"""
Economy Minister Robert Habeck has for months pushed for an energy subsidy scheme, arguing that German industry faces five tough years before the transition to renewable energies bears fruit. The top Green politician has warned that, without state support, "we will no longer have industry," as companies would shift operations to countries like France or the U.S., where energy prices are much lower.
"""
https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-energy-price-subsidy-industry-competition/
#Germany #renewables #GreenGrowth
Germany mulls new energy price subsidy for industries
German leaders want to prevent an industrial exodus. But the idea is likely to spark controversy within the EU.Hans von der Burchard (POLITICO)
CelloMom On Cars
•The panic about the economic stagnation is from the energy price shock (Russian gas disappeared) and the slow-down in China. But:
"These outside shocks have exposed cracks in Germany’s foundation that were ignored during years of success, including lagging use of digital technology in government and business and a lengthy process to get badly needed renewable energy projects approved."
https://apnews.com/article/germany-economy-energy-crisis-russia-8a00eebbfab3f20c5c66b1cd85ae84ed
Germany's economy struggles with an energy shock that's exposing longtime flaws
DAVID McHUGH (AP News)Jack of all trades
•@CelloMomOnCars One can only laugh at this point when reading passages like these:
"The government wants to have 215 GW of solar installed in Germany by 2030, more than tripling existing capacity in seven years."
https://apnews.com/article/germany-solar-power-renewable-energy-habeck-nepotism-ec42cc9bb078abd4c05c671bfe013c6d
Why laugh? Because 215 GW of #solar with 10% capacity factor (because it's Germany, not California) will roughly replace 20GW of #nuclear power that they retired since 2011. So many years lost...
Germany to ease solar rules as new installations surge
AP NewsCelloMom On Cars
•The climate community tends to bash on Germany for having reduced its nuclear fleet after the Fukushima incident.
I'm looking for an article I once read that says it is exactly that event, and Germans' willingness to pay - through the nose - for renewable energy, that helped jumpstart the nascent commercial PV market. The rest is (Chinese) history.
I'll look a little harder for that article, it's interesting.
CelloMom On Cars
•I take that back: in fact, German willingness to pay high prices for energy predates Fukushima. It started in 2004 when Germany introduced generous feed in tarriffs for rooftop solar.
"Germany’s deployment of wind and solar when the technologies were expensive is now widely celebrated as the reason why significant production capacity has been set up worldwide, leading to plummeting prices for the benefit of developing countries in particular."
https://energytransition.org/2016/01/how-germany-helped-bring-down-the-cost-of-pv/
How Germany helped bring down the cost of PV | Energy Transition
Energy TransitionJack of all trades
•@CelloMomOnCars
BTW, I'm not sure if it's fair to say that growth of solar production has been "for the benefit of developing countries in particular".
See the attached chart.
Ian Molton likes this.
CelloMom On Cars
•That has been largely an effect of redlining former colonies. If you had to pay a - very large - premium on interest on your loans, you would also have a hard time getting your industrial sector going.
I'm not arguing with the data on the chart - I'm asking why that data is the way it is, while obviously the Global South has the superior insolation.
It's a version of thinking women can't be doctors or engineers, thereby wasting the talent of half the population.
Jack of all trades
•@CelloMomOnCars
We're in total agreement here. The only way to tackle #ClimateChange is to do it equitably.
So I only wanted to point out that saying that the increased #solar production has been "for the benefit of developing countries in particular" is disingenious. It *could* have been for the benefit of developing countries, it *should* have been, but it *wasn't*.
Jack of all trades
•@CelloMomOnCars
To me it's the same argument people bring up against #degrowth:
"What about the developing countries, you want to keep people in poverty, you eco-fascist!"
No, my sweet summer child, it's the so-called "developed" countries that need degrowth, that's who we're talking about.
I find that it's very often rich people propaganda that screams "think about the poor" whenever one casts doubts on their free market "solutions".
Selena
•It's a part of 'the climate deniers playbook': showing a starving african mother with 1 lightbulb in her hut and lamenting that only (cheap) fossil fuels will raise her out of poverty.
