4 ms·

Living in Germany is leaving any big city and seeing loads of wind turbines everywhere. I know very little of its economics, like that it typically takes 7 yea

Living in Germany is leaving any big city and seeing loads of wind turbines everywhere. I know very little of its economics, like that it typically takes 7 years to pay it back and lasts 20-25 years, but looks like a good way to generate renewable energy and will likely soon take Germany to 100%. It's a goal for the government and for many years it has been pushing forward. I dislike many things here, but I can't say I don't admire the country's ability to execute on this and other subjects. I really don't get why the US and other strong countries don't invest as much on it. There is some environmental impact(birds etc) and downsides, but overall looks like one of the best ways to generate energy until we have fusion energy. Also creates many jobs.

ur-whale 3y ago
> seeing loads of wind turbines everywhere The wind turbines are only there to hide the giant, coal-powered power plants that Germany had to restart because the tree-huggers who run that country decided to ditch nuclear. I very much doubt the veracity of this article.
- Pesthuf 3y ago
  Ah yes, notorious tree-hugger Merkel in 2011.
  - llampx 3y ago
    Merkel had no strongly held positions, that much we all know.
  - ffgjgf1 3y ago
    All kind of idiot (objectively) environmentalists were fighting against nuclear for decades in Germany and other countries. They weren’t the only factor but nuclear was already effectively dead by 2011 in Germany.
- thiago_fm 3y ago
  Ditching nuclear doesn't make wind less important for Germany. I also do hope that this situation also changes, nuclear > coal. I don't doubt the veracity of the article. We've been seeing similar and growing numbers for years. I don't get the hate to wind and how energy generation can easily become a political subject.
mutlimind 3y ago
It is not viable, because renewables do not provide basic load for the grid. It is "stochastical" energy. There are no economical viable ways to store that "random" energy. There are several times in the year, where there is not enough wind and sun to feed the grid.
- thiago_fm 3y ago
  There are solutions being developed to store energy which will address the grid issue.
  - MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
    Failing to provide details smells a lot like „wonder weapons will turn the war around“. There is currently no battery tech that is remotely economical, and other more obscure solutions haven’t made a lot of impact either, presumably for economic reasons too.
    - adrianN 3y ago
      There isn't a lot of storage because there isn't a lot of surplus energy to store right now. It's more economical to build more generation capacity. But storage is really not hard: just store hydrogen. No magic technology is needed. You can buy Megawatt range electrolyzers today.
  - Kuinox 3y ago
    Existing solution is hydro storage. It's massive infrastructure and there is a long way to go.
  - ffgjgf1 3y ago
    Fusion power plants are also being developed. How is that an argument for anything?
locallost 3y ago
The US does invest in it, almost all new capacity added is renewables, has been for several years now, and this will not change unless something happens. The fastest grower is Texas of all places simply because it's really cheap. Birds are not an environmental issue, it was just a made up talking point that was debunked. Windows and cars are responsible for an order of magnitude more bird deaths.
- Nesze 3y ago
  > Birds are not an environmental issue, it was just a made up talking point that was debunked. Windows and cars are responsible for an order of magnitude more bird deaths. Can you share the reference? Thank you
  - locallost 3y ago
    https://www.energymonitor.ai/tech/renewables/weekly-data-how-many-birds-are-really-killed-by-wind-turbines/#:~:text=Energy%20Information%20Administration&text=Merriman%20concludes%20that%201.17%20million,that%20live%20in%20the%20US https://www.energymonitor.ai/tech/renewables/weekly-data-how.... It references the EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2021 edit: sorry, my bad, the data comes from elsewhere
- karmakurtisaani 3y ago
  Furthermore, offshore wind farms are great for birds. They provide more surface area for algae and other stuff to grow underwater, which then feeds to the rest of the ecosystem.
DeathArrow 3y ago
> Living in Germany is leaving any big city and seeing loads of wind turbines everywhere. I know very little of its economics, like that it typically takes 7 years to pay it back and lasts 20-25 years, but looks like a good way to generate renewable energy and will likely soon take Germany to 100%. At the same time, no animals are living in and near wind farms. Plants that require pollination don't grow because no bees can live in or near wind farms. Building wind farms, also means less space to grow crops, so there will be a food problem. Wind turbines aren't producing energy when the wind doesn't blow. Nuclear plants would have been a much better solution to the problem.
tnbp 3y ago
>>I know very little of its economics, like that it typically takes 7 years to pay it back and lasts 20-25 years Are you talking money or energy? Energy takes about one year, not seven.

ur-whale 3y ago

> seeing loads of wind turbines everywhere The wind turbines are only there to hide the giant, coal-powered power plants that Germany had to restart because the tree-huggers who run that country decided to ditch nuclear. I very much doubt the veracity of this article.

