7 ms·

The thing about Europe weaning itself off Russian hydrocarbons is that it was going to happen anyway, with all the green targets etc. It might as well happen a

The thing about Europe weaning itself off Russian hydrocarbons is that it was going to happen anyway, with all the green targets etc. It might as well happen a bit more quickly. Especially so in France, which already has massive carbon-free electricity sources.

nevermindiguess 5y ago
I’m sure it’s fine with your developer salary. Go tell the old lady with a meager pension or the family with three kids.
- 369548684892826 5y ago
  Developer salary in France is probably lower than a French pension.
  - jrimbault 5y ago
    FYI : wrong, so you can remove that "probably" from your mind. In France, developers are amongst the most well off salaried people. A junior developper would already be well above the median income and amongst the top 30% earners.
  - masklinn 5y ago
    It really is not. The minimum pension in france is 916,78 euros as of 2022. The minimum wages are 1269 after taxes. And while developer income is far from what it is in “hot” locations (berlin, london) to say nothing of the US, it’s generally way over min wages, by integer multiples.
  - Bayart 5y ago
    That's hyperbolic and false. Dev salaries are much better than the rest at equivalent education levels, just like they are everywhere. And pensions are quite low, although they usually assume that pensionneers own their home and have lower expenses than the working population.
    - ChuckNorris89 5y ago
      >they usually assume that pensionneers own their home Then good luck to the millennials out there will will have lower pensions than the boomers while also not being able to afford to own any properties.
      - Bayart 5y ago
        I don't plan on ever having a state pension. Most people my age just live with the idea that we're canon fodder for the economy.
        ChuckNorris89 5y ago
        Same. I'm gonna enjoy whatever is left of my life where I'm healthy and can do the activities I like without saving for retirement, and the moment I'm too sick to be able to work and enjoy life, I'm probably just gonna off myself.
  - Arkanosis 5y ago
    Developer in France here. No, it's not, not by a long shot.
- 1ris 5y ago
  I'm so very sick of this kind of comment. "Sure we could prepare for the seemingly imminent WW3 and literally save the world in the process. But are we sure we want to? cAn We aFfoRd iT?" If you want social redistribution, implement redistribution. Do cash handouts. But don't fuck up other field of politics. These special interests corrupt everything. If you want to solve a problem, tackle it. Don't play "over gang" so some body can fill their pockets in the process.
  - yourusername 5y ago
    I don't think anyone disagrees that moving away from hydrocarbons is a good thing. The contention is that this shock to move away more quickly is good. The lower half of incomes are really hurting. Our government (NL) is doing some quick fixes but it won't nearly compensate everything and according to the planning agencies we are looking at the biggest drop in spending power in over 40 years. That hurts if you were just barely getting by in 2020. E: This is not about gas for our SUVs being 30% more expensive, this is about your heating bill quadrupling since Q1 2021 if you have to do a new contract now.
    - dtech 5y ago
      > I don't think anyone disagrees that moving away from hydrocarbons is a good thing. You'd be surprised. Mostly these arguments come from people who think the whole thing is bullshit (or have financial incentives to say so) and we should take no action at all, or even actively move back to more fossil fuels.
    - paganel 5y ago
      Most of the solar cells are produced in China. China is not a democracy.
  - saiya-jin 5y ago
    Especially in such a situation that status quo is directly financing army of dictator who openly states that all Europe all the way to the Atlantic ocean should be demilitarized, denuked and 'neutral', ie free for grab to anybody, but absolutely definitely maybe not by him. And as we saw in past few weeks he properly walks his talks, so its either acting or being weak and stupid.
- vladvasiliu 5y ago
  There are going to be a bunch of subsidies. Note that the article is actually about subsidies ending, not forbidding people from using gas heaters altogether, at least not yet. And this had already been announced since before the whole Ukraine situation. I don't remember the specifics, but there are some aids for improving insulation in the form of direct cash contributions and also low (or no) interest loans, guaranteed by the state.
- rosndo 5y ago