Absolutely disgusting when you remember that the fossil fuel industry has always played a huge part in imposing the kind of merciless capitalism that causes extreme poverty
https://nebula.tv/climatedeniersplaybook/
The Climate Denier's Playbook
NebulaJack of all trades reshared this.
Jack of all trades
•@Selena @CelloMomOnCars
Thank you for the recommendation. Need to listen to this, especially two episodes caught my eye.
"Electric Cars Will Save Us" sound like a fun time.
"You Owe Your Life to Oil & Gas" should be good to challenge my preconceptions, because I think it may be true to some extent, or at the very least it's a complicated issue.
Brendan Jones
•@CelloMomOnCars just wanting to add in this post as confirmation of what you're saying about solar not being built in poor countries https://mastodon.social/@urlyman/111103727082366859
Jonathan Schofield
2023-09-21 14:58:55
CelloMom On Cars
•Even before the war in Ukraine and before Russia cut off fossil gas flows to Europe, Germans paid some of the highest electricity prices in the world.
The generation cost is only 25% of the consumer price. The rest is taxes and charges, many having to do with building out more renewables, strengthening and expanding the electric grid, etc. It's an *investment*, in other words. Smart.
https://strom-report.com/electricity-price-germany/
Electricity Price Germany 2020: Components & Development
STROM-REPORTCian O'Connor
•To some degree, but unfortunately the lifespan of solar/wind is about 20 years. So a lot of those costs are ongoing.
Jack of all trades
•@cian @CelloMomOnCars
And the costs are not neutral politically. The public pressure is mounting, see https://mas.to/@jackofalltrades/110821335616876668 or https://mas.to/@jackofalltrades/110695257146173675
Jack of all trades
2023-08-02 18:03:03
Cian O'Connor
•@CelloMomOnCars
Yes and that's only going to intensify when petrol/gasoline cars are banned.
I think the west is in denial about the coming energy transition. The countries that dominate the next century will be those that have access to reliable energy sources. Nuclear, geothermal (and to a lesser degree) hydro. With an emphasis on 'reliable'.
The other joker is that the so called 'green' transition is heavily dependent upon mining, but mining needs oil. Lithium batteries, or hydrogen, are too damn heavy and lack the energy density.
Cian O'Connor
•@CelloMomOnCars
Obviously climate change is real and a huge problem. But all of the solutions that don't assume significant degrowth, seem to be in total denial about the scale of the challenge.
Jack of all trades
•@cian @CelloMomOnCars
I came to realize that what is important to most governments, as well as to most people is not actually stopping #ClimateChange, but keeping things the same for as long as possible.
Western countries want to hold onto their imperial privilege. Their citizens want to continue their way of life.
In effect, any "green" policies will only work insofar as they don't conflict with the societal values mentioned above.
Jack of all trades
•@cian @CelloMomOnCars
Installing new and shiny solar panels produced on the other side of the globe with cheap labor and lax environmental regulations? Hell yeah.
Denying yourself the pleasure of international vacations, a cheeseburger or the latest electronic bauble? No way!
CelloMom On Cars
•@cian
Keeping things are they are is not the great thing most people think it is. If you think about it carefully, our current lives are not that great. That is, compared to how it could be, once we unshackle ourselves from fossil fuel dependence, the colonialism that requires, and the costs it brings.
We can do better.
Try this:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/03/15/rebecca-solnit-climate-change-wealth-abundance/
Cian O'Connor
•@CelloMomOnCars
I agree, but unfortunately most people in the west disagree with us.
And it would be a dramatic change. Hopefully we could hang onto stuff like washing machines and vacuum cleaners, along with antibiotics. But large cities and computers are probably doomed. And our children will probably have to work harder than we do, much of it hard physical work that we've abandoned. It's not the easiest thing to sell.
People on here get upset if you suggest that maybe cars shouldn't be a thing, because it would mean they can't visit their grandmother who lives in a remote village. The fact that there may not be a village, or grandmother, if we do nothing doesn't seem to occur to them.
GCU Grey Area
•Cian O'Connor
•Maybe, but a lot of bigger cities will fall apart. It takes a lot of energy to keep a skyscraper functioning, for example. And the bigger the city, the further things have to come, which requires energy.
