4 ms·
> "Actually, Germany did not have a long term increase in coal/gas due to the nuclear shut down but a decrease" Arguably this is semantics. But that's because
by Emma_Goldman 4y ago
> "Actually, Germany did not have a long term increase in coal/gas due to the nuclear shut down but a decrease"
Arguably this is semantics. But that's because the semantics of your claim is unhelpfully ambiguous. In absolute terms coal and gas make up approximately the same share of Germany's capacity as it did in 2010. In relative terms, because the total output has increased, it's share has fallen. But I say it is unhelpful because one has fallen, the other increased.
> "Gas production did grow but mainly to offset declines in coal"
I don't think this is semantics. For the reasons given, it's just wrong.
The statements together make it look like you're trying to misrepresent the facts to support a particular view about nuclear energy.
- uecker 4y agoAssumptions are all wrong. Total output decreased from 632 TWh in 2010 to 588 TWh in 2021. Coal and lignite decreased substantially 117 TWh + 146 TWh in 2010 to 55 TWh + 110 TWh in 2021 (with a substantial reduction in CO2 emissions). gas use remained stable with 89 TWh in 2010 and 90 TWh in 2021. At the same time nuclear decreased from 141 TWh and 69 TWh and renewables increased from 105 TWh to 233 TWh.
- Emma_Goldman 4y agoDifference might be accounted for by capacity versus actual factor use - though 2021 might not be a representative year because of COVID if you are referencing the latter. But I can only guess. Your statistics are useless without a source. Mine: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/paragraph_text_image/public/paragraphs/images/fig1-installed-net-power-generation-capacity-germany-2002-2021.png?itok=Ydea59zW https://www.cleanenergywire.org/sites/default/files/styles/p...
- legulere 4y ago2021 is very similar to 2019. Only 2020 had extraordinary low energy use: https://ag-energiebilanzen.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/STRERZ_2021Feb22_web.pdf https://ag-energiebilanzen.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/STR...
- uecker 4y agoWhy do you cite "net power generation capacity" when you care about use? Actual generation: https://ag-energiebilanzen.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/STRERZ_2021Feb22_web.pdf https://ag-energiebilanzen.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/STR... gas use / CO2 emissions may actually be lower than electricity generation implies if more modern plants are installed.
- legulere 4y ago> In absolute terms coal and gas make up approximately the same share of Germany's capacity as it did in 2010. You're being very disingenuous here talking about capacity. What matters is how much fossil fuels actually are getting burned: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Germany_electricity_production.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Germany_electricity_produ... Electricity production from fossil fuels went down from 360.3 TWh in 2010 to 328.5 TWh in 2021, which is a reduction of almost 10%, while increasing electricity export from 15 TWh to 19.3 TWh. https://ag-energiebilanzen.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/STRERZ_2021Feb22_web.pdf https://ag-energiebilanzen.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/STR...
- Emma_Goldman 4y agoI agree that use is more important than installed capacity, but I don't think whether the fossil fuel share of electricity generation today is the same as in 2010 or 10% lower makes any difference to my point. Saying that 'coal/gas' fell when coal fell, and gas rose, is unhelpful. And renewables did not substitute for nuclear while gas did not, because both were used to get generation back to meet 100% of Germany's needs. Basic arithmetic tells us that if you need to reach a certain proportion of renewables in your energy mix, and you take away 5% of your capacity which is renewable, you have made it harder and not easier to reach your goal. And the less renewables, the more fossil fuel generation. Hence the rise of natural gas, and the drawn out coal phase-out.