaseout negotiations harder, and made it easier for the big four power companies to prevent renewables from being deployed. In my view it's more important to build up industry capable of constantly deploying new zero carbon generation, and exporting this technology, than to keep the reactors running for more than 35 years (the phase out agreement).