Jack of all trades
•@cian @jaystephens @CelloMomOnCars
It sounds counterintuitive, that urban areas are much cheaper energy wise than rural areas, that is. How do you know this? Where can I read more about it?
Perhaps it is not a matter of efficiency, but of logistics. Rural areas can sustain themselves using the land they occupy. In contract, cities fall apart without a constant stream of resources flowing into them from the outside. They can only get so dense strictly because they are parasitic on rural areas.
Cian O'Connor
•@jaystephens @CelloMomOnCars
Well at the most extreme rural areas are cheaper. Just look at Africa. It's hard to beat self-sufficient peasant farmers (even if that's not a life anyone should aspire too).
At the other extreme if rural life is US life, well yes that's grotesquely inefficient. But that's largely due to cultural issues. The car has made forms of life that would seem insane 100 years ago possible.
And its the same for cities. They can be made pretty efficient, so long as they don't get too big, don't have skyscrapers, are built around good enough public transport, incorporate some form of urban gardening and you can solve the logistical problems.
If you know of any US cities that look like that, let me know. New York? I'm a little skeptical. Houston? Atlanta? Not a chance.
GCU Grey Area
•It's dependent on lifestyle in and out of cities (e.g. Car use by rural rich world folks distorts things quite a bit) and the density of the city, but generally holds quite well.
Evaluation of the Effects of Urbanization on Carbon Emissions: The Transformative Role of Government Effectiveness
FrontiersBart Van de Poel
•Jack of all trades
•@bartvdpoel @CelloMomOnCars
There is a substantial difference between pollution from coal and nuclear power generation.
See https://mas.to/@jackofalltrades/110943772184309382 and for Germany in particular, this study: https://academic.oup.com/jeea/article-abstract/20/3/1311/6520438
Jack of all trades
2023-08-24 09:00:17
Ian Molton likes this.
Jack of all trades
•@bartvdpoel @CelloMomOnCars
Relevant quote:
"""
We find that reductions in nuclear electricity production were offset primarily by increases in coal-fired production and net electricity imports. Our estimates of the social cost of the phase-out range from €3 to €8 billion per year. The majority of this cost comes from the increased mortality risk associated with exposure to the local air pollution emitted when burning fossil fuels.
"""
#Germany #nuclear #coal #pollution
Ian Molton likes this.
Bart Van de Poel
•Jack of all trades
•@bartvdpoel @CelloMomOnCars
These are aggregate values you're looking at. I don't have access to that research paper, and it's not available on sci-hub either, unfortunately.
I'd assume what the researchers meant is that coal power generation could've been that much lower if nuclear reactors were still operational. In contrast to intermittent wind and solar, nuclear and coal provide base load, and therefore are more comparable.
Jack of all trades
•CelloMom On Cars
•@bartvdpoel
Yup.
All I can say is, the Germans (and other Europeans) were also the ones who subsidised diesel for cars because that reduced the CO2 pollution, even though it worsened the PM pollution for their own populations.
As a policy choice to shoulder their own pollution burden, I think that deserves a measure of respect. It's better, morally speaking, than enjoying the energy that pollutes elsewhere.
Jonathan Schofield
•Jack of all trades
•@urlyman @CelloMomOnCars
If it's any consolation, #solar at this latitude isn't so great anyway.
Germany currently has 75.17 GW of installed solar capacity.
In June solar generated 9376.9 GWh resulting in a capacity factor of 17%. Nice, right? Well, in January solar generated 917,5 GWh resulting in capacity factor of 1.7%.
The idea that solar can meet the energy needs of Germany is quite ill-informed IMHO.
Source: https://energy-charts.info/charts/energy/chart.htm?l=en&c=DE&chartColumnSorting=default&interval=month&month=-1&source=total&legendItems=0000000000000000010
Energy-Charts
energy-charts.infoJack of all trades
•@urlyman @CelloMomOnCars
For comparison, average solar capacity factor for the whole US varies between 13.1% in December and 33.4% in June.
Source: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.php?t=epmt_6_07_b
Jonathan Schofield
•Jonathan Schofield
•Jack of all trades
•Ian Molton likes this.
CelloMom On Cars
•@urlyman
Despite the high altitude, solar is being developed in both Germany and famously rainy Netherlands.