  Old lady with a meager pension can still wear more clothes and ensure that her home is properly insulated. Same goes for the family with three kids. Indoor temperatures going down by a degree or two really is not a big deal.
  - egao1980 5y ago
    Unfortunately lower indoor temperature leads to excess mortality as stated in UK report - https://www.ons.gov.uk/releases/excesswintermortalityinenglandandwales2020to2021provisionaland2019to2020final https://www.ons.gov.uk/releases/excesswintermortalityinengla...
    - leoedin 5y ago
      There's literally no mention of indoor temperature in that report. All it says is that more people die in winter than summer - that could be due to all sorts of reasons. We know that viruses spread more in winter because people are indoors - that appears to be the main cause of excess winter death. It's good practice to use sources which back up your claim, rather than just vaguely talk about the same topic.
    - rosndo 5y ago
      I don’t see indoor temperatures discussed anywhere in this report, but yeah, excess mortality during the winter is to be expected. Some people suffering from debilitating conditions may freeze to death in their homes, but those people weren’t capable of safely living by themselves in the first place. I’ve lived through the winter in an old building that would barely heat above 17C, it wasn’t great, but I certainly wasn’t freezing all day long.
  - bkor 5y ago
    > and ensure that her home is properly insulated. Netherlands is planning to get rid off gas for a while. I've attended a presentation by the city. They planned to spend 12.500 EUR per house to switch to an local heating plan. Basically a source of hot water will enter the home. This pipe is way bigger than a gas pipe, this is why 12.500 EUR is needed per home. They mentioned that likely you'll pay the same for heating as before. I find it bonkers. With 12.500, why not insulate and maybe prepare it for a air/water heat pump. The radiators on really old homes will need to be replaced with ones that work with a low temperature. Walls need to be insulated, windows and window frames likely need replacing. Still, it's way better to be more energy efficient than to spend 12.500 EUR per house (of which 11.500 will be "subsidized") than asking people to change things without actually improving their homes. The problem doesn't seem to be the money. The problem is that idiotic solutions are suggested. Plus that whatever is subsidized goes up in price. E.g. a air/water heat pump costs way too much.
- CalRobert 5y ago
  This is why my developer salary is very heavily taxed and energy upgrades (insulation, airtightness, heat pump, etc) for the aforementioned people are subsidized.
  - brtkdotse 5y ago
    But how will the people lift themselves up by the bootstraps if you spoil them with subsidies??? /s
    - CalRobert 5y ago
      Given that the goal here is "don't cause basically an ecological apocalypse" and I benefit from other people emitting less I'd hope all can agree!
paganel 5y ago
> It might as well happen a bit more quickly. This sounds a bit rich, I mean, many of us here in Europe don't have the financial resources to just shrug this off as "it might as well happen now than in 10 years from now". I agree though with the take on France, they're one of the few countries in Europe who can afford to make that move right now (at least on paper, I don't know the details of their electrical and power grid).
- rich_sasha 5y ago
  In the UK, cost of running an air-source heat pump was on par with a gas boiler; now, I'd imagine, gas boiler is more expensive. France IIRC has cheaper electricity, so the imbalance is even greater. So this seems like exactly the right approach: the state is shifting subsidies to the cleaner source, doing what should be done anyway. I agree affordability is an issue, and the state should step in where necessary.
  - kkfx 5y ago
    Heat-pump to make hot water is a thing, heat-pump to heat a house (low inertia, geothermal as such) are another. A good enough heat-pump water heater demand more space than a gas one (300-500 liter are common kind, while gas ones tend to be instantaneous, the size of a backpack) and cost essentially the same. A low inertia geothermal heat pump to heat a house demand: - a big capex (~20k euros) - a sufficiently insulated house So potentially, for old house in moderately cold winter climate that means 50-60k euro investments that probably can be paid back in 15 years, if everything last at least 15 years without breakages... Far more economical air-air or air-water heat pumps can't be used in many place simply because of exterior temperature, especially at night, and insufficient insulation. Of course: we know all houses MUST tend to consume less, BUT pushing the need for new houses in the middle