5 ms·

Compare to the PAST, not the present! As you can see, the trend is downwards and steadily at that: https://www.destatis.de/EN/Themes/Economic-Sectors-Enterprise

by qayxc 2y ago

Compare to the PAST, not the present! As you can see, the trend is downwards and steadily at that: https://www.destatis.de/EN/Themes/Economic-Sectors-Enterprises/Energy/Production/Tables/gross-electricity-production.html https://www.destatis.de/EN/Themes/Economic-Sectors-Enterpris... Rome wasn't built in a day and I find it hilarious to advocate for nuclear power instead, if the average construction time (not even taking into account the prior mountain of bureaucracy) is over a decade. Not a single nuclear power plant built in past 15 years in Europe has been on time or on budget. Not even close.

masklinn 2y ago
> As you can see, the trend is downwards and steadily at that Lignite numbers: 2019: 114TWh, 18.7% 2020: 92TWh, 16% 2021: 110TWh, 18.8% 2022: 116TWh, 20% 2023: 88TWh, 17% I've seen steadier terminal alcoholics.
- Symbiote 2y ago
  I think this graph from Wikipedia is better, as it goes back to 1990 [1]. Renewables have increased significantly, but much of that is displacing nuclear power. The remainder, plus a small increase in natural gas, his displaced hard coal and a small amount of lignite. Presumably hard coal is more expensive. The overall trend is coal is reducing, but it's a poor show compared to Great Britain [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Germany#/media/File:Energiemix_Deutschland.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Germany#... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_in_Great_Britain#/media/File:UK_electricity_generation_by_type_of_fuel,_1998-2020.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_in_Great_Britain#/...
  - masklinn 2y ago
    > Presumably hard coal is more expensive. Yeah, Germany did have hard coal mines but they closed a few years back as they've gotten too deep and difficult to access to be economically viable (and it was subsidised until 2018), so Germany imports hard coal. Meanwhile germany is either #1 or #2 lignite producer.
thrance 2y ago
Strategically speaking, Europe lacks the natural resources to build renewable, wind turbines and solar panels have to be imported, most of them from Asia. Nuclear is still a bit cheaper per Watt and less carbon intensive, as it involves less infrastructure, logistics and batteries overall. It's also somewhat more reliable, as it doesn't depend on sun or wind (the former of which France often lacks). Also, I am hopeful that nuclear power plant construction delays will only improve in the near future, as Europe rebuilds its expertise in nuclear engineering, which it lost after the past decades of anti-nuclear waves. Finally, I don't see fossil fuel usage going down much in Germany in the link you gave, if at all. Which is the only thing that matters, ecologically speaking.
- Propelloni 2y ago
  > Nuclear is still a bit cheaper per Watt LCOE [1] of nuclear power in Europe and the USA is roughly thrice that of solar or wind [2]. In China it is about even. If you do not trust the Deutsche Bank report, the World Nuclear Association comes to roughly the same conclusion but assumes a lower discount, thus making nuclear power more attractive. [3] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_electricity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_electricity [2] https://www.dbresearch.de/PROD/RPS_DE-PROD/PROD0000000000528292/Costs_of_electricity_generation%3A_System_costs_matt.PDF https://www.dbresearch.de/PROD/RPS_DE-PROD/PROD0000000000528... [3] https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power#future-cost-competitiveness https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspec...
  - thrance 2y ago
    In France, the most recent report [1] by the Cour des comptes, our official accounting organ, still gives nuclear power as slightly cheaper than solar and wind. I trust your data, but the situation here is different, most reactors are already built, and "only" need maintenance and fuel replacement. I still stand by what I said in my previous comment about emissions per watts, etc. [1] https://www.ccomptes.fr/sites/default/files/2021-12/20211213-S2021-2052-analyse-couts-systeme-production-electrique-France.pdf https://www.ccomptes.fr/sites/default/files/2021-12/20211213...

by qayxc 2y ago

masklinn 2y ago

> As you can see, the trend is downwards and steadily at that Lignite numbers: 2019: 114TWh, 18.7% 2020: 92TWh, 16% 2021: 110TWh, 18.8% 2022: 116TWh, 20% 2023: 88TWh, 17% I've seen steadier terminal alcoholics.

Symbiote 2y ago
I think this graph from Wikipedia is better, as it goes back to 1990 [1]. Renewables have increased significantly, but much of that is displacing nuclear power. The remainder, plus a small increase in natural gas, his displaced hard coal and a small amount of lignite. Presumably hard coal is more expensive. The overall trend is coal is reducing, but it's a poor show compared to Great Britain [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Germany#/media/File:Energiemix_Deutschland.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Germany#... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_in_Great_Britain#/media/File:UK_electricity_generation_by_type_of_fuel,_1998-2020.png https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_in_Great_Britain#/...
- masklinn 2y ago
  > Presumably hard coal is more expensive. Yeah, Germany did have hard coal mines but they closed a few years back as they've gotten too deep and difficult to access to be economically viable (and it was subsidised until 2018), so Germany imports hard coal. Meanwhile germany is either #1 or #2 lignite producer.

thrance 2y ago

Strategically speaking, Europe lacks the natural resources to build renewable, wind turbines and solar panels have to be imported, most of them from Asia. Nuclear is still a bit cheaper per Watt and less carbon intensive, as it involves less infrastructure, logistics and batteries overall. It's also somewhat more reliable, as it doesn't depend on sun or wind (the former of which France often lacks). Also, I am hopeful that nuclear power plant construction delays will only improve in the near future, as Europe rebuilds its expertise in nuclear engineering, which it lost after the past decades of anti-nuclear waves. Finally, I don't see fossil fuel usage going down much in Germany in the link you gave, if at all. Which is the only thing that matters, ecologically speaking.

Propelloni 2y ago
> Nuclear is still a bit cheaper per Watt LCOE [1] of nuclear power in Europe and the USA is roughly thrice that of solar or wind [2]. In China it is about even. If you do not trust the Deutsche Bank report, the World Nuclear Association comes to roughly the same conclusion but assumes a lower discount, thus making nuclear power more attractive. [3] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_electricity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levelized_cost_of_electricity [2] https://www.dbresearch.de/PROD/RPS_DE-PROD/PROD0000000000528292/Costs_of_electricity_generation%3A_System_costs_matt.PDF https://www.dbresearch.de/PROD/RPS_DE-PROD/PROD0000000000528... [3] https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power#future-cost-competitiveness https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspec...
- thrance 2y ago
  In France, the most recent report [1] by the Cour des comptes, our official accounting organ, still gives nuclear power as slightly cheaper than solar and wind. I trust your data, but the situation here is different, most reactors are already built, and "only" need maintenance and fuel replacement. I still stand by what I said in my previous comment about emissions per watts, etc. [1] https://www.ccomptes.fr/sites/default/files/2021-12/20211213-S2021-2052-analyse-couts-systeme-production-electrique-France.pdf https://www.ccomptes.fr/sites/default/files/2021-12/20211213...