I don't double-guess those developers, I assume they did their due diligence, and they would not be investing in solar in these regions if they didn't think there was money to be made!
The secret sauce: wind energy.
Wind and solar are complementary in NL and D.
https://www.mijnepb.be/combinatie-zon-windenergie/
Zon en wind: een goede combinatie door het jaar heen
MijnEPBIan Molton
The problem is that there's a ton of money to be made installing Greenwash.
Something being financially viable is an anti-indicator of it's being green, as often as not.
TlDr; Commercial success != environmental success
Jonathan Schofield
•Ian Molton likes this.
Jack of all trades
•@CelloMomOnCars @urlyman Indeed, it makes more sense when #solar and #wind are combined. However, the variability is still quite big.
Based on 2022 data, in Germany there was 68.5 GW of solar, 58.1 GW of onshore wind and 8.2 GW offshore wind.
If we treat this as a combined 134.8 GW system, we are going to get a spread of generation between 12,353 GWh in August (capacity factor 12.3%) and 23,105 GWh in February (capacity factor 25.5%).
BTW in Germany electricity demand is higher in the winter.
Jack of all trades
•@CelloMomOnCars @urlyman
To again compare that with the US...
I dug the numbers for 2022 from EIA. US had 110.1 GW of solar and 140.9 GW of wind for a total 251 GW system.
Wind+solar generated 44,427 GWh in August (capacity factor 23.8%) and 64,523 GWh in April (capacity factor 35.7%). Both top and bottom bounds were decided by the wind output, as it generates more than twice the energy than solar.
Overall, the US gets double returns on their solar+wind investment compared to Germany or UK.
Jonathan Schofield
•@CelloMomOnCars according to my maths and some digging, US energy consumption per capita is 1.76x that of Germany and 3.8x that of the UK.
US:
energy demand: 100.41 quadrillion Btu (2022)
population: 333 million
Germany:
energy demand: 14.29 qn Btu (2021)
population: 83 million
UK:
energy demand: 5.32 qn Btu (2021)
population: 67 million
Jack of all trades
•@urlyman @CelloMomOnCars
My numbers are slightly different, but the general conclusion is correct.
2021 data for energy consumption:
USA: 88.52 qn Btu (25,945 TWh)
Germany: 12.1 qn Btu (3,549 TWh)
UK: 6.82 qn Btu (1,999 TWh)
Source: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/primary-energy-cons?tab=chart&time=2021&country=GBR~DEU~USA
I can see that 100.41 qn Btu number listed on the EIA site: https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/us-energy-facts/ though.
Would be nice to know the reason for the discrepancy.
Primary energy consumption
Our World in DataJonathan Schofield
•thanks. Good to see that, as you say, the *relative* amounts are roughly the same.
And yes, the EIA was my US source.
Jack of all trades
•@urlyman @CelloMomOnCars
So now check this out, 2019 data:
USA
avg engine power: 192 kW
avg kerb weight: 1768 kg
avg fuel consumption: 8.6 lge/100km
gasoline price: 0.79 $ PPP/litre
https://www.iea.org/articles/fuel-economy-in-the-united-states
UK
avg engine power: 110 kW
avg kerb weight: 1518 kg
avg fuel consumption: 6.3 lge/100km
gasoline price: 1.59 $ PPP/litre
https://www.iea.org/articles/fuel-economy-in-the-united-kingdom
German numbers are very similar to UK's.
The cheaper the energy the more wasteful people are with it, it's that simple.
Fuel economy in the United States – Analysis - IEA
IEAJack of all trades
•@urlyman @CelloMomOnCars
Here's another interesting trend reversal: the lowest point for the average car fuel consumption in the UK was 2016. After that point Brits started buying bigger and heavier cars and the fuel consumption has been growing ever since.
The exact same thing can be seen in Germany.
Jonathan Schofield
•@CelloMomOnCars
As Bowie might have sung…
Aaargh bop, do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do
Fk fk SUV fashion
Sam Sneddon 🏳️⚧️
•Jack of all trades
•@gsnedders @urlyman @CelloMomOnCars
Note that I was talking about fuel/energy consumption, not CO2 emissions. EVs can be wasteful too.