of a crisis, where many comprehend that's partially natural, but also partially artificial (just to make some people richer) it's not exactly a viable way. Italy for instance launch a "110% incentives" that essentially means: we (government) pay 110% of any work needed to get 2 energy consumption class improvement in houses. The result after more than an year is a disaster: due to high demand it's almost impossible finding anything and prices have been skyrocket well passing bonus thresholds. France have launched a bit before "1 euro symbolic price for generic insulation", as a result many choose it, it was far simple than the Italian 110% but again the outcome was mostly very bad: to maximize profits most enterprises have done very bad/useless jobs just dropping insulation without ventilation, without caring of humidity etc. IMVHO the SOLE option is pushing individual homes, offering incentives to sell apartments to the State (buy back to demolish in the future) in exchange of new A-class houses. That means a first batch of remote workers and retirees from the middle class, behind them small opportunities for service industry will appear so new people coming and behind them others as well. That's might be doable in 25+ years for a significant amount of people, in 50+ years for most with a new old distributed economy in the whole country instead of a concentrated ones in the hands and places. The rest seems to be a classic stereotypical USA-style business plan: try and fix on the go while making disasters on scale. It's a recipe for a disaster so big that have all the potential for a global unrest at WWIII level... Just pushing "small potatoes" efficiency like "just change to heat pumps for hot water, induction plates etc" is meaningless: the outcome will be may small capex for not really reduced opex, a big amount of wastes, a big gains for few who build such appliance and no real benefit for the society. For instance I have a hot-water heat pump and a solar p.v. system, most of the time I prefer heat water with the classic 2.7kW electrical resistance inside the pump because it's load curb works far better with p.v. self-consumption since it's far faster than the heat pump and so let me schedule more loads (washing machine, dishwasher etc) during the peak hours. Long story short: if we push p.v. systems it's better for them having a kind of electrical appliance that's NOT better for reduce power bill without p.v. and that's a problem. Also their MTBF vary and that's another problem. These days and not from today too many prefer focusing on an aspect and ignore the big picture, that does not work. We always need the big picture.
aequitas 5y ago
It was going to happen anyway, but not on a short term. While we here in the Netherlands where coerced from natural gas into electric (heat pumps), just over the border in Germany people are subsidised to actually get natural gas as a green move (as they where moving from oil and coal).
- nmehner 5y ago
  Please take a look at the actual regulations: https://ec.europa.eu/finance/docs/level-2-measures/taxonomy-regulation-delegated-act-2022-631-annex-1_en.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/finance/docs/level-2-measures/taxonomy-... states the conditions for investments in gas to be considered green is > (ii) the power to be replaced cannot be generated from renewable energy sources, based on a comparative assessment with the most cost-effective and technically feasible renewable alternative for the same capacity identified; the result of this comparative assessment is published and is subject to a stakeholder consultation; > (iii) the activity replaces an existing high emitting electricity generation activity that uses solid or liquid fossil fuels > (v) the facility is designed and constructed to use renewable and/or low-carbon gaseous fuels and the switch to full use of renewable and/or low-carbon gaseous fuels takes place by 31 December 2035, with a commitment and verifiable plan approved by the management body of the undertaking; > (vi) the replacement leads to a reduction in emissions of at least 55% GHG over the lifetime of the newly installed production capacity; So in short gas is only green if the investment replaces coal or oil, reduces GHG by 55%, is replaced with renewables before 2035 and no renewable alternatives exist. This is a very limited scope. For heating purposes Germany is moving away from gas as well: https://www.bdew.de/service/daten-und-grafiken/entwicklung-beheizungsstruktur-wohnungsneubau/ https://www.bdew.de/service/daten-und-grafiken/entwicklung-b... From 2025 on each installed heating has to be powered by 65% renewable energy. This basically rules out gas+oil.
  - aequitas 5y ago
    Thanks, that clarifies much.

