5 ms·

> they are going to offshore most of their energy-intensive manufacturing to china, india, ASEAN, etc. Why? A watt is a watt, and renewables are cost-competit

> they are going to offshore most of their energy-intensive manufacturing to china, india, ASEAN, etc. Why? A watt is a watt, and renewables are cost-competitive with carbon even before taking into consideration geopolitics. But, more importantly, renewables don't even have to be cost competitive to keep manufacturing in Germany while transitioning to renewables. Ukraine has opened up political space for subsidy that may not have existed a year ago. Germany just doubled their defense spending. To say that this was unimaginable even three weeks ago, if anything, under-states the case. I highly doubt there is political will in Germany to offshore manufacturing, and I'm pretty sure there is newly found political will to transition off of natgas. In particular, subsidizing energy prices to keep German manufacturing competitive while weaning off of RU natgas is likely an easy sell. I think it's much more likely that Germany shifts off of natgas and in the meantime subsidizes energy for manufacturing, than that Germany allows manufacturing to offshore as a result of energy price spikes due to renewable transition. > One thing european countries excel at is producing great PR. Not at all surprising when you realize that the entire political economy of the west -- democracy and consumer/financial capitalism -- is almost by design dominated by people and institutions who are good at PR. A major geopolitical theme in the 2010s was the fact that open societies have major weaknesses in open information warfare. The next decade of the global info war will be interesting. I think we'll learn that, although you can easily cause petty chaos and divisiveness in the west, the institutions and core values are very robust. After all, those institutions and values are subject to -- and always have been subject to -- constant and open assault. I think we'll also learn that authoritarian states have almost a mirror opposite dynamics of the west -- fueling petty divisions in much harder, but once you gain a foothold the whole system is much less robust to total collapse.

qiskit 5y ago
> A watt is a watt That was my point. And pollution is pollution. Shifting it to a third world country and clearing it off your books doesn't make you virtuous nor environmentally friendly. As I pointed it out with the european "recycling" scam. > renewables are cost-competitive with carbon even before taking into consideration geopolitics The largest source of renewables is biomass. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/renewable-sources/ https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/renewable-sources/ https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jun/30/wood-pellets-biomass-environmental-impact https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jun/30/wood-pel... > Not at all surprising when you realize that the entire political economy of the west I didn't say it was surprising. Also why take this into a bizarre geopolitical tangent?
- throwawaygh 5y ago
  > Shifting it to a third world country I think it's highly unlikely that Germany will offshore its Mittelstand. > The largest source of renewables is biomass. I'm not really sure what point you're making here. > Also why take this into a bizarre geopolitical tangent? This is 100% your tangent... why mention Saudi Arabia and Norway PR on an article about Germany? e: generally speaking, we're not disagreeing about much, so I think this exchange is possibly due to your confusion regarding what this article is about. You seem to think the article is primarily about Germany posturing around climate change and GHG. It's not. This article is about German energy independence and European geopolitics. This policy change was announced on the eve of war in Europe, not as a follow-up to a climate conference.
  - qiskit 5y ago
    > I think it's highly unlikely that Germany will offshore its Mittelstand. I didn't say they will. > I'm not really sure what point you're making here. A significant portion of renewables aren't as environmentally friendly as we think. > This is 100% your tangent... why mention Saudi Arabia and Norway PR on an article about Germany? Norway releases tons of PR about how environmentally friendly they are especially by how much EVs they buy. But on a closer look, they produce as much oil as saudi arabia on a per capita basis. I picked Saudi Arabia because they are the closest per capita producers to norway. I provided the source. Sort by "per capita" and you'll see norway right below saudi arabia. I picked saudi arabia because nobody in their right mind would say saudi arabia is "environmentally friendly". And yet we pretend norway is. My point is that european countries aren't as environmentally friendly as their PR says they are. Shipping garbage to china and claiming you recycle 100% of your garbage is not environmentally friendly. Producing as much oil as saudi arabia and buying a few EVs doesn't make you environmentally friendly. Releasing PR saying you are environmentally friendly doesn't make you environmentally friendly. Not sure why you are injecting geopolitics, democracy, etc into this.

qiskit 5y ago

> A watt is a watt That was my point. And pollution is pollution. Shifting it to a third world country and clearing it off your books doesn't make you virtuous nor environmentally friendly. As I pointed it out with the european "recycling" scam. > renewables are cost-competitive with carbon even before taking into consideration geopolitics The largest source of renewables is biomass. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/renewable-sources/ https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/renewable-sources/ https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jun/30/wood-pellets-biomass-environmental-impact https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jun/30/wood-pel... > Not at all surprising when you realize that the entire political economy of the west I didn't say it was surprising. Also why take this into a bizarre geopolitical tangent?

throwawaygh 5y ago
> Shifting it to a third world country I think it's highly unlikely that Germany will offshore its Mittelstand. > The largest source of renewables is biomass. I'm not really sure what point you're making here. > Also why take this into a bizarre geopolitical tangent? This is 100% your tangent... why mention Saudi Arabia and Norway PR on an article about Germany? e: generally speaking, we're not disagreeing about much, so I think this exchange is possibly due to your confusion regarding what this article is about. You seem to think the article is primarily about Germany posturing around climate change and GHG. It's not. This article is about German energy independence and European geopolitics. This policy change was announced on the eve of war in Europe, not as a follow-up to a climate conference.
- qiskit 5y ago
  > I think it's highly unlikely that Germany will offshore its Mittelstand. I didn't say they will. > I'm not really sure what point you're making here. A significant portion of renewables aren't as environmentally friendly as we think. > This is 100% your tangent... why mention Saudi Arabia and Norway PR on an article about Germany? Norway releases tons of PR about how environmentally friendly they are especially by how much EVs they buy. But on a closer look, they produce as much oil as saudi arabia on a per capita basis. I picked Saudi Arabia because they are the closest per capita producers to norway. I provided the source. Sort by "per capita" and you'll see norway right below saudi arabia. I picked saudi arabia because nobody in their right mind would say saudi arabia is "environmentally friendly". And yet we pretend norway is. My point is that european countries aren't as environmentally friendly as their PR says they are. Shipping garbage to china and claiming you recycle 100% of your garbage is not environmentally friendly. Producing as much oil as saudi arabia and buying a few EVs doesn't make you environmentally friendly. Releasing PR saying you are environmentally friendly doesn't make you environmentally friendly. Not sure why you are injecting geopolitics, democracy, etc into this.