5 ms·

I don’t think that’s true: https://www.nowtricity.com/country/germany/ https://www.nowtricity.com/country/germany/ Of course of we look at yearly figures gett

I don’t think that’s true: https://www.nowtricity.com/country/germany/ https://www.nowtricity.com/country/germany/ Of course of we look at yearly figures getting rid of nuclear and increasing coal usage after the start of the war didn’t really help.

jorvi 3y ago
Greens (the world over) aggressively attacking nuclear is quintessentially that meme of the cyclist shoving a stick between his own spokes. In 25 years, when we still have to keep coal plants turned on because we couldn’t magic enough battery capacity into existence to compensate for base load, those coal plants should have giant billboards next to them with this generation’s green politicians. Thanks for tying a concrete block to our feet.
- oezi 3y ago
  Don't talk such nonsense. The capacity additions in renewables are so enormous that by 2030 most European countries will run so much surplus during summer that we will likely not know what to do with it. TFA talks about tripling in solar in Germany until 2030! The only chance for needing any more coal in 2030 will be as a contingency if Putin is still fighting in Ukraine at that point.
  - jorvi 3y ago
    A surplus is useless without storage, and with projected battery production capacity having enough grid storage is a pie in the sky. Every western country + China will be clamoring for batteries, on top of virtually every industry. The only solution I hear from “green” people is the “future battery technology” MacGuffin.
    - oezi 3y ago
      The surplus in summer during noon isn't useless bit rather means that during morning and early evening we need less fossils. This is the main point of all of this, remember? A surplus also leads to reduced prices which enables novel uses such as charging an electric vehicle for very little money. This replaces CO2. The market will be clever to profit from the available cheap electricity.
      - jorvi 3y ago
        The surplus is already so bad that residential solar gets automatically turned off en-masse to protect the grid.
- uecker 3y ago
  Overall, economics is killing nuclear not greens.
  - retinaros 3y ago
    energy is the economy and france hast the most affordable energy in europe which would give a competitive advantage if its leader didnt plan a global european price destroying its own nuclear industry thanks to german and green party influence that hated the competition.
- ben_w 3y ago
  > we couldn’t magic enough battery capacity into existence "My Little Investment: The Invisible Hand Of The Free Market Is Magic" UK has mostly shut down coal. Has one single plant hanging around just in case. In 2020, Britain went 5,202 hours free from coal electricity generation, up from 3,665 hours in 2019 and 1,856 in 2018. And that's without significant quantities of batteries, because there's more than one way to store energy and more than one way to fuel backup generators if those storage systems aren't sufficient. If the UK can do it, basically everyone can.
- Gibbon1 3y ago
  > because we couldn’t magic enough battery capacity into existence to compensate for base load Lets look at California's ISO supply page right now. Renewables: 14.3GW. Nat Gas: 3.5GW Nuke: 2.2GW Imports: 1.3GW Batteries: -3.5GW (Charging) All the utility grade battery capacity was added in the last three years. What's kind annoying about solar, wind and batteries is we could have done a moon shot program in the 70's to develop the industry but we didn't. So we wasted 40 years and trillions on fossil fuels and nuclear. If we had taken the money spent on nukes in the 50's and 60's we would have been switching over in the 70's.
  - vjjsejj 3y ago
    Is battery storage cheaper than nuclear though? > annoying Wasn’t nuclear supposed to be the “moonshot” of the 50s and 60s? I guess another problem is that they would’ve had to solve both solar panel and the battery issue at the same time.
    - Gibbon1 3y ago
      My dad said when he was a young engineer nuclear and space was going to be the future and it didn't pan out. Friends dad was a nuclear engineering professor and said I retired just in time. I think battery storage costs something like $100/MWh or 10 cents per kwh. (Don't quote me/find a reliable source). Batteries increase demand when there is excess supply and increase supply when there is under supply. The result is lower price swings. The price differentials are higher than the cost of storage which makes them balance sheet profitable. The notable thing is the buy low sell high cycle is 24 hours, not weeks or months. From an arbitrage point of view that's exceptionally attractive. Better than buying wheat futures in the spring and trying to offload them in August and sometimes losing your shirt. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-insights/buy-low-sell-high-how-batteries-are-cleaning-grid https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-insights/buy-l...
  - jorvi 3y ago
    No. I’ll just copy my comment from elsewhere verbatim: Projected battery production capacity makes this a a pie in the sky. Every western country + China will be clamoring for batteries, on top of virtually every industry. The only solution I hear from “green” people is the “future battery technology” MacGuffin.
patall 3y ago
The main reason why Germany increased coal usage last year was because they exported it to France. Because their (french) nuclear plants were in maintainace or lacking cooling water. And why is everyone always looking at the momental situation? Look at yearly tendencies if you want to see what happens. Edit: since people are down voting, here is a fun fact for you. Power generated from nuclear: France 2016=415TWh; 2023(ongoing)=312TWh Germany 2016=80TWh; So optimistically for France -95TWh/a, Germany -80. Sources: https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=FR&interval=year&year=-1&legendItems=0010000000000000 https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=FR... https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=DE&interval=year&year=-1&legendItems=00010000000000000000000 https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=DE...