nevermindiguess 5y ago

I’m sure it’s fine with your developer salary. Go tell the old lady with a meager pension or the family with three kids.

369548684892826 5y ago
Developer salary in France is probably lower than a French pension.
- jrimbault 5y ago
  FYI : wrong, so you can remove that "probably" from your mind. In France, developers are amongst the most well off salaried people. A junior developper would already be well above the median income and amongst the top 30% earners.
- masklinn 5y ago
  It really is not. The minimum pension in france is 916,78 euros as of 2022. The minimum wages are 1269 after taxes. And while developer income is far from what it is in “hot” locations (berlin, london) to say nothing of the US, it’s generally way over min wages, by integer multiples.
- Bayart 5y ago
  That's hyperbolic and false. Dev salaries are much better than the rest at equivalent education levels, just like they are everywhere. And pensions are quite low, although they usually assume that pensionneers own their home and have lower expenses than the working population.
  - ChuckNorris89 5y ago
    >they usually assume that pensionneers own their home Then good luck to the millennials out there will will have lower pensions than the boomers while also not being able to afford to own any properties.
    - Bayart 5y ago
      I don't plan on ever having a state pension. Most people my age just live with the idea that we're canon fodder for the economy.
      - ChuckNorris89 5y ago
        Same. I'm gonna enjoy whatever is left of my life where I'm healthy and can do the activities I like without saving for retirement, and the moment I'm too sick to be able to work and enjoy life, I'm probably just gonna off myself.
- Arkanosis 5y ago
  Developer in France here. No, it's not, not by a long shot.
1ris 5y ago
I'm so very sick of this kind of comment. "Sure we could prepare for the seemingly imminent WW3 and literally save the world in the process. But are we sure we want to? cAn We aFfoRd iT?" If you want social redistribution, implement redistribution. Do cash handouts. But don't fuck up other field of politics. These special interests corrupt everything. If you want to solve a problem, tackle it. Don't play "over gang" so some body can fill their pockets in the process.
- yourusername 5y ago
  I don't think anyone disagrees that moving away from hydrocarbons is a good thing. The contention is that this shock to move away more quickly is good. The lower half of incomes are really hurting. Our government (NL) is doing some quick fixes but it won't nearly compensate everything and according to the planning agencies we are looking at the biggest drop in spending power in over 40 years. That hurts if you were just barely getting by in 2020. E: This is not about gas for our SUVs being 30% more expensive, this is about your heating bill quadrupling since Q1 2021 if you have to do a new contract now.
  - dtech 5y ago
    > I don't think anyone disagrees that moving away from hydrocarbons is a good thing. You'd be surprised. Mostly these arguments come from people who think the whole thing is bullshit (or have financial incentives to say so) and we should take no action at all, or even actively move back to more fossil fuels.
  - paganel 5y ago
    Most of the solar cells are produced in China. China is not a democracy.
- saiya-jin 5y ago
  Especially in such a situation that status quo is directly financing army of dictator who openly states that all Europe all the way to the Atlantic ocean should be demilitarized, denuked and 'neutral', ie free for grab to anybody, but absolutely definitely maybe not by him. And as we saw in past few weeks he properly walks his talks, so its either acting or being weak and stupid.
