4 ms·

I wouldn't say lying, but misrepresenting decribes that claim rather well.

by hef19898 3y ago

troupo 3y ago
Which of the following was misrepresented do you think: - that Germany has 135 GW combined installed capacity of wind and solar? - that wind and solar, combined, were only producing 15% of their installed capacity aka 20GW? - that Germany needed 61 GW of electricity? - wind and solar, combined, were producing only 30% of Germany's needs? - that Germany needed to burn 20 GW of coal to cover this? - that Germany needed to also burn gas, biomass, and import electricity to cover the remaining 20 GW?
- hef19898 3y ago
  The conclsion.
- ZeroGravitas 3y ago
  > - that wind and solar, combined, were only producing 15% of their installed capacity aka 20GW? This is a misrepresentation. Solar for example is only ever planned for to achieve about 30% of its "capacity" (due to the whole sun going down at night thing). And even that varies with seasons. So if you're claiming the German grid planners were expecting the solar to magically 4x overdeliver, and were suddenly let down then that's nonsense. Onshore wind has a similar number (again, varies by season).
  - troupo 3y ago
    > Solar for example is only ever planned for to achieve about 30% of its "capacity" (due to the whole sun going down at night thing). And even that varies with seasons. 1. 30% is avaerage number which is a useless because at 10 in the morning when I was writing my text solar was even below that. 2. You're literally confirming what I was saying. > So if you're claiming the German grid planners were expecting the solar to magically 4x overdeliver I was claiming no such thing. I said, and it is backed by reality, that at 10 o'clock in the morning on a cloudy quiet day 135GW worth of renewables were producing only 20GW. Which is a fact. I know it's an unpleasant fact, but reality has the unfortunate tendency to be unpleasant. > Onshore wind has a similar number (again, varies by season). So, again. What exactly was I misrepresenting? The fact that renewables are overprovisioned in Germany? Or the fact that they were producing significantly less than both their capacity and the needs of the country? Or the fact that Germany had to burn 20GW worth of coal to keep up with the demand? Or the fact that even if you provision 400% capacity (4x times the demand), and it still produces 15%, you will still need to burn coal through the night. So it's 18:44 when I'm writing this. Wind is at 12.69% and solar is at 3% capacity. In total 16% of Germany's eletricity demand. It's lower than when I was writing these numbers in the comment when someone called me a liar. 40% of electricity (26 GW) is coming from coal. Reality has the unfortunate tendency to be unpleasant. Funnily, but when I keep asking "how much more do we need to overprovision renewables" to meet the demands, I'm met with silence or wishful thinking.
    - hef19898 3y ago
      You are seriously unable to read time based values, aren't you?

I wouldn't say lying, but misrepresenting decribes that claim rather well.

Which of the following was misrepresented do you think: - that Germany has 135 GW combined installed capacity of wind and solar? - that wind and solar, combined, were only producing 15% of their installed capacity aka 20GW? - that Germany needed 61 GW of electricity? - wind and solar, combined, were producing only 30% of Germany's needs? - that Germany needed to burn 20 GW of coal to cover this? - that Germany needed to also burn gas, biomass, and import electricity to cover the remaining 20 GW?

hef19898 3y ago
The conclsion.
ZeroGravitas 3y ago
> - that wind and solar, combined, were only producing 15% of their installed capacity aka 20GW? This is a misrepresentation. Solar for example is only ever planned for to achieve about 30% of its "capacity" (due to the whole sun going down at night thing). And even that varies with seasons. So if you're claiming the German grid planners were expecting the solar to magically 4x overdeliver, and were suddenly let down then that's nonsense. Onshore wind has a similar number (again, varies by season).
- troupo 3y ago
  > Solar for example is only ever planned for to achieve about 30% of its "capacity" (due to the whole sun going down at night thing). And even that varies with seasons. 1. 30% is avaerage number which is a useless because at 10 in the morning when I was writing my text solar was even below that. 2. You're literally confirming what I was saying. > So if you're claiming the German grid planners were expecting the solar to magically 4x overdeliver I was claiming no such thing. I said, and it is backed by reality, that at 10 o'clock in the morning on a cloudy quiet day 135GW worth of renewables were producing only 20GW. Which is a fact. I know it's an unpleasant fact, but reality has the unfortunate tendency to be unpleasant. > Onshore wind has a similar number (again, varies by season). So, again. What exactly was I misrepresenting? The fact that renewables are overprovisioned in Germany? Or the fact that they were producing significantly less than both their capacity and the needs of the country? Or the fact that Germany had to burn 20GW worth of coal to keep up with the demand? Or the fact that even if you provision 400% capacity (4x times the demand), and it still produces 15%, you will still need to burn coal through the night. So it's 18:44 when I'm writing this. Wind is at 12.69% and solar is at 3% capacity. In total 16% of Germany's eletricity demand. It's lower than when I was writing these numbers in the comment when someone called me a liar. 40% of electricity (26 GW) is coming from coal. Reality has the unfortunate tendency to be unpleasant. Funnily, but when I keep asking "how much more do we need to overprovision renewables" to meet the demands, I'm met with silence or wishful thinking.
  - hef19898 3y ago
    You are seriously unable to read time based values, aren't you?