jorvi 3y ago

Greens (the world over) aggressively attacking nuclear is quintessentially that meme of the cyclist shoving a stick between his own spokes. In 25 years, when we still have to keep coal plants turned on because we couldn’t magic enough battery capacity into existence to compensate for base load, those coal plants should have giant billboards next to them with this generation’s green politicians. Thanks for tying a concrete block to our feet.

oezi 3y ago
Don't talk such nonsense. The capacity additions in renewables are so enormous that by 2030 most European countries will run so much surplus during summer that we will likely not know what to do with it. TFA talks about tripling in solar in Germany until 2030! The only chance for needing any more coal in 2030 will be as a contingency if Putin is still fighting in Ukraine at that point.
- jorvi 3y ago
  A surplus is useless without storage, and with projected battery production capacity having enough grid storage is a pie in the sky. Every western country + China will be clamoring for batteries, on top of virtually every industry. The only solution I hear from “green” people is the “future battery technology” MacGuffin.
  - oezi 3y ago
    The surplus in summer during noon isn't useless bit rather means that during morning and early evening we need less fossils. This is the main point of all of this, remember? A surplus also leads to reduced prices which enables novel uses such as charging an electric vehicle for very little money. This replaces CO2. The market will be clever to profit from the available cheap electricity.
    - jorvi 3y ago
      The surplus is already so bad that residential solar gets automatically turned off en-masse to protect the grid.
uecker 3y ago
Overall, economics is killing nuclear not greens.
- retinaros 3y ago
  energy is the economy and france hast the most affordable energy in europe which would give a competitive advantage if its leader didnt plan a global european price destroying its own nuclear industry thanks to german and green party influence that hated the competition.
ben_w 3y ago
> we couldn’t magic enough battery capacity into existence "My Little Investment: The Invisible Hand Of The Free Market Is Magic" UK has mostly shut down coal. Has one single plant hanging around just in case. In 2020, Britain went 5,202 hours free from coal electricity generation, up from 3,665 hours in 2019 and 1,856 in 2018. And that's without significant quantities of batteries, because there's more than one way to store energy and more than one way to fuel backup generators if those storage systems aren't sufficient. If the UK can do it, basically everyone can.
Gibbon1 3y ago
> because we couldn’t magic enough battery capacity into existence to compensate for base load Lets look at California's ISO supply page right now. Renewables: 14.3GW. Nat Gas: 3.5GW Nuke: 2.2GW Imports: 1.3GW Batteries: -3.5GW (Charging) All the utility grade battery capacity was added in the last three years. What's kind annoying about solar, wind and batteries is we could have done a moon shot program in the 70's to develop the industry but we didn't. So we wasted 40 years and trillions on fossil fuels and nuclear. If we had taken the money spent on nukes in the 50's and 60's we would have been switching over in the 70's.
- vjjsejj 3y ago
  Is battery storage cheaper than nuclear though? > annoying Wasn’t nuclear supposed to be the “moonshot” of the 50s and 60s? I guess another problem is that they would’ve had to solve both solar panel and the battery issue at the same time.
  - Gibbon1 3y ago
    My dad said when he was a young engineer nuclear and space was going to be the future and it didn't pan out. Friends dad was a nuclear engineering professor and said I retired just in time. I think battery storage costs something like $100/MWh or 10 cents per kwh. (Don't quote me/find a reliable source). Batteries increase demand when there is excess supply and increase supply when there is under supply. The result is lower price swings. The price differentials are higher than the cost of storage which makes them balance sheet profitable. The notable thing is the buy low sell high cycle is 24 hours, not weeks or months. From an arbitrage point of view that's exceptionally attractive. Better than buying wheat futures in the spring and trying to offload them in August and sometimes losing your shirt. https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-insights/buy-low-sell-high-how-batteries-are-cleaning-grid https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-insights/buy-l...
- jorvi 3y ago
  No. I’ll just copy my comment from elsewhere verbatim: Projected battery production capacity makes this a a pie in the sky. Every western country + China will be clamoring for batteries, on top of virtually every industry. The only solution I hear from “green” people is the “future battery technology” MacGuffin.

patall 3y ago

The main reason why Germany increased coal usage last year was because they exported it to France. Because their (french) nuclear plants were in maintainace or lacking cooling water. And why is everyone always looking at the momental situation? Look at yearly tendencies if you want to see what happens. Edit: since people are down voting, here is a fun fact for you. Power generated from nuclear: France 2016=415TWh; 2023(ongoing)=312TWh Germany 2016=80TWh; So optimistically for France -95TWh/a, Germany -80. Sources: https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=FR&interval=year&year=-1&legendItems=0010000000000000 https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=FR... https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=DE&interval=year&year=-1&legendItems=00010000000000000000000 https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=DE...