7 ms·

This seems really specific information that’s not really relevant to that parent comment. How did you learn about this and why do you care?

lenkite 4y ago
"How did you learn about this and why do you care?" Because my german colleagues were ranting about this whenever there was a break/issue in "Teams meetings". (which happens often) Why do I care ? Because people are apparently not looking at reality when they make grandiose claims about renewables and electricity generation in Europe. Replace by renewables by all means - but at-least be honest about the data.
- revertmean 4y ago
  So Germany, a country that is well behind other European countries on renewables, had an over-dependence on Russian gas and was forced to reopen some coal plants when the price spiked. And you came to the conclusion that this was somehow a fault with renewables? How does that make sense to you?
  - lenkite 4y ago
    Why did you think its Germany alone ? It's Austria, France and the Netherlands as well. France and Austria both re-opened coal power plants. Even the Netherlands removed their cap on coal power. How does that make sense to you ?
    - revertmean 4y ago
      What, France? The poster child for the nuclear fans had to re-open coal plants? Well, I hadn't heard that. That's interesting. It makes sense to me because they were all clearly dependent on Russian gas, which is what caused the price spike in electricity across Europe. It still doesn't make sense to me that you think it's something to do with renewables.
      - looping__lui 4y ago
        … they probably had to ramp up to help out their German neighbors when their electricity grid was close to collapose because of a non-sustainable idealogically driven strategy authored by the Green part being completely oblivious of today’s reality.
        haizhung 4y ago
        No, they had to reopen them because their nuclear plants stopped working. Too hot, not enough water in the rivers due to climate change to cool down the nuclear plants - so they shut them off, and France was buying renewable energy from Germany. So you got your facts exactly the wrong way. https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/even-crisis-germany-extends-power-exports-neighbours-2023-01-05/ https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/even-crisis-germany-... Turns out, nuclear is not the end all, be all solution. Who knew? I don’t know why HN has such a rage boner for Germany’s energy transition, it doesn’t seem that triggered by any other country.
        looping__lui 4y ago
        Maybe because it’s not a transition but an ideology driven f** up? I live near the coal plants they are firing up again. I’m all pro PV (have one), I heat my house on geothermal, I spent a ton on energy efficiency for my house. But this entire “renewable transition”, “getting out of nuclear” and coming up with other random ideas in a industry focused economy is just bogus in execution.
        cauch 4y ago
        The German government did indeed messed up their transition. As has the French one (their nuclear park is in a dead end, while they are nowhere with new nuclear or new renewable). The French situation is in fact way dyer, but because they are "borrowing to the future" (for example, their electricity cost is low, but they are not building up the budget that will be needed for older power plants dismantlement, so they are heading for a very big crisis), people don't notice. Not that the Germany is better than France. My point is that it s true that people who have a rage boner about Germany are not fair: if they really care about f* up, why they don't care about France? I don't buy this idea that the German transition was an ideology driven f* up. The project was designed and supported by a lot of experts. They published their results, with their computations and all, and no real flaw was discovered. Sure, there were some pro-nuclear partisans who, like the anti-nuclear ones, would never accept