There is no data for 2020+ in that IEA report, but there are other reports, like this one from the European Commission: https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/transport/road-transport-reducing-co2-emissions-vehicles/co2-emission-performance-standards-cars-and-vans_en
"""
As the new target started applying in 2020, the average CO2 emissions from new passenger cars registered in Europe have decreased by 12% compared to the previous year and the share of electric cars tripled.
"""
CO₂ emission performance standards for cars and vans
Climate ActionSam Sneddon 🏳️⚧️
•@urlyman @CelloMomOnCars Ah, was unclear if it was measuring "fuel consumption" (as labelled, which is presumably 0 for a BEV) or "energy consumption" (which isn't!).
And sure, CO2 and energy consumption differ, but CO2 emissions is a very good proxy given for fuel consumption given for both petrol and diesel ICEs it's directly proportional.
Jack of all trades
•@gsnedders @urlyman @CelloMomOnCars
"lge" is short for "litres of gasoline equivalent".
Based on 2019 data for the UK, averages for each type of powertrain were:
petrol: 6.7 lge/100km
diesel: 6.0 lge/100km
hybrid: 4.7 lge/100km
plug-in hybrid: 2.4 lge/100km
electric: 2.1 lge/100km
You can explore this data yourself at https://www.iea.org/articles/fuel-economy-in-the-united-kingdom
Fuel economy in the United Kingdom – Analysis - IEA
IEAJonathan Schofield
•@gsnedders @CelloMomOnCars I infer that the lge for electric is a function of how clean (or not) the electricity it's charged from is.
In which case, it's kind of depressing to see that the lge in 2019 was slightly higher than in 2011. Wonder which winkers were in government during that period? 🤔 😉
Jack of all trades
•@urlyman @gsnedders @CelloMomOnCars
Not at all, lge is a measure of energy, not emissions.
These numbers mostly show a difference in efficiency of an internal combustion engine vs an electric motor. It will always be about three times less, as 60-70% of energy is lost as heat in ICE cars.
Jonathan Schofield
•Julianoë
•@urlyman @CelloMomOnCars
Exactly the same for France
https://www.iea.org/articles/fuel-economy-in-france
Fuel economy in France – Analysis - IEA
IEASamuelJohnson
•Ian Molton likes this.
pettter
•Jack of all trades
•@pettter @urlyman @CelloMomOnCars
But that would be communism! 😆
quixote
•@CelloMomOnCars @urlyman The seasonal variability can be compensated by using pumped hydro (possibly using modifications of existing facilities?) or compressed air (new builds) as storage.
Fossil fuels have a century of infrastructure built around them. It's not too surprising that renewables might need some storage infrastructure of their own.
Ian Molton
Bollocks.
I've done the math on the storage requirements. It's astronomical. No chance on hell with even pumped hydro (which has an enormous environmental footprint) or compressed air (worthless at realistic pressures).
Ian Molton
A quick Google finds the above. Text from https://www.researchgate.net/post/How_can_I_calculate_the_energy_storage_capacity_of_a_liquid_air_energy_storage
Ian Molton
Ian Molton
Ian Molton
Jack of all trades
•@CelloMomOnCars
I'd like to highlight another quote from the article:
"""
A 10 billion-euro ($10.68 billion) electrical line bringing wind power from the breezier north to industry in the south has faced costly delays from political resistance to unsightly above-ground towers. Burying the line means completion in 2028 instead of 2022.
"""
Getting energy from producers to consumers is a gargantuan task, made even harder when producers are scattered and unreliable, like with solar and wind.
CelloMom On Cars
•It was the same with coal plants, really: Those were built to be close to mines not population or industrial centers, and then they would need long distance high voltage lines to transport the juice. Same for nuclear, for that matter: they had to be sited where it made sense.
So the generation now happens at different locations.
Similarly, China has been building HVAC and HVDC lines. Wish the US would start on theirs.
Jack of all trades
•@CelloMomOnCars Is that correct though?
Historically industrial centers grew around abundant sources of coal, like the Ruhr valley in Germany or Upper Silesia in Poland. It makes sense for the industry to move to places with the abundance of cheap energy.
That neatly connects with the original article. Industries will move whenever energy access becomes uneconomical.