vladvasiliu 5y ago
There are going to be a bunch of subsidies. Note that the article is actually about subsidies ending, not forbidding people from using gas heaters altogether, at least not yet. And this had already been announced since before the whole Ukraine situation. I don't remember the specifics, but there are some aids for improving insulation in the form of direct cash contributions and also low (or no) interest loans, guaranteed by the state.
rosndo 5y ago
Old lady with a meager pension can still wear more clothes and ensure that her home is properly insulated. Same goes for the family with three kids. Indoor temperatures going down by a degree or two really is not a big deal.
- egao1980 5y ago
  Unfortunately lower indoor temperature leads to excess mortality as stated in UK report - https://www.ons.gov.uk/releases/excesswintermortalityinenglandandwales2020to2021provisionaland2019to2020final https://www.ons.gov.uk/releases/excesswintermortalityinengla...
  - leoedin 5y ago
    There's literally no mention of indoor temperature in that report. All it says is that more people die in winter than summer - that could be due to all sorts of reasons. We know that viruses spread more in winter because people are indoors - that appears to be the main cause of excess winter death. It's good practice to use sources which back up your claim, rather than just vaguely talk about the same topic.
  - rosndo 5y ago
    I don’t see indoor temperatures discussed anywhere in this report, but yeah, excess mortality during the winter is to be expected. Some people suffering from debilitating conditions may freeze to death in their homes, but those people weren’t capable of safely living by themselves in the first place. I’ve lived through the winter in an old building that would barely heat above 17C, it wasn’t great, but I certainly wasn’t freezing all day long.
- bkor 5y ago
  > and ensure that her home is properly insulated. Netherlands is planning to get rid off gas for a while. I've attended a presentation by the city. They planned to spend 12.500 EUR per house to switch to an local heating plan. Basically a source of hot water will enter the home. This pipe is way bigger than a gas pipe, this is why 12.500 EUR is needed per home. They mentioned that likely you'll pay the same for heating as before. I find it bonkers. With 12.500, why not insulate and maybe prepare it for a air/water heat pump. The radiators on really old homes will need to be replaced with ones that work with a low temperature. Walls need to be insulated, windows and window frames likely need replacing. Still, it's way better to be more energy efficient than to spend 12.500 EUR per house (of which 11.500 will be "subsidized") than asking people to change things without actually improving their homes. The problem doesn't seem to be the money. The problem is that idiotic solutions are suggested. Plus that whatever is subsidized goes up in price. E.g. a air/water heat pump costs way too much.
CalRobert 5y ago
This is why my developer salary is very heavily taxed and energy upgrades (insulation, airtightness, heat pump, etc) for the aforementioned people are subsidized.
- brtkdotse 5y ago
  But how will the people lift themselves up by the bootstraps if you spoil them with subsidies??? /s
  - CalRobert 5y ago
    Given that the goal here is "don't cause basically an ecological apocalypse" and I benefit from other people emitting less I'd hope all can agree!