that such studies were scientifically sound just because it did not say what they ideologically wanted to hear. At the time, the project was scientifically sound. It did not work out because 1) the government did half of the things the project said it should do, 2) as every long-term project, it had some uncertainties, and it turned out some elements did not "aligned". An alternative project of keeping with nuclear generation was also scientifically sound, but it is not scientifically correct to pretend that this one was "better", or "more rational", or even "less ideological". People who come here and say "it was an ideological f* up" are just people who see it did not worked out and are not smart enough to not think "obviously, if it would have be me, I would have done it way better, the only reason it failed is because they suck and are irrational while I'm wayyyy smarter than everyone and soooo rational".
  - looping__lui 4y ago
    Because renewables (which I am personally fond of; PV on my roof) cannot cover Germany’s electricity needs/baseload but only supplement it. Driven by an ideological agenda of Ms Merkel and the green party, they shut down nuclear power plants (needed to cover our base load in chemical/manufacturing/whatnot) and replaced it with gas from Russia (don’t ask me why). Now that Russian gas isn’t exactly on the table anymore and we not only depend on Russian gas for heating but also a great deal for electricity (nuclear was shut down, remember) we have no choice but ramp up to coal thanks to the Green party. The fact that Germany’s “greenest” (carbon emissions-wise) day was still worst than France’s most polluting day speaks volumes. Wind power and solar DO NOT suffice to cover Germany’s electricity need unless you go full-scale deindustrialisation (which the Green party certainly would favor). I’m all in for PV on everyone’s roofs, I have geothermal heating for my house, I built everything low energy - but please lets stop the ideological destruction of our economy and our environment by the Green party’s “vision”.
    - pastacacioepepe 4y ago
      > Driven by an ideological agenda of Ms Merkel and the green party, they shut down nuclear power plants (needed to cover our base load in chemical/manufacturing/whatnot) and replaced it with gas from Russia (don’t ask me why). You have been misinformed. They shut down nuclear to replace it with renewables. They already used Russian gas at the time.
      - looping__lui 4y ago
        You cannot replace nuclear with renewables in Germany. You cannot shut down production if the sun doesnt shine or there is no wind. There is a non-trivial amount of electricity that needs to be available 24/7 and there needs to be a source of electricity that can be ramped up quickly when demands spike or renewable isn’t delivering.
        pastacacioepepe 4y ago
        I actually agree on this, but I was just replying to your statement that they decided to shut down nuclear to replace it with russian gas.
  - makomk 4y ago
    Germany was at the forefront of the European push for renewables, though. Sure, they never produced as much electricity from renewable sources as countries with really great hydroelectric resources, but those countries' experience isn't that relevant to everyone else since the countries which could do that generally already did so before renewable energy even became fashionable in the first place. In terms of wind and solar they were way out in front of everyone else (they apparently had the highest installed capacity of solar in the world for a while, and they still have the third-highest wind turbine capacity behind only the much larger USA and China).
stainablesteel 4y ago
its 100% relevant, the belief in return from renewables (which they don't actually offer much) comes at the expense of making the rest of the world poorer, and making europe more vulnerable to energy shocks putin took advantage of this, europe put their neck in the guillotine for him

