4 ms·

You make an argument that only works in theory. In reality you cannot switch heating modalities like underwear for whatever seems reasonable at the moment. Most

You make an argument that only works in theory. In reality you cannot switch heating modalities like underwear for whatever seems reasonable at the moment. Most houses are build with gas and oil heating systems. In some places like Berlin the gas infrastructure is very old and established. Even streetlights run on gas in some places and houses have generators in the basement to combine heat and electricity supply.

alkonaut 5y ago
But this argument has been made for years. For decades. We are talking about banning the sales of combustion engine vehicles within 10 years. Surely in 10, 20 or 30 years one should be able to see pretty significant progress in the conversion of building heating systems? I’m assuming old multi story houses with gas heating typically use a water system (radiators) and only a single basement furnace? In that situation, switching the boiler to anything else or even better just using central heating should be a reasonably sized investment. It’s not like German cities are unique in how they are built and heated. Lots of other cities have done this conversion in the latest decades. Gas infrastructure was old and established in all major European cities. Now it’s electrical stoves and central heating in many places.
- quelltext 5y ago
  > Now it’s electrical stoves and central heating in many places. What's "central heating"? I believe Germany already uses central heating in most places. The question is what powers it. Can it be efficiently replaced by renewable-energy (!) electric heating vs. fossil? Other commenters have posited "no". The way I see it, investing in nuclear should have been part of the plan, instead of replacing it with renewables (vs. doing so for those uses of fossil where renewables make sense). The fear of nuclear energy in Germany is just ridiculous IMO, and arguably has become a self-fulfilling prophecy. With nuclear power on its way out know how and effort to research and to maintain existing plants and investment in it are at a minimum making continued operation now a liability.
  - alkonaut 5y ago
    Central heating is the distribution of hot water from a central location. Best case it’s leftover energy from nearby industry, worst case it’s just a place where something is burned, such as biogas/biomass/trash or fossil fuels. But many cities have some heavy industry that can supply waste heat for a lot of buildings. Centrally burned fossil is better for the environment than burning in residential buildings, especially in cities. For the climate it makes no difference though. Even though it’s a waste of high grade energy, one could imagine powering heating plants with electricity in a pinch. If there is so much surplus electricity that reactors are closed then perhaps… The Stockholm City gas system, although much smaller than Berlin’s was swapped to a renewable gas (biogas) 10 years ago.

alkonaut 5y ago

But this argument has been made for years. For decades. We are talking about banning the sales of combustion engine vehicles within 10 years. Surely in 10, 20 or 30 years one should be able to see pretty significant progress in the conversion of building heating systems? I’m assuming old multi story houses with gas heating typically use a water system (radiators) and only a single basement furnace? In that situation, switching the boiler to anything else or even better just using central heating should be a reasonably sized investment. It’s not like German cities are unique in how they are built and heated. Lots of other cities have done this conversion in the latest decades. Gas infrastructure was old and established in all major European cities. Now it’s electrical stoves and central heating in many places.

quelltext 5y ago
> Now it’s electrical stoves and central heating in many places. What's "central heating"? I believe Germany already uses central heating in most places. The question is what powers it. Can it be efficiently replaced by renewable-energy (!) electric heating vs. fossil? Other commenters have posited "no". The way I see it, investing in nuclear should have been part of the plan, instead of replacing it with renewables (vs. doing so for those uses of fossil where renewables make sense). The fear of nuclear energy in Germany is just ridiculous IMO, and arguably has become a self-fulfilling prophecy. With nuclear power on its way out know how and effort to research and to maintain existing plants and investment in it are at a minimum making continued operation now a liability.
- alkonaut 5y ago
  Central heating is the distribution of hot water from a central location. Best case it’s leftover energy from nearby industry, worst case it’s just a place where something is burned, such as biogas/biomass/trash or fossil fuels. But many cities have some heavy industry that can supply waste heat for a lot of buildings. Centrally burned fossil is better for the environment than burning in residential buildings, especially in cities. For the climate it makes no difference though. Even though it’s a waste of high grade energy, one could imagine powering heating plants with electricity in a pinch. If there is so much surplus electricity that reactors are closed then perhaps… The Stockholm City gas system, although much smaller than Berlin’s was swapped to a renewable gas (biogas) 10 years ago.