paganel 5y ago

> It might as well happen a bit more quickly. This sounds a bit rich, I mean, many of us here in Europe don't have the financial resources to just shrug this off as "it might as well happen now than in 10 years from now". I agree though with the take on France, they're one of the few countries in Europe who can afford to make that move right now (at least on paper, I don't know the details of their electrical and power grid).

rich_sasha 5y ago
In the UK, cost of running an air-source heat pump was on par with a gas boiler; now, I'd imagine, gas boiler is more expensive. France IIRC has cheaper electricity, so the imbalance is even greater. So this seems like exactly the right approach: the state is shifting subsidies to the cleaner source, doing what should be done anyway. I agree affordability is an issue, and the state should step in where necessary.
- kkfx 5y ago
  Heat-pump to make hot water is a thing, heat-pump to heat a house (low inertia, geothermal as such) are another. A good enough heat-pump water heater demand more space than a gas one (300-500 liter are common kind, while gas ones tend to be instantaneous, the size of a backpack) and cost essentially the same. A low inertia geothermal heat pump to heat a house demand: - a big capex (~20k euros) - a sufficiently insulated house So potentially, for old house in moderately cold winter climate that means 50-60k euro investments that probably can be paid back in 15 years, if everything last at least 15 years without breakages... Far more economical air-air or air-water heat pumps can't be used in many place simply because of exterior temperature, especially at night, and insufficient insulation. Of course: we know all houses MUST tend to consume less, BUT pushing the need for new houses in the middle of a crisis, where many comprehend that's partially natural, but also partially artificial (just to make some people richer) it's not exactly a viable way. Italy for instance launch a "110% incentives" that essentially means: we (government) pay 110% of any work needed to get 2 energy consumption class improvement in houses. The result after more than an year is a disaster: due to high demand it's almost impossible finding anything and prices have been skyrocket well passing bonus thresholds. France have launched a bit before "1 euro symbolic price for generic insulation", as a result many choose it, it was far simple than the Italian 110% but again the outcome was mostly very bad: to maximize profits most enterprises have done very bad/useless jobs just dropping insulation without ventilation, without caring of humidity etc. IMVHO the SOLE option is pushing individual homes, offering incentives to sell apartments to the State (buy back to demolish in the future) in exchange of new A-class houses. That means a first batch of remote workers and retirees from the middle class, behind them small opportunities for service industry will appear so new people coming and behind them others as well. That's might be doable in 25+ years for a significant amount of people, in 50+ years for most with a new old distributed economy in the whole country instead of a concentrated ones in the hands and places. The rest seems to be a classic stereotypical USA-style business plan: try and fix on the go while making disasters on scale. It's a recipe for a disaster so big that have all the potential for a global unrest at WWIII level... Just pushing "small potatoes" efficiency like "just change to heat pumps for hot water, induction plates etc" is meaningless: the outcome will be may small capex for not really reduced opex, a big amount of wastes, a big gains for few who build such appliance and no real benefit for the society. For instance I have a hot-water heat pump and a solar p.v. system, most of the time I prefer heat water with the classic 2.7kW electrical resistance inside the pump because it's load curb works far better with p.v. self-consumption since it's far faster than the heat pump and so let me schedule more loads (washing machine, dishwasher etc) during the peak hours. Long story short: if we push p.v. systems it's better for them having a kind of electrical appliance that's NOT better for reduce power bill without p.v. and that's a problem. Also their MTBF vary and that's another problem. These days and not from today too many prefer focusing on an aspect and ignore the big picture, that does not work. We always need the big picture.

aequitas 5y ago

It was going to happen anyway, but not on a short term. While we here in the Netherlands where coerced from natural gas into electric (heat pumps), just over the border in Germany people are subsidised to actually get natural gas as a green move (as they where moving from oil and coal).

nmehner 5y ago
Please take a look at the actual regulations: https://ec.europa.eu/finance/docs/level-2-measures/taxonomy-regulation-delegated-act-2022-631-annex-1_en.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/finance/docs/level-2-measures/taxonomy-... states the conditions for investments in gas to be considered green is > (ii) the power to be replaced cannot be generated from renewable energy sources, based on a comparative assessment with the most cost-effective and technically feasible renewable alternative for the same capacity identified; the result of this comparative assessment is published and is subject to a stakeholder consultation; > (iii) the activity replaces an existing high emitting electricity generation activity that uses solid or liquid fossil fuels > (v) the facility is designed and constructed to use renewable and/or low-carbon gaseous fuels and the switch to full use of renewable and/or low-carbon gaseous fuels takes place by 31 December 2035, with a commitment and verifiable plan approved by the management body of the undertaking; > (vi) the replacement leads to a reduction in emissions of at least 55% GHG over the lifetime of the newly installed production capacity; So in short gas is only green if the investment replaces coal or oil, reduces GHG by 55%, is replaced with renewables before 2035 and no renewable alternatives exist. This is a very limited scope. For heating purposes Germany is moving away from gas as well: https://www.bdew.de/service/daten-und-grafiken/entwicklung-beheizungsstruktur-wohnungsneubau/ https://www.bdew.de/service/daten-und-grafiken/entwicklung-b... From 2025 on each installed heating has to be powered by 65% renewable energy. This basically rules out gas+oil.
- aequitas 5y ago
  Thanks, that clarifies much.