lenkite 4y ago

"How did you learn about this and why do you care?" Because my german colleagues were ranting about this whenever there was a break/issue in "Teams meetings". (which happens often) Why do I care ? Because people are apparently not looking at reality when they make grandiose claims about renewables and electricity generation in Europe. Replace by renewables by all means - but at-least be honest about the data.

revertmean 4y ago
So Germany, a country that is well behind other European countries on renewables, had an over-dependence on Russian gas and was forced to reopen some coal plants when the price spiked. And you came to the conclusion that this was somehow a fault with renewables? How does that make sense to you?
- lenkite 4y ago
  Why did you think its Germany alone ? It's Austria, France and the Netherlands as well. France and Austria both re-opened coal power plants. Even the Netherlands removed their cap on coal power. How does that make sense to you ?
  - revertmean 4y ago
    What, France? The poster child for the nuclear fans had to re-open coal plants? Well, I hadn't heard that. That's interesting. It makes sense to me because they were all clearly dependent on Russian gas, which is what caused the price spike in electricity across Europe. It still doesn't make sense to me that you think it's something to do with renewables.
    - looping__lui 4y ago
      … they probably had to ramp up to help out their German neighbors when their electricity grid was close to collapose because of a non-sustainable idealogically driven strategy authored by the Green part being completely oblivious of today’s reality.
      - haizhung 4y ago
        No, they had to reopen them because their nuclear plants stopped working. Too hot, not enough water in the rivers due to climate change to cool down the nuclear plants - so they shut them off, and France was buying renewable energy from Germany. So you got your facts exactly the wrong way. https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/even-crisis-germany-extends-power-exports-neighbours-2023-01-05/ https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/even-crisis-germany-... Turns out, nuclear is not the end all, be all solution. Who knew? I don’t know why HN has such a rage boner for Germany’s energy transition, it doesn’t seem that triggered by any other country.
        looping__lui 4y ago
        Maybe because it’s not a transition but an ideology driven f** up? I live near the coal plants they are firing up again. I’m all pro PV (have one), I heat my house on geothermal, I spent a ton on energy efficiency for my house. But this entire “renewable transition”, “getting out of nuclear” and coming up with other random ideas in a industry focused economy is just bogus in execution.
        cauch 4y ago
        The German government did indeed messed up their transition. As has the French one (their nuclear park is in a dead end, while they are nowhere with new nuclear or new renewable). The French situation is in fact way dyer, but because they are "borrowing to the future" (for example, their electricity cost is low, but they are not building up the budget that will be needed for older power plants dismantlement, so they are heading for a very big crisis), people don't notice. Not that the Germany is better than France. My point is that it s true that people who have a rage boner about Germany are not fair: if they really care about f* up, why they don't care about France? I don't buy this idea that the German transition was an ideology driven f* up. The project was designed and supported by a lot of experts. They published their results, with their computations and all, and no real flaw was discovered. Sure, there were some pro-nuclear partisans who, like the anti-nuclear ones, would never accept that such studies were scientifically sound just because it did not say what they ideologically wanted to hear. At the time, the project was scientifically sound. It did not work out because 1) the government did half of the things the project said it should do, 2) as every long-term project, it had some uncertainties, and it turned out some elements did not "aligned". An alternative project of keeping with nuclear generation was also scientifically sound, but it is not scientifically correct to pretend that this one was "better", or "more rational", or even "less ideological". People who come here and say "it was an ideological f* up" are just people who see it did not worked out and are not smart enough to not think "obviously, if it would have be me, I would have done it way better, the only reason it failed is because they suck and are irrational while I'm wayyyy smarter than everyone and soooo rational".
- looping__lui 4y ago
  Because renewables (which I am personally fond of; PV on my roof) cannot cover Germany’s electricity needs/baseload but only supplement it. Driven by an ideological agenda of Ms Merkel and the green party, they shut down nuclear power plants (needed to cover our base load in chemical/manufacturing/whatnot) and replaced it with gas from Russia (don’t ask me why). Now that Russian gas isn’t exactly on the table anymore and we not only depend on Russian gas for heating but also a great deal for electricity (nuclear was shut down, remember) we have no choice but ramp up to coal thanks to the Green party. The fact that Germany’s “greenest” (carbon emissions-wise) day was still worst than France’s most polluting day speaks volumes. Wind power and solar DO NOT suffice to cover Germany’s electricity need unless you go full-scale deindustrialisation (which the Green party certainly would favor). I’m all in for PV on everyone’s roofs, I have geothermal heating for my house, I built everything low energy - but please lets stop the ideological destruction of our economy and our environment by the Green party’s “vision”.
  - pastacacioepepe 4y ago
    > Driven by an ideological agenda of Ms Merkel and the green party, they shut down nuclear power plants (needed to cover our base load in chemical/manufacturing/whatnot) and replaced it with gas from Russia (don’t ask me why). You have been misinformed. They shut down nuclear to replace it with renewables. They already used Russian gas at the time.
    - looping__lui 4y ago
      You cannot replace nuclear with renewables in Germany. You cannot shut down production if the sun doesnt shine or there is no wind. There is a non-trivial amount of electricity that needs to be available 24/7 and there needs to be a source of electricity that can be ramped up quickly when demands spike or renewable isn’t delivering.
      - pastacacioepepe 4y ago
        I actually agree on this, but I was just replying to your statement that they decided to shut down nuclear to replace it with russian gas.
- makomk 4y ago
  Germany was at the forefront of the European push for renewables, though. Sure, they never produced as much electricity from renewable sources as countries with really great hydroelectric resources, but those countries' experience isn't that relevant to everyone else since the countries which could do that generally already did so before renewable energy even became fashionable in the first place. In terms of wind and solar they were way out in front of everyone else (they apparently had the highest installed capacity of solar in the world for a while, and they still have the third-highest wind turbine capacity behind only the much larger USA and China).

stainablesteel 4y ago

its 100% relevant, the belief in return from renewables (which they don't actually offer much) comes at the expense of making the rest of the world poorer, and making europe more vulnerable to energy shocks putin took advantage of this, europe put their neck in the guillotine for him