Pesthuf 3y ago
Ah yes, notorious tree-hugger Merkel in 2011.
- llampx 3y ago
  Merkel had no strongly held positions, that much we all know.
- ffgjgf1 3y ago
  All kind of idiot (objectively) environmentalists were fighting against nuclear for decades in Germany and other countries. They weren’t the only factor but nuclear was already effectively dead by 2011 in Germany.
thiago_fm 3y ago
Ditching nuclear doesn't make wind less important for Germany. I also do hope that this situation also changes, nuclear > coal. I don't doubt the veracity of the article. We've been seeing similar and growing numbers for years. I don't get the hate to wind and how energy generation can easily become a political subject.

mutlimind 3y ago

It is not viable, because renewables do not provide basic load for the grid. It is "stochastical" energy. There are no economical viable ways to store that "random" energy. There are several times in the year, where there is not enough wind and sun to feed the grid.

thiago_fm 3y ago
There are solutions being developed to store energy which will address the grid issue.
- MrBuddyCasino 3y ago
  Failing to provide details smells a lot like „wonder weapons will turn the war around“. There is currently no battery tech that is remotely economical, and other more obscure solutions haven’t made a lot of impact either, presumably for economic reasons too.
  - adrianN 3y ago
    There isn't a lot of storage because there isn't a lot of surplus energy to store right now. It's more economical to build more generation capacity. But storage is really not hard: just store hydrogen. No magic technology is needed. You can buy Megawatt range electrolyzers today.
- Kuinox 3y ago
  Existing solution is hydro storage. It's massive infrastructure and there is a long way to go.
- ffgjgf1 3y ago
  Fusion power plants are also being developed. How is that an argument for anything?

locallost 3y ago

The US does invest in it, almost all new capacity added is renewables, has been for several years now, and this will not change unless something happens. The fastest grower is Texas of all places simply because it's really cheap. Birds are not an environmental issue, it was just a made up talking point that was debunked. Windows and cars are responsible for an order of magnitude more bird deaths.

Nesze 3y ago
> Birds are not an environmental issue, it was just a made up talking point that was debunked. Windows and cars are responsible for an order of magnitude more bird deaths. Can you share the reference? Thank you
- locallost 3y ago
  https://www.energymonitor.ai/tech/renewables/weekly-data-how-many-birds-are-really-killed-by-wind-turbines/#:~:text=Energy%20Information%20Administration&text=Merriman%20concludes%20that%201.17%20million,that%20live%20in%20the%20US https://www.energymonitor.ai/tech/renewables/weekly-data-how.... It references the EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2021 edit: sorry, my bad, the data comes from elsewhere
karmakurtisaani 3y ago
Furthermore, offshore wind farms are great for birds. They provide more surface area for algae and other stuff to grow underwater, which then feeds to the rest of the ecosystem.

DeathArrow 3y ago

> Living in Germany is leaving any big city and seeing loads of wind turbines everywhere. I know very little of its economics, like that it typically takes 7 years to pay it back and lasts 20-25 years, but looks like a good way to generate renewable energy and will likely soon take Germany to 100%. At the same time, no animals are living in and near wind farms. Plants that require pollination don't grow because no bees can live in or near wind farms. Building wind farms, also means less space to grow crops, so there will be a food problem. Wind turbines aren't producing energy when the wind doesn't blow. Nuclear plants would have been a much better solution to the problem.

tnbp 3y ago

>>I know very little of its economics, like that it typically takes 7 years to pay it back and lasts 20-25 years Are you talking money or energy? Energy takes about one year, not seven.